Archive 1170

Archive 1171

Archive 1172

Archive 1173

Archive 1174

Archive 1175

→

Archive 1180

Hello, i have been making contributions without an account. I just made an account finally and was wondering if there is anyway I can now link my contributions to this account. Zagerk (talk) 06:07, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

@zagerk: there is not. lettherebedarklight晚安 06:24, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Zagerk. More correctly, there is not a formal way to do so. You are perfectly free to put a note on your userpage saying. "I formerly edited under IP address xxx.xx.xxxx. and I contributed to articles y. z, a and b. If you are more concerned about privacy than I am, do not mention the IP address. It is entirely up to you.Cullen328 (talk) 07:24, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Zagerk I edited for a long time without an account. From time to time, out of curiosity, I've looked for some of my old edits. And I've found several IP addresses. And it clearly isn't only because I might have edited from a couple of different computers (it would have been two, mainly--possibly a third once in a while). That's when I saw for myself what I've read on these discussions many times: IP addresses change.

So there is that problem to start with. But another point. I don't know how these things work. But I wonder if it's possible that your old IP address (or one I used to have) could ever have been associated with a computer that was used a lot for mischief here.

By the way, when I edited as an IP, I usually signed things with my real name. I did a search of my real name just now, including "pages containing." It turned up zilch. Uporządnicki (talk) 10:40, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

@AzseicsoK: Searches don't return results from the Wikipedia name space or talk pages, unless you set the advanced search settings specifically for the Wikipedia name space or talk pages, respectively. And they never return results from edit summaries. ~Anachronist (talk) 03:38, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_of_Dimes While making year end donations, I tried to research the March of Dimes. After finding several online article about a sudden and controversial defunding of researchers 9n 2018, I came to Wikipedia to see additional information. The history of the organization ends before the time of the controversy. It's as if it is 2017. This made me wonder if someone deleted or blocked the later history. It just doesn't "smell" right. 2603:8001:C900:8A0C:A5FD:A5E3:59D1:B70C (talk) 06:10, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

If you want to find out whether this has happened, look in the "history" of the article, particularly for any major deletions. -- Hoary (talk) 06:24, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

If no volunteer editor freely chooses to update an article since 2017, then the article will stay "frozen", as it were, in 2017. There are millions of articles that need updating and a limited number of volunteers. So, feel free to get to work, in compliance with Wikipedia's Policies and guidelines. You are just as capable as anyone else to improve that article. Cullen328 (talk) 06:35, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

If you take a look at Talk:March of Dimes, you will see that the last substantive discussion of the article content took place in 2011, over 11 years ago. Cullen328 (talk) 06:40, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

I saw an error in an article "Silicon" and I tried to log in. I could not remember my password so I logged in generically. Unfortunate I am at a tech college and the IP is shared by the college. Someone made a bad edit on an unrelated page and then my edit was flagged with a warning due to that bad edit from this IP, not by me. I since recalled my password and want to claim that edit. IS THIS POSSIBLE? IF SO HOW? I-mt (talk) 00:03, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

@I-mt: If you go to Wikipedia:Oversight you can contact the oversight team to ask to supress the IP address on the edit you made while logged out. RudolfRed (talk) 00:06, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

I-mt, sorry if I misunderstand; but my (mis)understanding is that when not logged in at all you made an intelligent edit and that you did so using the same IP number as somebody else who made a stupid edit. If this is indeed so, then this won't cause eyebrows to rise. It's entirely normal for a particular tech college IP number to be used in close succession by one or more intelligent people and one or more nitwits. I wouldn't worry about your use of the IP number. -- Hoary (talk) 05:02, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. There is no way to reattribute an edit. You may if you wish put a note on your user page that that particular edit was made by you: you need to weigh up how important it is to you to "claim" the edit, against revealing an IP address that you used. ColinFine (talk) 10:53, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

I want to Recorrect my location's Name From Hadele Ele to Hadale'ela Afar Ethiopia Plz Help me to do it Wollo Media (talk) 22:46, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Please make your suggestion on Talk:Hadele Ele. On Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ethiopia, mention that you have made the suggestion on Talk:Hadele Ele, and invite people there to comment on your suggestion. -- Hoary (talk) 23:02, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Hadale'ela Afar Ethiopia

Hadale'ela Afar, Ethiopia is one of the woredas in the Afar Region of Ethiopia. Part of the Administrative Zone 5, Hadale-Ela is located near the base of the eastern escarpment of the Ethiopian highlands, and bordered on the south by Simurobi Gele'alo, on the west by the Amhara Region, on the north by Dalifage, on the northeast by the Borkana River which separates it from Dewe, and on the east by Administrative Zone 3. Information is lacking on the towns of this woreda. Wollo Media (talk) 22:48, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

No point in responding again. OP is now indefinitely blocked. Shantavira|^{feed me} 14:23, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi, I'm a random person on the internet and swore I saw a page about children in the LGBT community. Can you give me the link or something? 130.41.216.131 (talk) 17:03, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello! Welcome to the Teahouse! Was the link to a Wikipedia article? - UtherSRG (talk) 17:11, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

There's an article on LGBT parenting. Maybe that was it? Larataguera (talk) 17:37, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

To answer these questions, I firstly don't know where it is. Secondly, it wasn't LGBT parenting. I remember it having a boy holding a transgender flag.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.41.216.139 (talk) 20:28, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello random person. Was that article on the wikipedia, or somewhere else on the internet? —usernamekiran (talk) 21:30, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

It was a Wikipedia article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.41.216.60 (talk) 21:57, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

This sounds like Transgender youth, @130.41.216.60 casualdejekyll 22:27, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

That's the page, thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.127.234.187 (talk) 15:27, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

The thing is, I’m very good at history/geopolitics stuff, and I’ve edited some pages like that, but the Geography Section that is in some pages is a bit confusing. I have the information, but I do not know the format to write it. Currently, this page is the Dubrovnik page.

Kindly help me with my doubt. Regards, Retiarus732. Retiarus732 (talk) 16:43, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

You'll find some advice at Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities/Settlements: Article structure#Geography. - David Biddulph (talk) 16:55, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

In the Piano Sonatas by Ludwig van Beethoven, I often find both "bar" and "measure" being used. Is there a consensus as to which one to use, or are both acceptable?

Thank you. ContributeToTheWiki (talk) 16:22, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

ContributeToTheWiki Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You may wish to direct this question to the talk page of that article, Talk:Ludwig van Beethoven, where the editors that follow that article can see it and better respond. 331dot (talk) 16:26, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

@ContributeToTheWiki 331dot's advice is good, or you could ask on a Talk Page for classical music at WT:CM. I've searched their archives and there doesn't seem to be any discussion on that topic. However, given that Measure (music) is a redirect to Bar (music), I would think that the latter is the more common term. However both do seem acceptable and both are heavily used in articles. The lead of our article does say that measure is more commonly used in American English, so WP:ENGVAR may apply. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:35, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

WP:ENGVAR should certainly apply, even if the issue is not explicitly mentioned there. Measure is, as far as I know, never used by British musicians, unless they need to talk to Americans, whereas American musicians tend to talk about bar lines which separate the measures. The part of ENGVAR which enjoins consistency within an article is also doubtless relevant. ColinFine (talk) 17:56, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Per all of the above, when there are two equivalent terms, the only principle that matters is consistency. Bar and measure are basically pure synonyms, and both are in common use, so it's fine to use either one, so long as one is consistent. If there is a dispute over which of the two words to use, check the article history for whichever one was used first. That's usually a good rule of thumb. --Jayron32 18:06, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello what is the official name of the summary at the start of wikipedia articles? :) - Descria Air Calvary (talk) 04:03, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

Lede or Lead. David notMD (talk) 04:15, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

C'est le "Lead". 115.96.216.203 (talk) 09:29, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

You'll find information at MOS:LEDE. - David Biddulph (talk) 10:21, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

Why "lede"? "Lead" is fine, and matches normal English, but Wikipedia is the ONLY place I have ever seen "lede". My spellchecker doesn't believe it's a word. The first use of that word in the linked article is in a sentence that says " It is not a news-style lead or "lede" paragraph." HiLo48 (talk) 10:35, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

I've never seen it elsewhere either, but I assume it's to draw a distinction between the "lead" of the article and Lead the material or the concept of leadership. 331dot (talk) 10:39, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

Correct "The introduction to a news article is called the 'lede' and is usually in the first paragraph as in an essay. The 'lede' is a deliberate misspelling of 'lead' to prevent confusion in the days when printing was done with lead type.". Theroadislong (talk) 10:53, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

WHERE is the introduction to a news article called the lede? (Yet again, my spellchecker wants me to correct that word's spelling!!) HiLo48 (talk) 19:50, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

@HiLo48 - wiktionary:lede#Etymology_2 would be a great place to start casualdejekyll 19:54, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

Ah, so it's American! Didn't think it was real English. OK, moving on from my sarcasm, can American editors please recognise that is is NOT part of English in other parts of the world, and stop making absolute statements about its use as if it's a global phenomenon? HiLo48 (talk) 19:59, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

@HiLo48:, as a former professional editor who studied at the London College of Printing, I can assure you that "lede" is/was used in British publishing also. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 176.249.29.80 (talk) 06:23, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

@HiLo48: I didn't see anywhere where American editors made absolute statements about its use as if it's a global phenomenon - do you think you could point me to where this was? Perhaps a Diff? casualdejekyll 20:08, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

I think they were referring to the wiktionary entry you linked in which it states the term originated from the US. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 20:13, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

That's relatively clearly the exact opposite of that, though? casualdejekyll 20:18, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

Not really. Based on their userpage they seem to have a strong dislike for Americanism. The word originated in the US and spread elsewhere. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 20:24, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

It's in the OED. Not sure what else you need to convince yourself it's an acceptable English word. The default windows spellcheckers don't accept it in US English either, btw (I just switched languages to check). -- asilvering (talk) 20:40, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

In newspapers, the lede is kinda like the hook to convince readers to keep on looking at your article. The summary is the nut graf, the second paragraph. KC-inator (talk) 18:18, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

See Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Lead section/Archive 15 for an EXTENDED debate. Personally, I will use Lead from now on. David notMD (talk) 12:19, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

• When the first paragraph is set to music, it's referred to as the Lied. Elemimele (talk) 20:29, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

Ba-dum, tish! {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 176.249.29.80 (talk) 06:25, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

My mother made her career in journalism. I saw the word "lede," and my mother explained it as a bit of in-shop jargon, meant to make a clear distinction with "lead." My mother died in 1992--before there was Wikipedia, even before there was much of an Internet. Uporządnicki (talk) 17:30, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello. I recently created a page for the etymology of the Persian word "رای." I was trying to enter my citations but i got an error stating that I was spamming. The error also said that I could get my account banned, which i obviously do not want. Could somebody elaborate why this is? or possibly enter the citation for me? this is the citation I would like to enter:

Qaemmaqami, A. R., & Khatebey, A. (2013, July 9). رای و رأی ([New Persian] rāy and [arabic] ra'y). Academia.edu. Retrieved December 9, 2022, from https://www.academia.edu/3992194/%D8%B1%D8%A7%DB%8C_%D9%88_%D8%B1%D8%A3%DB%8C_New_Persian_r%C4%81y_and_Arabic_ra_y_

This is the link to the page: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%D8%B1%D8%A7%DB%8C

There is also a Persian word "رای" of Arabic origin, however the words are distinct in their etymology and pronunciation. Maybe Wikitionary thought I was creating another page for a word that already has a page? I am very confused and would greatly appreciate some assistance. MarkParker1221 (talk) 18:55, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, MarkParker1221. Wiktionary is a separate project with its own policies and guidelines. You will have to ask your question there. The Teahouse is for asking and answering questions about editing the English Wikipedia. Cullen328 (talk) 19:12, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Also asked at help desk. Replied there. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 19:11, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Okay, I see. Thank you. MarkParker1221 (talk) 20:32, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

How can I become an Administrator and become a good wikipedian — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheAutumns (talk • contribs) 19:04, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

@TheAutumns: Thanks for stopping by the Teahouse to ask this question. Information on administrators is found at Wikipedia:Administrators. It generally takes several years of very active, quality work at Wikipedia and a clear familiarity with Wikipedia's culture and behavior management processes as well. As a new user, it'll be a very long time indeed before you should even consider applying for adminship. In general, being a "good wikipedian" means following the 5 pillars of good editing, managing conflict properly when it happens, making solid contributions to the encyclopedia, etc. Help:Introduction is a good place to start learning how to do so. --Jayron32 19:19, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

"Good wikipedian" is that a new class of Good article? WHere's the nomination process! ^[Joke] ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 20:44, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Maybe you can earn the title after collecting a certain number of service awards. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 20:55, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Another element to being a good Wikipedian is signing your posts on discussion pages such as the Teahouse, TheAutumns. You can do this by typing four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:54, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

sorry Cordless Larry I don't got you well, and please another question how can I report such as harassing vandalisms — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheAutumns (talk • contribs) 21:08, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

@TheAutumns, vandalism and harassment are two different things. Vandalism is a blatant and malicious attempt to disrupt Wikipedia (WP:VANDALISM); harassment is offensive behavior directed against one or more people (WP:HARASSMENT). They are generally handled in different ways. Vandalism can be reported to WP:AIV, for example, if it meets the behavior, while harassment would probably be addressed at WP:ANI.

Please either use the "reply" button (which will automatically sign your post) or add ~~~~ to the end of your post. We have a bot that will sign posts for you, but it is not always reliable. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 21:41, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

First, be respectful and civil to your fellow Wikipedians. Then try to make constructive edits as you see fit. A lot of important stuff is outlined in Help:Introduction and WP:GUIDE. I hope you like Wikipedia and decide to stay. Professor Penguino (talk) 23:52, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

I'm working on a draft for an entry in my user space, and I'd like to save it since writing the entry is a multi-day process. The problem is that I don't see a "save" button (or anything else) in my user space, and I haven't been able to find the answer online. I wrote my previous article using my sandbox, so this didn't come up. I've just been leaving my window open, but this is making me nervous since I don't know how often or if Wikipedia autosaves.

Thanks! Dactyl123 (talk) 20:20, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Dactyl123, publish means save to this page. Everything is published even in user space since you agree to the usual terms for all writing and everything including user pages is discoverable by others. So, press publish, don't stress and keep on editing. Slywriter (talk) 20:28, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia settled on "Publish" so that it is understood that other editors can see (and edit) drafts, even if not yet submitted for review. David notMD (talk) 21:40, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! May I ask you a follow-up question? I'm writing a bio, and I want to add a sidebar for her birth, nationality, education, etc., but I've forgotten how to insert the box. I've been reading about templates and sidebars, but I haven't found the answer. I'm doing visual editing. Do you know how to do this? Dactyl123 (talk) 00:53, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! Whew, I'm ready to quit for the day and save. Footnotes, footnotes, footnotes. Have a nice night. Dactyl123 (talk) 01:00, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

If this is about Sanna K, what you want is Template:Infobox artist. David notMD (talk) 10:33, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

I wish I'd seen your reply earlier! I don't know why it didn't show on my notifications. I've just spent at least an hour (on top of the time I spent yesterday) figuring out that I needed an "infobox" rather than a "sidebar." Argh. Well, it's done now, and I'm close to submitting my entry. Just need to do some more corrections...famous last words. Thanks for your help. Have a good weekend. Dactyl123 (talk) 00:39, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

I was reverting some changes and found User:Kazakhstan, Greatest country in the world. I believe this is against the username policy, but I want some input before I strike. SniperReverter (Talk to me and what I've done) 21:49, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Doesn't seem violate anything. Also your contribution link doesn't work. Slywriter (talk) 21:59, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

User blocked indefinitely. Their edit filter log looks convincing. Sarrail (talk) 22:23, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, also @Slywriter how do I make it work? SniperReverter (Talk to me and what I've done) 03:39, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

SniperReverter, remove the | as I did above to your signature, or this, which is probably the better way. The | is part of the convention when doing internal links, where a space is used when doing an external link(arrow icon) as you currently have it setup. Slywriter (talk) 04:44, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

I would say that it contravenes WP:DISRUPTNAME, SniperReverter. ColinFine (talk) 22:25, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Looks like the work of Борат Quisqualis (talk) 23:02, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Could you please help me with my first Article creation Johndharmadeep (talk) 19:25, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Well, all I can say is that it needs reliable sources and needs cleanup to comply the neutral point of view policy. Sarrail (talk) 19:26, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Could you please help me with it. Because I found this person in google very exiciting. At such age he has been into many news channels and interviews with his tremendous work. If I can suggest you respectfully, I request you to please create by your name. Johndharmadeep (talk) 19:30, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

In the feedback which you have received, the words in blue are wikilinks to detailed advice. - David Biddulph (talk) 19:33, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

One point to bear in mind is that the reliable sources need to be independent of the subject. Interviews with the subject do not demonstrate notability. Wikipedia is interested in what reputable independent sources say about the subject, not what he says about himself. - David Biddulph (talk) 19:37, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Could you please share me your mail sir? I will share the person details. I m new to this Johndharmadeep (talk) 19:44, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

No. Advice has been given here on Wikipedia. Note also that when alongside the "Resubmit" button on your draft it said "Please note that if the issues are not fixed, the draft will be declined again", that's what it meant. - David Biddulph (talk) 19:46, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

@Johndharmadeep: another point you should be made aware of is that "Which helps his project a lot for the social reasons." is absolutely the wrong reason for creating an encyclopedia article on Wikipedia. Quisqualis (talk) 21:13, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Teahouse hosts are here to advise, but not to be co-authors. David notMD (talk) 05:00, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

please why and what is the essence of signing our comments or posts by Sinbot — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheAutumns (talk • contribs) 05:33, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia, the purpose of User:Sinebot is to help you sign your reply if you forgotten to do so. We are required to sign our reply in talk pages using ~~~~ at the end of every reply made, you read more about it WP:SIG. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 06:20, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Im looking to create a Brand New Wiki Page. Not sure how to start. How would that process work? Koolbotkid91 (talk) 16:29, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Ello' Koolbotkid, you can go to the Article Wizard and start there. A word of thumb, must declare a conflict of interest when you write a Wikipedia article.

If I may ask, what do you plan to write about? A1139530 (talk) 16:33, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

@A1139530 That was a bit confusing, at least to me. The editor only needs to declare a COI if there is a COI, and that is determined by what the OP plans to write about. Your advice might have left the impression that an editor (or a new editor) always needs to declare that a COI exists. Maybe I was reading your message too strictly. David10244 (talk) 04:51, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

I worded this very badly. I meant to write "If there is a COI, don't forget to declare it". Sorry @Koolbotkid91 for the confusion. A1139530 (talk) 19:07, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Yes, that makes more sense. Thanks. David10244 (talk) 11:15, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

• Hello Koolbotkid91 and thanks for stopping by to ask this question. There's some good guidance for writing your first Wikipedia article at Help:Your first article. The most important thing to glean from that is step 1 is gathering all of your source material first before you begin to write and to cite your sources as you go. By far, the most common cause of deleted or rejected articles is a lack of sourcing, so start there and then get to writing. Good luck! --Jayron32 16:35, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

  Hiya Koolbotkid91! Writing a brand new article is one of the hardest things to do on Wikipedia. It's usually better to start with out tutorial so that you can get the hang of how the site works a bit. The number one reason I think articles fail is that the article fails to show how the subject meets our notability requirements. From my perspective, it is best to read through nor notability policies and find which subset of those requirements the article would fall under. Then, determine which notability statement(s) you will assert in that article, and then provide adequately independent and reliable sources that prove the assertion of notability. Good luck! UtherSRG (talk) 17:18, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Was wondering if I can exist 205.56.181.196 (talk) 18:57, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello IP Address! Yes, you can exist. However, I do not believe this test is constructive to the teahouse. If you like, create a Wikipedia Account. A1139530 (talk) 19:00, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

This IP address has made hundreds of edits, dating back years, so yes, it exists. If you were the editor for any of those, I confirm that you exist, too. David notMD (talk) 21:35, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

If the IP is a bot or AI, it might exist, but not be sentient. Maybe it's asking for consciousness, but we can't help with that here. David10244 (talk) 05:00, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

This is genuinely the funniest thing I've seen today. But more to the point, what is the ip editor actually asking? Club On a Sub 20 (talk) 16:26, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Related to the IP possibly being AI, Wikipedia has Artificial intelligence, so why doesn't it have Natural intelligence? David notMD (talk) 16:36, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Great question @David notMD! In the spirit of Teahouse answers, "feel free to write the article yourself. Here are some links to get you started....." (just kidding) David10244 (talk) 11:21, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi there. I keep updating the wiki page of Stephen Sharer to add his correct birthday as he is lying to children about his age. I keep adding his real age of 30 but it is constantly getting deleted and I am not sure why, thanks in advance. 2600:1015:B063:16E2:482B:3FC:52E6:BE4A (talk) 06:13, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Maybe you need to give a reliable source for his birthday! --Bduke (talk) 06:17, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

it's going trying to login with Google and try to log in with you doing with this every day I'm tired I've had it I'd rather just go without 2600:1700:DDD0:AE90:C58C:24BC:3956:268 (talk) 06:24, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi there , confused about your last message about Google, could you elaborate? He has wiped the internet of his real age and due to the fact that he works with children I think it is important to be added. This will sound crazy but would a link to a yearbook with photographic evidence work? I don’t seem to have any other way to prove it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1015:B063:16E2:482B:3FC:52E6:BE4A (talk) 06:29, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Why does it matter "for children" if he is 24 or 30? His Wikipedia article does not include his age or birthdate, as far as I can see. David10244 (talk) 11:51, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Is am just worried for minors and am not sure what else to do. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1015:B063:16E2:482B:3FC:52E6:BE4A (talk) 06:32, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

We require an impeccably reliable source for a date of birth. This is mandatory and not negotiable. If reliable sources differ, we provide both and explain the contradiction. Being "worried for minors" is nice but does not justify straying from our policies and guidelines. Cullen328 (talk) 07:39, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

I don't understand what the concern for minors is. 331dot (talk) 09:57, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

I guess that a 24-year-old might be thought less mature and less capable of dealing with children than a 30-year-old? Maybe? But quite a few 24-y-olds are themselves parents, and I'm sure we all know very immature quadragenarians, so... It's all very peculiar. --bonadea contributions talk 17:57, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

• Wikipedia relies on reliable sources to verify information, especially about living people. This discussion is probably more suitable for WP:BLPN. GiantSnowman 10:59, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi! First-time Wikipedia editor here. I created an awards table in the Gabrielle Zevin article. In 2005 she was longlisted for the Otherwise Award, which was then called the James Tiptree Jr. Award. The name changed occured in 2019. I linked to the wiki article on the award, link reads as Jame Tiptree Jr. Award, which is also the name I put down as the award category. Is this correct? And what's the general protocol for name changes? Thanks! Snowflower2 (talk) 18:29, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Snowflower2, and welcome to the Teahouse. You linked to the article, which is titled by the award's current name, and you made the display text the name of the award at the time. In my view that is exacttly the right way to do it. ColinFine (talk) 19:13, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! @ColinFine Snowflower2 (talk) 02:20, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Hey Good Morning, Draft:Dave Bachinsky

Trying to figure out the best way to update this page so it's approved. All the references are to real pages but it wasn't approved Roll Forever (talk) 17:36, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Roll Forever Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The reviewer left some advice for you on the draft. Do you have specific questions about it? 331dot (talk) 17:40, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

I just fixed all the links and updated some wording. Is there anything specific I should be changing? Roll Forever (talk) 17:49, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Among other things, nothing should be bold except his name. And delete all the contest history. And reference all the stuff at the top. and other stuff. David notMD (talk) 18:17, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Roll Forever. You need to remove all promotional language and bring the draft into compliance with the Neutral point of view. Sentences such as With precision transition skills and ability to huck down a massive set of stairs, Bachinsky has what it takes to be a top contender in any skateboarding contest. Insider jargon and slang like "huck" should be avoided. Cullen328 (talk) 21:48, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you so much for revision. I'm just about to resubmit. Have an amazing weekend Roll Forever (talk) 01:06, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

This will be declined again. Everything from the top down to Shapethree needs to be referenced, and if not posible, deleted. David notMD (talk) 03:37, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

You should also go through the article and make sure every sentence is grammatically correct. In the "Shapethree" section, every one of the first five sentences contains at least one grammatical error. CodeTalker (talk) 04:04, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi, I’m a bit strapped for time, also have zero experience as a Wikipedia editor so apologies and TIA if anyone is willing to help.

I’ve just come across a page which was has already been flagged for NPOV but hasn’t been touched since 2009. imv it would be worth updating this page to reflect academic criticisms as WP is making efforts to get pages up about women this seems a great page to update but I’m so newb it would be great to get in touch with an experienced editor focussed on psychology just to ask a few preliminary questions about the research involved eg. I cannot find any responses from her re: lit review through scholar.g She’s also done considerable work since 2009 in the same area of research but slightly tangential so it might be that I’m looking in the wrong place to find any response. best regards TIA EthicalAugur (talk) 09:03, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

EthicalAugur, which article is this? -- Hoary (talk) 09:24, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Oh, I was sure I posted the link, apologies, it’s WP:Sonja_Lyubomirsky

i don’t know if that’s how I’m supposed to link? EthicalAugur (talk) 15:14, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Sonja Lyubomirsky Sarrail (talk) 15:15, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Her book Layous & Lyubomirsky (2014). The how, why, what, when, and who of happiness.

and a lit rev. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2019.1651888

which covers some of her research into gratitude and it’s relationship to happiness.

Can fill you in on details but basically I think that the page needs an update as this content in coming up in UG studies. EthicalAugur (talk) 15:22, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

EthicalAugur, I took a look at the article Sonja Lyubomirsky. I am not impressed. For example the lead tells us that she's the author of the bestseller The How of Happiness: A Scientific Approach to Getting the Life You Want, a book of strategies backed by scientific research that can be used to increase happiness. Well, booze, dope, exercise, "retail therapy" and more can be used with the aim of increasing happiness. This doesn't mean that they're efficacious. I suppose that what's meant by both Lyubomirsky and the cited source is that these "strategies" really are efficacious. And for all I know, they are. But what's the cited source? The institution of which Lyubomirsky is an employee. Not good! (It should be a disinterested source.) So feel free to improve the article. Start with minor and modest improvements (scrupulously referenced), and continue to rather more substantial improvements (also scrupulously referenced). Always click "Show preview" and check what you've done before clicking "Publish changes". You say that you think you may be "looking in the wrong place to find any response" relevant to Lyubomirsky's work. I'm not a psychologist and neither are most people looking at this talk page; a better place to ask would be Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Psychology. -- Hoary (talk) 04:37, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

i am aware of the procedure for reviewing of articles which get submitted to articles for creation. however, what about reviewing of those articles which get directly published? if my account enables me to create and directly publish an article (which it does), how do i request a review? is there any text that i am supposed to add to the article vis-a-vis its reviewing? would be glad to know. Dissoxciate (talk) 06:59, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

They get listed automatically at Special:NewPagesFeed. - David Biddulph (talk) 08:19, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

And from there they are either approved or deleted. If you want a new article reviewed then you need to create it through the draft process. Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:12, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

alright. thanks for the input. Dissoxciate (talk) 09:13, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi

hope you doing well

I need help for improving the draft of bingx.com article and please let me know exactly where my mistakes in this draft is and help me to modify it

Draft:BingX.com

thank you so much Sedrezahosseini (talk) 11:19, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Sedrezahosseini Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You have submitted it for a review; the reviewer will give you any feedback. A previous reviewer has left you comments on the draft as well. 331dot (talk) 11:21, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Likely not notable, and needs copyediting... which I am not inclined to do, since I predict the draft will be declined. That's my opinion; sorry. We'll see. David10244 (talk) 11:39, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

if i have created an article by publishing it directly; however, wish to seek a review at AfC, should i just copy the entire content of the article (which i already published), create a draft, paste it and submit to AfC? or something else? and if i do copy it to AfC, what should i do to the already published article? apply for speedy deletion or notify someone? hope the question is intelligible. Dissoxciate (talk) 11:30, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi Dissoxciate. If you would like to return your article to draft status and then submit it to WP:AFC, the easiest thing to do would be to WP:DRAFTIFY the article. Basically, you will be WP:MOVEing the page from the article namespace to the draft namespace. Once you've done that, you can then submit it to AfC for review. If your question is about Journey's End (painting), then instead of submitting it to AfC for review, maybe ask for assistance at Wikipedia:WikiProject Visual arts. At first glance, the article doesn't look all that bad; so, maybe see what some of the members of WikiProject Visual arts think about it. If it's only in need of minor improvement and notability is not a concern, then there's no need to draftify it. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:37, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

hi Marchjuly. thanks a lot for the response. this is exactly what i was looking for. personally, i do think there aren't any notability issues here; i just require some additional assistance. ill check at Wikipedia:WikiProject Visual arts. gracias! Dissoxciate (talk) 12:25, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Dissoxciate, I notice two chunks within Journey's End (painting) -- challenged the British academic system of art education and the physicality of the oil medium, and He was greatly inspired by the Mughal miniature traditions and the Japanese wash technique -- that are taken verbatim from this, but without quotation marks. (There may be other unacknowledged quotations too: I didn't look.) Use quotation marks for any quotation; and do so quickly. -- Hoary (talk) 12:29, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Hoary should i add quotation marks then, or just edit the chunks to make them non-verbatim? i think the latter should suffice. Dissoxciate (talk) 12:32, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Dissoxciate, you're free to do either. NB just changing the odd word here or there would not be sufficient; you'd have to do a thorough reworking. -- Hoary (talk) 12:37, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

There is a table of 100 rows and 5 columns.

I want to change the alignment of the 3rd column from center to left.

I know I can insert style="text-align:center" in a cell but doing this one hundred times is .. too much.

Can I do this once and apply to the entire rows of the 3rd column? Regpath (talk) 06:34, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi Regpath. This cannot be done except in some circumstances with Wikipedia:TemplateStyles which has limitations and is difficult to use. Repeating code in every row is the normal way to format a column, also with hundreds of rows. A regular expression can often add the code in every row at the same time but it can be quite tricky to get right if the table code isn't very clean and systematic. Don't try it if you aren't already familiar with regular expressions. Which page and table is it about? PrimeHunter (talk) 16:27, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello my name is osvaldo and i wanna create a list of future f1 champions until 2050 can you go to the f1 champion list and give out every single driver that was f2 f3 f4 and karting and you know ill click on the future drivers page and check out their photos of them from wikipedia and observe them as future stars wouldnt that be nice because i really really want them please 2A01:C50F:2F00:1000:2152:C195:23A:2DB0 (talk) 13:46, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

So, to clarify, you want the creation of a list of future F1 champions until 2050? It's only 2022, why extend it to 28 years later? Sarrail (talk) 13:48, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not the place for predictions. See WP:CRYSTAL. Shantavira|^{feed me} 13:49, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

List of Formula One World Drivers' Champions lists champions 1950-2022. Only after a year is over is the list updated with one new name. List of Formula One drivers lists all drivers who were in at least one F1 race, with a green background for those currently active. As already mentioned, Wikipedia cannot predict who among them might win the championship in the future, or for race car drivers who have not yet competed at the F1 level yet, or not racing at any level yet, or not born yet. David notMD (talk) 14:37, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

This crystal ball's always cloudy except for when you look into the past. We do not engage in speculation for next year, let alone decades into the future. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 15:07, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

It seems to me more than likely that the future F1 champions of, say, 2045–50 have not even been born yet. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.213.188.15 (talk) 17:52, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

i literally was clicking random stuff Lol1234joejoe (talk) 17:28, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

By posting this query, you just did. If you want to know how to create an article, WP:YFA gives directions, but you should learn something about how Wikipedia works first. Start with WP:Five pillars. David Biddulph has posted more links on your Talk page; click the big blue button.

Also, remember that the rest of us are here with serious purpose, even if we enjoy it. We don't enjoy wasting time clearing up non-serious users' inept jokes and having to take steps to block them, so I'm glad you aren't one of those people. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.213.188.15 (talk) 18:02, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. See Help:Introduction to get started. Sarrail (talk) 17:53, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi everyone, good morning/afternoon/evening!

Would the articles that are still in-progress be deleted after a set number of unsuccessful attempts? Thank you for answering. HanaKaeKo (talk) 17:48, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, HanaKaeKo, and welcome to the Teahouse. Like most things in Wikipedia, there's no fixed number. If a draft keeps being submitted without substantially addressing the problems, or if in the considered opinion of the reviewer there is no hope of its ever becoming acceptable, then they will reject it, which says that it may not be submitted again. But a draft can be submitted many times if it is actively being improved. Given the unpredictable wait time for a review, it is worth carrying on improving a draft even after submitting it.

Separately, if a draft is untouched for six months, it is liable to be deleted. ColinFine (talk) 18:33, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

The article Lists of The New York Times fiction best sellers uses a navbox template, and it was just brought to my attention that the navbox isn't visible on mobile. (Unless you view on desktop mode.) Is this a known bug? I'm not sure where to take this. Thanks! -- irn (talk) 17:28, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi irn. Navboxes should not be used for article content. All navboxes are deliberately omitted in mobile to reduce less relevant content on small screens. I have changed it to a list in columns.[1] PrimeHunter (talk) 19:21, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Ah, okay. Thanks! -- irn (talk) 19:28, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

I have come across (or added) names of people, organisations, companies, and things that probably merit Wikipedia articles. Some are subjects of articles that already exist on other wikis, some are good candidates for WP:WiR, and a few just seem like obvious omissions that someone may wish to pursue. I will pick up what I can (time permitting), though it would take me years to contribute something about all of them. What are the best forums to bring these to the attention of others? Cheers Cl3phact0 (talk) 07:57, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi Cl3phact0, there is requested articles, see WP:RA, but to be honest the list of articles already requested is enormous, and things languish there for extremely long periods. Most editors seem to pursue their own areas of interest, and fill in the blanks the encounter as they read around WP. Where articles exist on other Wikipedias, if they are of adequate quality for the English WP (which has more stringent requirements for sourcing than some), you can translate them, see WP:TRANSLATETOHERE for an overview. Elemimele (talk) 10:50, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. I suppose I asked partially because the WP:RA list is so dauntingly long. Any thoughts about "Stubbing" best practice? I looked at this in passing and thought it might be a good way to get some of the articles started, but I am also wary of touching any invisible wiki-verse third rails (being fairly new to here). Cheers Cl3phact0 (talk) 11:09, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

@Cl3phact0: The list would be even longer if I didn't occasionally go through and remove entries that have articles. That should tell you that subjects do get written about, eventually. As for stubbing, basically what you would be doing is writing a short overview and include some references. Nothing wrong with that. I started a few stubs myself. Some of them grow into articles, and some are still stubs (two examples of mine, Sayyid Baraka and The Train Is Coming). ~Anachronist (talk) 22:29, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Women in Red has an extensive set of its own redlink lists: Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Redlist index, which you can add to. ■ ∃ Madeline ⇔ ∃ Part of me ; 11:02, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. I've added a few to the list you shared. I also put a note with some others on the talk page of the project. Cheers Cl3phact0 (talk) 11:43, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, I created a page on Georgian Wikipedia about myself. I am an actor. but the editor entered unnecessary and unwanted information into the article and blocked me. Please help to remove this article. Thanks! 37.232.108.149 (talk) 22:44, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

You will have to address that using whatever process the Georgian Wikipedia has to do so; that is separate from this project. 331dot (talk) 22:48, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but the English Wikipedia and Georgian Wikipedia are completely separate projects, and it is very likely that nobody here can help you.

I don't know what the policies of Georgian Wikipedia are on writing about yourself, but here it is strongly discouraged. ColinFine (talk) 22:48, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

I am making a article about Cow Bayou in User:HelpingWorld/sandbox, and I am making a table for the species and the population of them. I got my info from this journal this pg 7-8. I dont know how to format the table all I need is the taxa/species and the number of it in the table, can anyone help? Thanks.`~HelpingWorld~` ^(👽🛸) 17:59, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Well, you seem to have made a competent start towards setting up a table, although I'm completely mystified as to what you have in mind to put in it. But apart from that, there's this problem. I looked at your source, and I don't think one can actually gather fish populations from it. It seems to me that what your source is saying is: FOR PURPOSES of the study, THIS MANY individuals of THIS species were caught BY THIS METHOD at THIS LOCATION. Unless I'm missing where the source extrapolates to total population, I don't think that's really usable. There's also the fact that the source is 45 years old, so even if it could give us an idea of fish populations from 1987, it probably isn't terribly relevant today. Uporządnicki (talk) 18:24, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

@User:AzseicsoK, but your saying the fish species in the source still can be used correct cause last time I checked the same specieses are in the bayou.HelpingWorldMobile (talk) 22:31, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

@HelpingWorldMobile If you checked (how?), that is original research which is not acceptable as a source. David10244 (talk) 03:49, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia has many rules than any websites, Wikipedia is not such like Facebook, Instagram, Twitter e.t.c. these social medias you can do what ever you like but before you get blocked it is not common it is very hard. so why Wikipedia blocked people so fast? and how can I become useful to Wikipedia and to get respect by it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheAutumns (talk • contribs) 06:25, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

@theautumns: check our introduction. lettherebedarklight晚安 06:34, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Also, Wikipedia is NOT social media. Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:15, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

yeah I know Wikipedia is mostly close with google true??TheAutumns (talk) 11:23, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

@TheAutumns No. Google is primarily a search engine, while Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. The rules are here so that Wikipedia does not turn into a social media or chat site. Wikipedia does not try to be Google or Facebook. You are certainly welcome here if you want to help build and improve this encyclopedia. David10244 (talk) 11:53, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Useful by learning the rules. Many new editors start out with having 'good faith' edits reverted due to ignorance of the rules, examples being adding content they know to be true, but without references, or inserting copyright protected content. Others do not comprehend neutral point of view, or want to create promotional/advertising type articles. David notMD (talk) 12:17, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

sorry please but I don't got what is this talking about what is the subject of this topicTheAutumns (talk) 13:21, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

@TheAutumns You don't get what this is talking about? You made a statement, then asked two questions, then a third question. These comments are intended to be answers to your questions. David10244 (talk) 03:54, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

I would take issue with the idea that it's very hard to get blocked in Facebook. You get kicked right off Facebook, if someone there doesn't like your name. Their rules are just to make you think they have rules and do things fairly, but it's pretty arbitrary. They don't tell you why; you just find you have no account one morning. And their "mechanism" for appeal is also just for appearance; it never leads to anything--not even a reply. The only time it's ever reversed is when they do it to someone sufficiently prominent that it makes the news. Then they put out a statement that--oh, it was a mistake!--and undo it. Uporządnicki (talk) 13:32, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi Wikipedia i just wanted to tell you that i wanna learn how to start an article so i an share beautiful information with the fellow dear readers and i am interested in articles and everyday things and if you would let me my first article would be about my school "City Springs Elementary/Middle school" its a wonderful charter school and i think that Baltimore schools need to be appreciated and maybe if you are willing to let me submit and article that would be Amazing! but thank you for you time and i will continue reading you Outstanding Articles.

Sincerely, Tori Livingston 73.200.117.48 (talk) 02:51, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

my article did i make it on here?!?!?!? 73.200.117.48 (talk) 02:52, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Firstly you can read about notability, then if you think that there are sufficient independent reliable sources to demonstrate notability you could read the advice at WP:your first article and prepare a draft for review. - David Biddulph (talk) 03:01, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

You can also try the article wizard. Sarrail (talk) 03:02, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

The vast majority of elementary and middle schools are not notable and not eligible for a Wikipedia article unless their architecture is highly unusual and written about in reliable sources, or some truly historic event took place there. See WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES for more information. Wikipedia is not a directory of every single school on Earth. Cullen328 (talk) 04:01, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

I have a page call Zac Coonan sandbox and there is another page with my face on it. I would like these taken down I am finding them embarrassing and hurtful. If you could do that, that would be great 2001:8003:A8EB:2200:BCED:E3CB:21E3:9948 (talk) 23:09, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello @2001:8003:A8EB:2200:BCED:E3CB:21E3:9948, you can put { {Db-g7} } without the spaces which speedy deletes the page by the request of the Author (you). But the pages got deleted and you only have 1 edit which is the teahouse?`~HelpingWorld~` ^(👽🛸) 23:28, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

User:Zac Coonan and User:Zac Coonan/sandbox have both already been deleted as not having appropriate content for user pages. You have attempted to delete the image File:Zac coonans face.png from Commons: your first request is malformed, as you didn't give a reason, and the second is an "author request", but you posted it without being logged in, so technically the request wasn't from the author. I don't know Commons well enough to know what will happen there, but my guess is that someone will delete it anyway. If they don't, I suggest asking for help on Commons, at Commons:Commons:Village pump. ColinFine (talk) 23:43, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Are you Zac Coonan, and editing using that account? If so, then you put that picture in those pages. But see ColinFine's answer. If you are not Zac Coonan, then you should not request deletion by saying you are the author of the image. David10244 (talk) 04:18, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

all the other San Diego City Attorney election have political party's so I added it and didn't think it was a problem 2603:8001:2902:64F4:4517:E4B6:A397:EAED (talk) 01:59, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

It's good that you are providing edit summaries; the problem is that it's hard -- for me, and I imagine for other people too -- to make sense of them. Example: removing political parties as all elections in California are non-partisan and not have people add party as a good deed or confuse colors with party's. I understand that down to and including "non-partisan and", but I'm quite lost when I attempt to parse not have people add party as a good deed or confuse colors with party's. Maybe people are reverting your edits in part because they don't understand the reasons you're giving. -- Hoary (talk) 02:26, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

The assertion that all elections in California are non-partisan is incorrect. Presidential primary elections in California remain fully partisan. Voters can still designate a party affiliation when they register to vote. In the last ten years, it is true that California law has allowed people to cross party lines in primary elections for Congress, the state legislature, governor and other top statewide offices, but candidates for those offices can and do declare their party affiliation on the ballot. Cullen328 (talk) 04:22, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello Wikipedians!
What are the best tools to automate reference creation?
I have seen Help:Citation_tools and tried a few (not all), but haven't found the solution yet.

Like Firefox plugin, but better reference format

There is a plugin to Firefox which automatically creates references. Very smooth, but the format of those references could IMO be better.

• It creates references that look like this^[1]

• And I would like them to look like this (well-organized Wikicode)^[2]

The question

Is there some other tool that you know of or could recommend?

References

MahaNakhon (talk) 07:39, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

I now tried Citer and it does the job. Are there any other similar tools?
MahaNakhon (talk) 07:45, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

hi there, wiki administration

First, I apologize for not understanding the copyright restrictions.

One of our company profiles should be posted on Wikipedia to assist our customers in finding information using Wikipedia's best detailed system.

So, I tried to include our firm profile and other information that is already on our website. I used several common words in both my online and wiki introductions. I saved it as a draft, but today I received information that a copyright issue had been transferred from our company's website to our wiki profile. However, we have not received any copyright notices or emails.

If you allow me to back up the work you've removed or construct a fresh one, it will be more beneficial to reproduce with the directions you've previously warned about.

Thank you to the wiki team for working on authentication and perfection. In the same way, guide us. We'll provide an excellent platform for the people.

Thanks

SM Faysal

web developer

Dedert Corporation Smfaysal1011 (talk) 13:16, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Smfaysal1011 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. First, you must make a formal paid editing disclosure; this is a Terms of Use requirement and mandatory.

Second, Wikipedia has no interest in aiding your customers, or in enhancing search results for your company. We don't have "profiles", not a single one. Wikipedia has articles, typically written by independent editors wholly unconnected with the subject. Any article about your company must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the company, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable company. Wikipedia is not interested in what a company says about itself. 331dot (talk) 13:26, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Any content deleted for copyright infringement will not be restored. First step is declaring paid on your User page (See WP:PAID). Then, use WP:YFA to create and submit a draft. References need to be independent from any content created by the company. WP:NCORP may help. Be aware that if you do succeed in creating a draft and having it accepted, after that milestone you are prohibited from any future editing of the article. Instead, you will be limited to making suggestions on the Talk page of the article, for an independent editor to accept or deny. Lastly, once an article exists, anyone can edit it. If there is valid negative published content about the company (lawsuits, etc.) that may be added. David notMD (talk) 16:19, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Your creation and Edit summaries for Draft:Swapno Sarothi make clear that you have either a WP:PAID or WP:COI connection, so declare that also. David notMD (talk) 16:23, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

@Smfaysal1011 As for the "Swapno Sarothi" draft: Encyclopedia articles do not use the word "we". David10244 (talk) 11:44, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

David10244

pls review once again,

i think, this time all okay.

i thought i should wright as they talk on their website.

Thanks Smfaysal1011 (talk) 17:47, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

No, i'm not paid.

i took research and i know their activities. As a first time continuator, i took some wrong words.

Consider this situation as a new contributor. Smfaysal1011 (talk) 17:51, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

@Smfaysal1011: It’s OK to be a paid editor, or to have a conflict of interest. It’s not OK to lie about it and waste other editor’s time.

I do not find it very likely that the same person would, within two days, decide to independently research and write articles that look a lot like advertisements for both an American chemical company and a Bengali non-profit.

I also find it unlikely that lack of familiarity with Wikipedia causes someone to write I tried to include our firm profile and other information that is already on our website. I used several common words in both my online and wiki introductions. A mistake in English also seems unlikely. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 09:43, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Credible sources, namely the Bloody Run Historical Society, cite an original building in Everett PA (Bedford County) dates from 1738. The building is the John Patton house. Ithinkwecan (talk) 04:25, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Ithinkwecan, you are welcome to make this suggestion at the foot of Talk:List of the oldest buildings in Pennsylvania. (Don't forget to point out precisely where the Bloody Run Historical Society says this.) -- Hoary (talk) 05:39, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Ithinkwecan. One would think that a US building dating to 1738 would be on the National Register of Historic Places but I am not seeing it there. When I Google the name, I see an early 19th century building with a similar name in West Virginia, which was Virginia back then. That is clearly not what you are talking about. So, we would need to have significant coverage of this house in independent, reliable sources in order to cover it on Wikipedia. Does the house possibly have another name? Cullen328 (talk) 09:46, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi, I wanna ask how to change "User:Name/sandbox" and its URL into custom name when I'm editing my page? NicoleSYL (talk) 07:06, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

@NicoleSYL: You can change it to "User:Name/CustomName" simply by moving that sandbox page to a new name. The "Page" menu tab has a "Move" selection to do this. If you have something else in mind, you need to be more specific. ~Anachronist (talk) 07:31, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, NicoleSYL and welcome to the Teahouse, and to WIkipedia. I have a suspicion that what you are really asking is how you can make User:NicoleSYL/sandbox have a name without the "User" stuff on the front, such as (for example) Dato' Sri Eddie Chong Wei Chuan. In other words, you are asking "How can I make my sandbox an article in the encyclopaedia?"

The technical part of the answer is: in two ways. Either Move the draft to an article - but you won't have access to that function until you have been here for four days and made ten edits; or use the articles for creation process and submit the draft for review. If the reviewer accepts it, they will move it into article space. However do not try doing either of these at present: this would be a waste of everybody's time.

The practical part of the answer is: by turning the couple of lines of nothing much that you have there into an acceptable encyclopaedia article. I suggest you study your first article carefully, to learn how to do this. I also suggest that you put this project aside for a while, and spend a few months learning how Wikipedia works and what its requirements are, by making small improvements to some of our existing six million articles, before you come back to yhour draft with greqater understanding of what is required. ColinFine (talk) 10:50, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Why would a revision version of any article be deleted in the revision history and have the summary on the revision section as "edit summary removed" or something like that? Hgh1985 (talk) 10:54, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Revision deletion. - David Biddulph (talk) 10:57, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

I tried to do it but it doesnt show the refrences on the page? Could someone help?`~HelpingWorld~` ^(👽🛸) 23:21, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, HelpingWorld, and welcome to the Teahouse. That usually means that the reference is malformed; and looking at the sandbox I immediately see that <ref name=CowBayou is followed by another opening < instead of by a closing > ColinFine (talk) 23:46, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! I was confused on how to do it. The same issue happened to me a few months ago but someone else fixed it and I didn't think to check the page.`~HelpingWorld~` ^(👽🛸) 23:50, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Yes, except that it wasn't "CowBayou"; it was "Cow Bayou"; and I think (though without mustering the energy to confirm) that a space within a reference name results in requiring quotation marks around the reference name. (I always put reference names in quotation marks, so I don't have to worry about the matter.) -- Hoary (talk) 23:55, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Fixed, I think. -- Hoary (talk) 23:53, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

HelpingWorld, I would never mistake < for > or vice versa. This isn't the result of superior intelligence or proficiency. (I'm quite thick.) Instead, it's the result of syntax highlighting. If I got the inequality symbol wrong, the resulting colour in my edit window would be wrong. Very unfortunately, I enabled syntax highlighting so long ago that I've completely forgotten how I did so -- and even when I look for it, I can't find it. (Did I mention that I'm quite thick?) Perhaps some other editor here will be able to tell you how to do this. -- Hoary (talk) 00:02, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

If I had to duplicate another ref, would I copy the same format you did?`~HelpingWorld~` ^(👽🛸) 00:04, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

HelpingWorld, first use: <ref name="something appropriate">{{Cite web|[blah blah blah blah]}}</ref>. Any subsequent use: <ref name="something appropriate" />. Does this explain? -- Hoary (talk) 00:13, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Yes, thanks!`~HelpingWorld~` ^(👽🛸) 00:58, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

@HelpingWorld I concur with Hoary that syntax highlighting makes it virtually impossible to make that sort of error. To activate it in the source editor, simply toggle the pen icon at the top of the edit window next to the "Advanced" drop-down. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:41, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

I RECENTLY MADE A DONATION IN ERROR TO WIKIMEDIA THINKING I WAS DONATING TO THE ST. MARIA GORETTI CHURCH IN WESTFIELD INDIANA. WHILE I AM WILLING TO MAKE A DONATION TO THE FOUNDATION I CAN NOT DONATE TO BOTH THE ST. Maria Goretti Church and the Wikimedia Foundation. PLEASE CANCEL. MY ORIGINAL DONATION. 73.168.211.140 (talk) 19:47, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

We have nothing to do with the donation process, please contact the Wikimedia Foundation by email at donate at Wikimedia dot org. 331dot (talk) 19:55, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

This is the Teahouse, a board for new editors to ask questions about editing Wikipedia. For help with Wikimedia Foundation donations, email donate [at] wikimedia [dot] org Iscargra (talk) 21:36, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

This person reached out to the Donor Relations team on the email shared, and we will happily assist the donor with getting their funds returned. Thank you! KRobinson (WMF) (talk) 13:22, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

I know user pages are not required but a WMF account in red just looks... Odd :) Anyway, welcome. Slywriter (talk) 13:31, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

I would like to report user: Roxy the dog for bullying and false vandalism claims.

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:81.134.166.71

The content I added was in accordance with Wikipedia guidelines. Wikipedia enables Marketers to add information so long as the information is free of puffery and unbiased. I have neither used puffery nor stated any biased views with the content I have published. It simply states the existence of a company that produces the material in question. The information is provided in a table where there are several other brand names also mentioned. In my content I have not mentioned USP's or any content that should constitute puffery, biased opinions on vandalism. Roxy the dog has reverted my changes 2 times, nearing the breach of 3RR rule. My aim is to keep this as a collaborative space where we can help disseminate information in a fair way, free of bullying and inclusive of help. 81.134.166.71 (talk) 11:30, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Um, no, it is totally wrong that "Wikipedia enables Marketers to add information so long as the information is free of puffery and unbiased". Wikipedia is not for merely disseminating information. This is an encyclopedia with criteria for inclusion, and it primarily summarizes what independent reliable sources say about a topic. 331dot (talk) 11:32, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

And I don't see where you have complied with WP:PAID. 331dot (talk) 11:32, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Marketers are allowed to edit Wikipedia, as long as they approach the subjects that they have a conflict of interest of in an extremely careful manner. This is a rather rough introduction to Wikipedia editing. Would you like to contribute to other areas of Wikipedia instead? 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 12:04, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

IP editor. You claim that The content I added was in accordance with Wikipedia guidelines but a) you did not provide a source for the information, which violates the key policy of verifiabilty and b) you ignored the mandatory declaration that you are a WP:PAID editor. It is not "bullying" to point this out, although Roxy the dog was wrong to call your edit vandalism, which has a very specific meaning here, as you know. Please create an account, make the WP:COI declaration and proceed to suggest edits via the {{edit request}} mechanism. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:18, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Doesn't feel wrong. Looks like vandalism to me, adding unwelcome stuff time after time, and clearly acting on behalf of some business. I do feel that the OP should also re-examine their definition of bullying, and we'll forget the website wide behaviour that says that if you are talking about somebody, you should inform them, as they are a newbie. Welcome to Wikipedia btw, I hope you stay, and learn how to behave. Roxy the dog 13:43, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

IP address: I agree that your actions aren't vandalism. But they are clearly intended to promote a particular company, and are against Wikipedia policy. Even if you don't care about Wikipedia policy, you should stop: your actions make Ultramax look like a shitty company that can't afford to advertise honestly. Maproom (talk) 13:51, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

My recent contribution to the Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention noticeboard (and a few preceding entries) are delted with a double strike-through. I've seen WP:REVDEL before with a single strike, but the article doesn't explain what double strike means! (I'm guessing someone posted something to that noticeboard that really shouldn't be seen) but wondering what it's called when this happens. JeffUK (talk) 14:44, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi @JeffUK, welcome to the Teahouse. That's an oversight strike - see Wikipedia:Oversight#Nomenclature for an illustrative table. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:46, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Sometimes in my search to improve articles I find things that did not happen (while in the article they are mentioned as 'this might happen in the future') would it than be better to simply delete it? Or to say something like 'This plan did not actually materialize' SarahBx (talk) 11:25, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

In some cases, an event that didn't happen can be notable if it passes WP:GNG. There are, however, a lot of articles that exist on this project that should be deleted. These can be put through the deletion process; see WP:PROD and WP:AFD. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:29, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

SarahBx Hello and welcome. It's difficult to give a general answer, as it likely depends on the situation. 331dot (talk) 11:30, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

If you mean an otherwise valid article with a section on future events, then deleting the future stuff may be enough. However, sometimes event plans that did not reach fruition can be notable if widely known and written about. See Batgirl (film). David notMD (talk) 16:47, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

I lived in Riverhead N.Y. and know the Riverhead Raceway advertises and lists their track as one quarter mile in length, Wikipedia presently incorrectly states it is .20, 1/5 of a mile. I do not want to register or edit w/ my ip address exposed. Can this be updated by someone for accuracy purposes? To the lay person one fifth or 1/4 is little difference but to a race fan it's a glaring mistake. Thank you K.Blasko 47.17.0.239 (talk) 16:52, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

COURTESY: Riverhead Raceway. David notMD (talk) 16:55, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Several of the refs are dead or behind a paywall, but #3 (New York Times) say quarter mile.David notMD (talk) 17:01, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Actually, it was quarter-mile until an IP editor changed it in August 2021. I changed it back, as refs confirm. David notMD (talk) 19:47, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

I am trying to revert an edit on a page, but it says that the edit was "never made.". Can I have some help on this Club On a Sub 20 (talk) 15:22, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Club On a Sub 20 - can you give us a link to the edit in question? 199.208.172.35 (talk) 15:23, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @club on a sub 20: what edit? lettherebedarklight晚安 15:23, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

My bad, I will try to link it...Here. The edit adds lots of unnecessary plot details. Am I unable to revert it because multiple edits were made after it? Club On a Sub 20 (talk) 16:38, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

@Club On a Sub 20, no, that situation gives a different error message. This one is very odd - The edit could not be undone because it does not exist or was deleted. also shows up for me when I click "undo", but obviously the edit does exist and was not deleted. Maybe the folks at WP:VPT could tell you more. In the meantime, you could simply manually restore the version of the article before those edits, then re-add any good edits which were made after them. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 17:23, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Ok, thank you for the reply Club On a Sub 20 (talk) 17:40, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

I had a similar error over the weekend, where I tried to revert something and it said it couldn't be done because the edit "didn't exist". I was reverting two edits at Hypersexuality, which were followed by a single inoffensive edit. When I included that edit in my reversion, the system was fine and reverted all three (the third edit was addition of a missing full stop to the section that I was removing by reversion, so I did wonder if the problem was that my reversion wasn't compatible with keeping the last edit, which was what I'd asked the system to do. In effect, had it reverted the bit I wanted, another edit that I hadn't attempted to revert would have ceased to exist. But I have no idea whether that's what the world was trying to tell me.) Elemimele (talk) 18:33, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Hmm. Going from memory, the error message should be "This edit cannot be undone because of intervening edits", followed by further instructions. I wonder if the problem here is simply that the wrong error message is now being displayed. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:40, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

@Club On a Sub 20: This is definitely a bug; you should have seen this message instead. Reported at phab:T325019. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 20:32, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

I've been contributing for a couple of weeks now and suddenly I'm unable to edit pages. I know this is general but I'm not sure what's going on. Thanks! Jayity (talk) 19:39, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

@Jayity: Hello Jayity! Since you successfully posted here that means you are able to edit. Would you mind telling us what message you receive when trying to edit? ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 19:40, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

There is something that says "edit source" where the edit button previously was. Jayity (talk) 19:44, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

"Edit source" means editing with source code. Guessin' that you were editing with visual editor 'til now. Lookin' at your edits, it looks like you've been editing with visual editor for a while. Sarrail (talk) 19:46, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Indeed. @Jayity, the Visual Editor is not available on talk pages, which is where your last few posts have been. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 19:48, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Even on non- talk pages I get the edit source button. Am I just doing something completely wrong? haha please help me. Jayity (talk) 19:49, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Nothin' wrong, you can edit talk pages using the "edit source" button. Sarrail (talk) 19:51, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Sarrail your explanation isn't entirely correct. The "edit source" button is referring to the Source Editor (also known as the Wikitext editor) which is different than source editing (which would be directly editing the HTML that makes up Wikipedia) ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 19:56, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Yep, that's correct. Sarrail (talk) 19:58, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

I mean, technically I could edit Wikipedia just from the HTML and CSS but I would most likely end up accidentally breaking something. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 20:00, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Not sure what happens when it's breached, but hopefully it doesn't happen. Sarrail (talk) 21:27, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

See Tarlonniel's (the IP) comment above for the explanation. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 19:51, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Is there a way I can switch back to the visual editor? For the purpose of writing/editing. Jayity (talk) 19:52, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Yes, you can by tapping the "pencil" at the top right corner of your "editing screen", which should show two options:visual and source, but with talk pages, you can't. Sarrail (talk) 19:54, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

@Jayity, here are the instructions at the top of WP:VisualEditor: Log in, go to preferences (top right) -> editing tab, uncheck Temporarily disable the visual editor while it is in beta, optionally change Editing mode to Show me both editor tabs, and save your preferences. I believe there's also an "Always use Visual Editor when available" option. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 19:53, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you all! Got it figured out. Jayity (talk) 19:54, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Reason I am writing is that for the last thirty years I have worked as an executive coach/therapist in the UK and one of my initial trainings was in Family Therapy and how Family of Origin Dynamics plays out in the boardroom in both Government and the Corporate world.

However it now appears to me that most of that training has been overtaken by recent and emerging neurobiological research indicating how extended childhood trauma, or Complex PTSD, can lead to the Epigentic shutdown, via DNA Methylation, of the genetic capacity to produce Dopamine, Serotonin, etc ..

I've had a good look at the Family of Origin Dynamics of Putin, Trump, Johnson,( UK ),Bolsanaro, Mark Zuckerberg ,The Koch brothers and others , who all experienced extended child hood trauma. It appears to me that the Dopamine, Serotonin etc. shutdown findings to date correlate with and go a long way to explaining how and why these people behave in the toxic and dysfunctional ways they do. They evidently have large followings, as it also appears from emerging data, that approx 40% of the US adult population experienced extended traumatic child hoods making them very susceptible to strong aggressive leadership and easily triggered into a fight , flight or freeze response.

To me the implications of Dopamine shutdown as a result of Complex PTSD have huge mental health policy and strategic implications and there seems to be so little awareness of this emerging research.

Reason I am writing to you is that I am seeking further and current research findings that review and elucidate on the topic of DNA methylation and its affect on adult behaviour and psychology especially as I have a number of colleagues and journalists interested in the topic who wish to see more of the current research before going public with it.

Any current research papers or publications on the above topic you could refer me to would be greatly appreciated

I trust this email is received in the spirit of its intent

Many thanks

Sol Davidson B.SC. B.Ed. MBA, MACE (Redacted) SolDavidson (talk) 18:21, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

This almost certainly isn't the forum for this, but I'm curious. In your study, are you backing up your assertion that the individuals you name DO behave in toxic and dysfunctional ways? Or is that your starting point--an axiom, that not only doesn't need discussion, but is so preternaturally self-evident that it shouldn't even occur to anybody to discuss it? Uporządnicki (talk) 18:34, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, SolDavidson. I can suggest only two avenues for this within Wikipedia. One is to look at the articles we have on related subjects (eg Dopamine - you can probably find some more targetted articles), and see if there are any useful studies cited in them. The other is to ask at the science section of the Reference Desk, where it is possible that somebody can give you some pointers. (Like everything else in Wikipedia, this is inhabited by volunteers). ColinFine (talk) 19:10, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, SolDavidson. If Mark Zuckerberg suffered signicant childhood trauma, that is not reflected in his Wikipedia biography. Cullen328 (talk) 22:00, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

SolDavidson, our article DNA methylation has 128 references to discussion of the topic in the scientific literature. Have you read that article and its references? Cullen328 (talk) 22:06, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Sorry I failed to mention that the DNA methylation can be transmitted intergeneratioanlly and from my research his parents / grandparents were refugees from Galicia during a war phase involving Poland and Germany and Russia in the late 19th century 80.43.73.178 (talk) 18:24, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

The Teahouse is not the place for this discussion, but as a sufferer of C-PTSD and an avowed lefty anarchist-type, I am extremely offended at the idea that my diagnosis somehow makes me more likely to be a "toxic and dysfunctional" type like Trump, Putin, and that ilk, or that it makes me a "supporter" of same. Madam Fatal (talk) 21:37, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, I decided to start contributing the wiki. I am usually active in Hebrew Wikipedia, and I don't have any problem with having my edits being checked and having a "Mentor" (don't know how to call it). who is active here and can help me? (I'm in Israel' meaning It's UTC+3 here)? I prefer an editor who speaks Hebrew. have a good day, (By the way my English isn't good) Eitanbb (talk) 21:43, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Eitanbb, new editors don't usually have mentors; but if you want one, then please see Wikipedia:Adopt-a-user/Adoptee's Area. -- Hoary (talk) 21:59, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks!

BTW is there any Hebrew-speaking active editor? Eitanbb (talk) 22:01, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi Eitanbb. You might find some Hebrew speaking Wikipedians at Wikipedia:WikiProject Israel or at Wikipedia:Translators available#Hebrew-to-English. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:07, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Category:User he-N lists editors who have described themselves as native speakers of Hebrew. Probably most of them really are. However, only a small percentage are likely to be active. (The commonness of inactivity is of course not specific to speakers of Hebrew.) -- Hoary (talk) 23:41, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

@Hoary That adopt-a-user scheme has been augmented by the Growth Team's Mentoring feature: see their Project Page. As far as I know, all new accounts now get a mentor although not all new editors use the feature to ask questions of the person they have been assigned to. My Talk page is full of such questions but in my experience the system is not terribly useful: the Teahouse is a better place to get advice. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:51, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Mike Turnbull, I sit corrected. And as I look at your talk page, I understand what must have triggered all those threads titled "Question from [username] ([time])", most of which just induce despair. (Sample question: "Hello how can i make people like my videos".) -- Hoary (talk) 22:40, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi, I need help adding references and making my page better, so it will get accepted. Draft:Marry Me Ollymurswiki (talk) 15:49, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Ollymurswiki Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Please see Referencing for beginners. Also note that YouTube is only rarely considered an appropriate source. 331dot (talk) 15:53, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Ollymurswiki (or Wikiediter5674, to give your actual account name). Are you Olly Murs? I see that you created this account two days ago, have edited only to create this rather promotional article about an album that was released a week ago and is almost certainly WP:TOOSOON to meet Wikipedia's requirements for notability; and to upload File:Bg-c (3).jpg to commons, asserting that you were the copyright holder. This suggests very strongly to me that you are Murs, and so have a strong conflict of interest in working on this article. That doesn't prevent you from doing so, but you should make your conflict clear.

Bear in mind that a Wikipedia article should be based nearly 100% on what people wholly unconnected with the subject, and not briefed by the subject, have chosen to publish in reliable sources: for a creative work such as a music album, that usually means in-depth reviews (without interviews). If such sources do not yet exist, then no article is possible at the moment. ColinFine (talk) 18:17, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

No, I am not Murs sir, just mearly a fan Wikiediter5674 (talk) 18:42, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Then you should change your signature to something that does not suggest that you are Murs or are acting on his behalf.Sorry: you have. I thought that you must have changed your user name, but I couldn't find a log of it.

How do you come to own the copyright to the image then? ColinFine (talk) 19:23, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Wikiediter5674, you have edited Draft:Marry Me (Olly Mars album) 11 times since I posted this extremely important question, but you have not answered the question. If you are merely a fan, how does it come about that you hold the copyright on the image, as you have explicitly asserted here? ColinFine (talk) 23:19, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi, on the UEFI article I used a multiple image template. I do want to make the logo a bit smaller though. But it seems that the width1 parameter is ignored. Any ideas? Thanks in advance. PhotographyEdits (talk) 20:38, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

The template page Template:Multiple_image does list its limitations. Be aware that pages are to be viewed on many different devices, so try to avoid design elements you may want to specifically optimize for a specific setup. JBX (talk) 23:37, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi, I'm trying to edit the page for Aplysina fistularis. The information under "Reproduction" is uncited, but I found that the Oceana site listed under "External links" contains this information as well as other information that could be used to expand the article.

Looking at WP:EXT confuses me, because I don't know where the line is drawn with specifically "information that could not be added to the article for reasons such as [...] amount of detail."

Would it be okay to move it from an external source to a proper reference? Thank you.

OktaviaMiki (talk) 00:15, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Yes, it could be made into a proper citation if the website in question is reliable and verifies the uncited claim. Iscargra (talk) 00:18, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

If I cite the website within the article using ref tags, will the references be updated to reflect that? I don't know how else to modify the references since looking at it in the editor gives me a template tag. OktaviaMiki (talk) 00:29, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

OktaviaMiki, if the question you're now asking is "If I add a reference somewhere within an article, will it be numbered automatically and will all subsequent references be renumbered automatically?", then the answer is yes, all of this (re)numbering is automatic. If I misunderstand your question, please put me right. -- Hoary (talk) 01:11, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Yep! You read it right.

Thank you both! 🎜Oktavia Miki🎝_talk 01:13, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Some of the old references of the person I am working on are not available in google scholar - LK1965 (talk) 01:22, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

@LK1965: Welcome, and thanks for citing your sources. It is not a problem: sources don't need to be available online. RudolfRed (talk) 01:29, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Right. It can be a book, a magazine, etc., as long as it is reliable. Professor Penguino (talk) 02:35, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Myself Azhar Y. Tantary, a researcher by profession. I intend to publish a Wikipedia article for my book entitled "Wavelet Transforms: Kith and Kin" where the students and researchers can initiate useful discussions and any queries will be openly addressed. Could somebody assist me in this matter? Azhar92 (talk) 18:35, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Azhar92, welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid that is not the purpose of Wikipedia. Wikipedia is a collection of articles on notable subjects, not a discussion venue or question/answer forum for those subjects; every conversation on Wikipedia should (in theory) be at least tangentially related to improving Wikipedia. If your book is notable per WP:NBOOK, it's possible to have an article on it, but you must declare your conflict of interest per WP:COI when making any related edits. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:40, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you so much. Azhar92 (talk) 05:49, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

COURTESY to Teahouse hosts: at Draft:Wavelet Transforms: Kith and Kin, Declined. Among many flaws, hyperlinks not allowed except in an Edternal links section; references must be embedded in text (see Help:Referencing for beginners); an article about a book requires references about the book (reviews, etc.), NOT the science; much less information about the authors. David notMD (talk) 21:29, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

@Azhar92 Thers are probably sites on the 'net where this can be done, but as mentioned, Wikipedia is not the place. Perhaps another host or lurker has a suggestion for where this can be accomplished. David10244 (talk) 04:58, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, David. Azhar92 (talk) 05:50, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Well, here's hoping that the Teahouse hosts will have some suggestions! David10244 (talk) 11:18, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

There are some alternatives at Wikipedia:Alternative outlets that might fit what the OP is looking for. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:50, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for that info; I'll ping @Azhar92. David10244 (talk) 07:28, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello everyone on Wikipedia. I would like to introduce myself. Thank you Scencter (talk) 17:49, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. Is there a question you want to ask? Sarrail (talk) 17:54, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Yes, what is the easiest and fastest way to become an admin? Scencter (talk) 20:43, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Scencter It's not easy or fast, there is a process for the community to discuss it, and the odds of success without significant contributions to the project are close to zero. It takes at least a year, usually more, and you must have contributions in areas where giving you the admin tools would help the project. Being an admin is just about having extra buttons, admins have no more authority than any other editor. Note that you can do 95% of things here without having the admin tools. Just focus on being a good editor and helping out, and others will notice your good work and nominate you. 331dot (talk) 20:50, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

I don’t see myself enjoying Wikipedia if I don’t have the ability to block people though. Scencter (talk) 21:50, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

@Scencter Why?? Eitanbb (talk) 21:51, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Scencter Being an admin is not just about blocking people- and to be frank I doubt the community would give you the admin tools if the ability to block is a dealbreaker for you in terms of your Wikipedia enjoyment. 331dot (talk) 21:53, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

As an active Wikipedian I agree. Eitanbb (talk) 21:55, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

I see, so I shouldn’t say that’s why I want to become an admin. I just assume that’s why admins like the project so much. I wouldn’t see the point in admins being here if they didn’t have authority over other people. Scencter (talk) 22:12, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

@Scenter: You are exhibiting a complete failure to understand what the administrator's purpose is here. We don't have authority over other people. You think we like the project because we are admins, but it's the exact opposite, we became admins because we like the project enough to put up with the additional drudgery and hassle of being an administrator. That's an important distinction that seems to have escaped you. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:19, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

I think I understand what you’re saying I should say now, thank you. Scencter (talk) 01:54, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

@Scencter We try to cooperate with each other instead of having authority over each other. We block accounts when there is vandalism to articles, or a repeated failure to respect and understand WP's rules and guidelines, or childish behavior, etc. Blocking an account is not "fun". Being an admin here is known as "wielding the mop" because it can be drudgery to clean up messes. I personally can't fathom enjoying having to block other accounts. This isn't a first-person shooter game where we take other "players" out. Although I suppose it can be tempting at times... David10244 (talk) 04:09, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

@David10244: That's right, blocking anyone isn't "fun". Every time I block someone I'm well aware there's a human being on the other side who will be frustrated, angry, or other unpleasant emotion as a result. Most of my blocks are simple judgments involving someone disruptive who is clearly not here to build an encyclopedia, like treating it as a free marketing platform. Other blocks involve extensive discussions, drama, and difficult judgments. In my view, my admin duties are to clean up messes, help out in disputes, hold someone's hand to help them understand what's going on, and preserve stability of the project using blocks and page protections. Fortunately the drudge work is voluntary, and when I don't feel like doing it I can just be a good editor, as I was before I became an admin. ~Anachronist (talk) 04:38, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

@Anachronist I've been here maybe a year, counting my IP edits, and I don't even want to be an admin. Hats off to those of you who are. David10244 (talk) 07:38, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Scenter might be mistaken about the meaning of "blocking". In usual social media, this refers to user A preventing user B from interacting with them, but having no impact on interactions that are not between A and B. In Wikipedia parlance, "blocking" is the equivalent of "banning" on social media - preventing someone from interacting with much of the website’s functionality. (Note that Wikipedia is not social media, we’re not here to chat, but to edit articles.) Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 09:27, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

I wrote an article about the company: checked and edited it million times as it has to be neutral and transparent. Why it's not publishing and staying in the draft? Stape Ivanna (talk) 11:22, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Stape Ivanna Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. New users cannot directly create articles, and must use Articles for Creation to create and submit a draft. Unfortunately, what you wrote was a clear advertisment. Wikipedia is not a place to merely tell about a company- it is a place to summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about it, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. If you work for this company, you must make a formal declaration, please read WP:PAID as well as WP:COI. Writing a new article is the most challenging task to attempt on Wikipedia, we usually recommend that new users first gain experience and knowledge by editing existing articles first, as well as using the new user tutorial. 331dot (talk) 11:28, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

[ec] Well, that's simple, Stape Ivanna. Draft:Stape reads like an advertisement for "Stape", which is "a company that is creating an infrastructure for server-side tracking". The number of independent sources that the draft cites: zero. If you're looking for a conduit for the company's PR fluff, you're at the wrong website. -- Hoary (talk) 11:30, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for answer! But what is the difference between TikTok article in Wikipedia and Stape article?

TikTok - platform, history and features. And Stape platform, history and features. Stape Ivanna (talk) 11:35, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

@Stape Ivanna, I can't see the article so I don't exactly know what is written there, but given what Hoary stated above, I'd guess that the difference are the (lack of) reliable sources especially from independent people, stuff made by others about the subject that have zero relation to them. sources are required to verify information you write in the article and sources from independent people or publishers are required to see if it has notability for wikipedia.

in addition, TikTok isn't primarily written by people connected to the company but by people who don't really have any personal connection or stake to it. while you can say they wouldn't be able to know some facts about the subject due to their lack of connection, this doesn't really apply here since that wouldn't be usable in wikipedia regardless (as everything requires a reliable, published source and cannot be cited to just someone's knowledge). those who do have connection to the subject (which given by your username, you seem to have) have to comply with more policies that make contributing harder (see WP:Paid editing), and in addition may (consciously or not) add biased or fluffy statements to an article.

happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 11:55, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

thanks for clarification! Stape Ivanna (talk) 12:03, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Disingenuous that you blanked your Talk page, as that is where an Admin gave a reason for the Speedy deletion (G11 = advertising/promotion). Now that you have clearly declared PAID on your User page you can try again, but references in support of content needd to be independent of the company. Citing what the company says about itself is useless. Reviewing WP:NCORP may help understand what makes a company Wikipedia-notable. David notMD (talk) 16:42, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

@Stape Ivanna Hello. I added some (hopefully clear) information to your talk page. I hope that was OK with you. David10244 (talk) 08:24, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

thanks!! Sova Hol (talk) 09:02, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

oh, now i see it. thank you so much! Sova Hol (talk) 09:05, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi, I was creating an article on Carmen Ennesch: Carmen Ennesch while I was working on a remote desktop which made my article look like it was anonymously authored. Is there any way that I can attribute my actual article to myself? Thanks Unable11 (talk) 00:05, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

It's hardly your actual article, or anyway it will hardly remain so, Unable11; because any other user is free to improve it. You can, if you wish, write on your user page that you made such-and-such edits while you weren't logged in. -- Hoary (talk) 00:16, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Unable11 From lookin at your history of edits, you have created several articles while logged in, and this last one (CE) as an IP number because you were not logged in. As Hoary wrote, the best you can do is list the articles you started on your User page, as there is no means to change that IP to your User name in the View history of that article. David notMD (talk) 11:17, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! I'm aware that it's not 'my' article, but I just wanted to be clear about who had been involved in its history in case anyone wanted to message me about it. How do I list the article on my User page? Unable11 (talk) 11:34, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

@Unable11 Although you could mention the article on your User Page by linking to it, even giving the IP address you used when creating it, no-one who read the article would be likely to make the connection. A better way to proceed might be to make a new edit on Carmen Ennesch and mention in the edit summary that you were its first editor/creator. That way, interested parties who looked at the history of the article should be able to reach you. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:37, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Some editors list the acticles they created on their User page as Wikilinks. That way, a person who is at one of the articles you created, or a draft you have submitted, and becomes interested in what else you have done, can go to your User page and see the list. For example User:GlassCobra (chosen at random) lists articles started and those significantly contributed to. David notMD (talk) 10:50, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

I was an ip editor, and finally got an account. Now I have a weird best of 1998 text widget in my way and I can't make changes easily I can fit things inside (talk) 05:54, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

When you're in the editor, click this:

Then click onto "Source editing" or "Visual editing", depending on what you want:

Among Us for POTUS (talk) 06:02, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

@I can fit things inside, this is also something you can set in your account preferences, under the editing tab. There is an option to disable Visual Editor. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 15:04, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Christian Socialist Party (Austria)'s a poor and unsubstantiated redirect to Christian Social Party (Austria), whose article cites its alignment with the 'petit bourgeoisie'. FatalSubjectivities (talk) 14:38, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Also Christian Socialist People's Service ought not redirect to Christian Social People's Service FatalSubjectivities (talk) 14:40, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi @FatalSubjectivities, welcome to the Teahouse. There is a place set up to discuss and resolve these situations - Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 15:08, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

I always prefer to use Template:TOC limit when creating articles just because I don't like overly-long tables of content. However, I recently start working on a new article (See User:Krisgabwoosh/Biography Template) and was wondering if there was a way to hide the last three subsections (Those under "References"; 3.1, 3.2, 3.3) while keeping the first three (Those under "Judicial career"; 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, and 2.4). Alternatively, I suppose I could tweak around with some text size differences. Is there a set Manual of Style for headings and sub-headings? Krisgabwoosh (talk) 05:54, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Krisgabwoosh. Why are you trying to deprive readers of a fully informative table of contents? I do not understand. Perhaps you should consider simplifying the structure of the article instead. Cullen328 (talk) 06:10, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Well that's just the thing, I'm hoping that shortening the TOC will provide for simpler navigation. Sure, you could click "Footnotes" or "Bibliography" to be taken there, but when the article is short enough that simply clicking "References" will show you both, the extra sections become more clutter than they are informative. Krisgabwoosh (talk) 06:24, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

I disagree with you, because a bibliography is completely different from references, but again, you are entitled to your opinion. Just ask yourself why you are trying to buck widely accepted consensus. This is a consensus based project, after all. Cullen328 (talk) 07:40, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Ah, I wasn't aware there was an established consensus on this topic. Perhaps you should've started with that, as one of my questions was whether there was an agreed-upon Manual of Style for TOC headings and the like. Could you direct me to it? Krisgabwoosh (talk) 07:51, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

@Krisgabwoosh, you can start here and explore the links branching off from it. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 15:00, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! Krisgabwoosh (talk) 16:02, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi. Article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Molfar_(company) was removed due to suspicion of СOI. how to fix it and return the article? Nastya1811 (talk) 13:23, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

@Nastya1811 The draft still exists at Draft:Molfar (company) but has just been declined as it reads too much like an advertisement. You can continue to try to improve it but you should not remove any of the templates related to potential COI or the decline reasons. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:45, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

No. This article has already been accepted. But then she was sent back to the draft. Why is the description of the company's activities an advertisement? Nastya1811 (talk) 14:04, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

We require far more than a "description of the company's activities". Wikipedia is NOT for merely providing information. A Wikipedia article summarizes what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a topic showing how they meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable business. Theroadislong (talk) 14:06, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

@Nastya1811 I looked at the two references in English, since I don't speak Ukrainian. The one to TNW gives a page that doesn't mention Molfar and the other, supposedly to a Times article gives a 404 error for a page that doesn't exist. That suggests to me that the Draft is poorly written. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:14, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

I'm fix link for Times Nastya1811 (talk) 14:24, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

@Nastya1811 Yes, it is an interesting article but it is based on an interview so I'm afraid it doesn't help show that this organisation is notable as Wikipedia defines that term. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:32, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Sorry if I asked the question weirdly, but I was just curious. I saw that the JPEGMAFIA discography had the albums, singles, and other works in a different way than they're normally stylized. (i.e "BALD!' was "Bald!", "JOECHILLWORLD" was "Joechillworld".) Can I change them to their officially stylized version instead? Treadmarks (talk) 17:23, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Treadmarks, welcome to the Teahouse. I think your answer is here - specifically, Reduce track titles on albums where all or most tracks are listed in all capitals. Does that cover the issue? 199.208.172.35 (talk) 17:28, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Yes it does, thank you for clearing that up for me. Treadmarks (talk) 17:30, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

I use Windows 11 in Firefox. When I press Ctrl X and Ctrl V in the Discussions Tools box for a while, I eventually end up having a cloud emoji copied to my clipboard. Why's it do that, and what's the purpose of it? Among Us for POTUS (talk) 06:25, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Which discussion tools you used? Lemonaka (talk) 11:32, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

This one. Among Us for POTUS (talk) 16:20, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

@Among Us for POTUS, the best place to ask would be either the discussion page at MediaWiki, or at WP:VPT. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 17:43, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

I've come across the article Umbilicus erectus while editing on Wikipedia earlier today, and I found its heading unusual. In particular, this line:

Umbilicus erectus, the reniform Venus' navel (also sometimes nabelkraut or ombelico di Venere reniforme)

The alternate common names seem to be specific to German and Italian respectively, and I didn't find evidence of their use in English. Nonetheless, they are real common names.
This seems to be intuitive to be removed, since Wikipedia is not a dictionary and doesn't need to provide translations to other languages unless appropriate. Yet, when exactly would other languages' common names be appropriate to add?

Erasmia pulchella is a page for a moth species where the Chinese and Japanese common names are talked about in much more detail, with provided etymology and them being clearly marked as Chinese/Japanese. Is that appropriate? The Chinese/Japanese names and etymologies are sourced by references in the same language, rather than a different one. Does this count as primary sourcing rather than secondary sourcing – without establishing notability – or do different rules apply here? Randi Moth (talk) 18:25, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

I'm working on Leeds 13, a conceptual art collective at University of Leeds in the late-1990s. L13 keep an archive of their publicity outputs, mostly newspaper clippings scanned as TIFs or JPGs, many of them marked UoL Press Office.

However, many of these articles no longer/never existed on their respective newspaper websites so I don't have a value for the url field. And without url I can't use archive-url to reach the scan in the L13 archive. I could use the URL of the L13 scan as url, but that doesn't feel quite right.

Any thoughts on how to handle this?

Thanks Arnhemcr (talk) 10:10, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Arnhemcr, you can cite a newspaper article that's never been online. You'll need to provide the name of the newspaper, the date of the issue, the page (and preferably column) number, the name of the writer of the article, and the title of the article. Maproom (talk) 10:57, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

And, conversely, you should not link to scans of those clippings, because they are probably copyright violations. This may not have mattered to Leeds 13, but it does to Wikipedia. ColinFine (talk) 11:49, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Good point, well made (particularly the copyright angle)! Thanks Arnhemcr (talk) 21:00, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Could someone indicate where in WP is the style addressed for truncated links for national football team designations. I believe that the word for the nation involved should be based on what is the grammar of the name from the originating nation, not the imposed grammar by others particularly when in most instances the style used is the name of the nation, not the nationality. In fact the vast majority of instances in WP already show a preponderance for the name of the nation. Do a search on any nation's national football team title. Another instance is that the WP article titles by far cite nation name as that is what the article concerns, not the "Nationality football team". As a case in point: Mexico national football team. The foundation of the translation is the word from their title of the organization, Mexico, not Mexicano or Mexicana. Some nationals do not even require you are a citizen of the country. Another example of truncated nation titles is that only the name of the nation is included, not the nationality. Some clear guidance needs to be provided so that there is not confusion especially when people contribute and thinking that Mexican national football tea is officially accepted article title when it is not. Of course there will always be those that insist the only reference to a nation's name in a truncated link has to be "grammatically correct" but it is a title that you do not change out of respect for the title derived from the originating language. We do not say United Stateian or Englandian.2603:8000:D300:D0F:A4A9:1E1:30A5:4340 (talk) 2603:8000:D300:D0F:A4A9:1E1:30A5:4340 (talk) 20:38, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi IP editor, welcome to the Teahouse. This seems to be an issue which should be worked out on the talk page of WP:WikiProject Football (link). They'll be able to point you to any particular style guidance which applies. If someone contests your edits, do not continue - discuss. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 21:09, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

I want to know that is there is any user script that can help me for adding Template:AfC submission/draft to any draft article. If someone will reply my question so please ping me. ​​​​​​​𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝟕𝟐𝟖🧙‍♂️^{Let's Talk !} 09:23, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

It wouldn't be advisable to try to automatically edit pages on Wikipedia in bulk. The Wikipedia:Bot policy should help you understand. Also, I'm not sure what you mean by pinging you, are you refering to having comments added to your Talk page instead of in the Teahouse? JBX (talk) 23:55, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

@LordVoldemort728: I don't know of any such script or tool, but it isn't hard to add manually the tag {{subst:AFC draft|LordVoldemort728}} to the top of any draft you create. ~Anachronist (talk) 21:58, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

I created a page here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Billy_Cotton

It's been 5 months and I just got a message saying it will be deleted if it's not edited after 6 months. But the page has not been approved yet and is still a "draft". Did I do something wrong? Did I submit it correctly? Can anyone advise? thanks! PaulVarjack (talk) 14:07, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Hiya Paul! Welcome to the Teahouse! Yes, you didn't submit it to review. Just slap a {{subst:submit}} On the top and you are good to go for AfC review. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:19, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

PaulVarjack Very common mistake for newbies - "Publish" means Save, not Submit. David notMD (talk) 20:45, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

@UtherSRG: @David notMD: There never was a submit button, because nobody tagged it to have one. I have fixed that.

@PaulVarjack: You may now submit the draft for review. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:22, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello everyone, I am currently helping edit the Asian American Activism article. Since there are not that many editors currently working on it, I would love to receive any feedback from the forum on how to improve the quality of the article. I am having trouble determining the section titles as some seem too long. I would greatly appreciate if anyone could suggest some ideas to make the titles more concise. Also, please let me know if you think the Background section is directly related to Asian American activism or it belongs to a different article, e.g. anti-Asian racism. KellyL09 (talk) 20:53, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, KellyL09, and welcome to the Teahouse. Have you asked at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Asian Americans? That would be a good place, I think. There are several other WikiProjects listed on the article's talk page, so they might also be worth asking. ColinFine (talk) 22:24, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi ColinFine, I havn't asked them about it yet. I will do it now, thank you so much for letting me know! KellyL09 (talk) 23:58, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi KellyL09! I've taken the liberty of creating a section on the article's talk. Let's hash it out and see what page watchers say. BusterD (talk) 00:10, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

For example, The Land Breakers is blanked for this reason. What do I do? SikiWtideI (Speak to the backwards police) 00:49, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Their draft is at AfC and they shouldn't have done this - I'll just revert the change. If someone wants to publish over a redirect, they don't need this intermediate blanking step. There are two options: 1) just edit the redirect and write the article in there, or 2) submit a draft of that title through AfC. This intermediate blanking is not part of either process. -- asilvering (talk) 01:01, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi SikiWtideI. In some cases, page blanking can be seen as a request to have a page deleted. The creator of the page can blank it and then tag it for deletion per WP:G7 as long as others have not made significant contributions to the page. If the page was blanked by someone other than the creator, then it's should probably be restored and then nominated for deletion, tagged for speedy deletion, or proposed for deletion as explained in WP:DELETE. If the page was blanked in order to make way for a future expansion of the article, it might be best to WP:DRAFTIFY or WP:REDIRECT it instead because pages in the mainspace without content are eligible for speedy deletion per WP:A3. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:09, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

There is a star˜at the end of this section. What does it mean? What is it used for? Is it just a random symbol used by the author or does it have a specific meaning in this Wikipedia? Thanks, Ggenellina (talk) 02:12, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

It's U+0098 <control-0098>, a control character. I've removed it as obviously erroneous. – dudhhr ^talk _contribs (he/they) 02:20, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Can I plz add Brian Quinn to your lol JordanStyles1996 (talk) 00:47, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

No. Harobouri • 🎢 • 🏗️ (he/him • WP:APARKS) 01:07, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

OP has won an indefinite block. -- Hoary (talk) 02:52, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, all! I've been trying to improve the Tournament (medieval) page for some time, but I am a little unsure exactly how I should proceed. The article suffers from sections lacking reliable sources, and I try to put in citations for some of the unsourced content, but they're sometimes hard to find -- although JSTOR can be helpful. Any advice? Professor Penguino (talk) 03:01, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

P.S. I have brought up these issues on the talk page. Professor Penguino (talk) 03:02, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Professor Penguino, and welcome to the Teahouse. Here are some ideas for finding reliable sources:

• WP:RSP - list of sources that are reliable and should be avoided etc.
• Newspapers.com, Newspaper Archive, etc. (if accessible)
• Google Scholar & Google News

Hope this helps. Harobouri • 🎢 • 🏗️ (he/him • WP:APARKS) 03:05, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

It will! Thanks! Professor Penguino (talk) 04:16, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

At some point, content for which a citation can't be found does have to be removed. You can be the person who removes it! Better yet, you can rewrite the section/paragraph with information you can cite. Here's a recent book (on Eng/Fr/Ger) that might help (and you can always raid the bibliographies of each chapter, as well): doi:10.2307/j.ctv105bbwd. -- asilvering (talk) 03:37, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you very much! Professor Penguino (talk) 04:15, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

I am trying to update and add to information about the above nonprofit, but I seem to get shut out at every turn. Because the page already exists, I was directed to edit it on the page itself, which I have done, only to be rejected again. This last time I was directed to a page that was supposed to help me understand why, but it had a warning that "if i was doing something I wasn't supposed to do" I would be blocked. I'm not doing anything I'm not supposed to do, but I am afraid to continue. VerniceDaniel (talk) 23:11, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello @VerniceDaniel, welcome to Teahouse, you edits are disallowed by filters. If you believe they are false positive, please report this issue to Wikipedia:Edit_filter/False_positives Lemonaka (talk) 23:16, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_1169 § No CAPTCHA box and no way to SAVE in the Sandbox - previous discussion here at the Teahouse. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 23:19, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

@VerniceDaniel, per our previous discussion, you have a conflict of interest (which you have not yet declared on your user page) and should be using either the edit request wizard or the edit request template to request edits on the talk page. Please do not try to replace the entire article with your rewritten version, that would be inappropriate. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 23:22, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

I give up. I am looking to hire a professional Wikipedia website navigator. If you have any advice, please feel free . . . VerniceDaniel (talk) 00:03, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

VerniceDaniel, if you're thinking of paying somebody to write for you, don't. You'd be throwing your money away. -- Hoary (talk) 02:55, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

@Hoary I read this much more as a complaint about how VerniceDaniel is finding the process of dealing with Wikipedia's expectations - difficult and confusing enough that they wish they had someone whose job it was to do this for them. -- asilvering (talk) 03:02, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Asilvering, thus my protasis. -- Hoary (talk) 06:39, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

@VerniceDaniel, Please refrain from doing so, per WP:MEAT and WP:PAID, doing this will lead you into terrible troubles. Lemonaka (talk) 04:01, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, VerniceDaniel, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm not expert at reading the logs, but I think that what has happened is that your text included the words "Hero among us", and this has tripped an edit filter designed to catch a piece of repeated vandalism adding a meme called "Among us". If I'm right, then that is indeed a "false positive", and you should report it, as Lemonaka says. ColinFine (talk) 23:38, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

I usually use the standard "straight" quotation marks for everything on Wikipedia, as that's what Wikipedia automatically creates.

However I'm debating whether I should change some “curly” quotation marks which are being used for a quote from someone to "straight" quotation marks, or should I leave them as they are? Danstarr69 (talk) 09:24, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

You'll find guidance at MOS:CURLY. - David Biddulph (talk) 09:54, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

@Danstarr69, my understanding of MOS:CONFORM is that you should. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:54, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

I have created wiki page for my organization 2 times. But the 2 times deleted from reviewers. Kindly help to create company page my organization. MSathis (talk) 07:28, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

No. MSathis, I quote: "The Products are intuitive to use and have great acceptance among the Business User Community." This is advertising. Wikipedia doesn't want advertising. If your organization is genuinely notable, then eventually people will volunteer to create an article about it, with no prodding from you. But the article won't be flattering. -- Hoary (talk) 07:32, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for your feedback Hoary. but this is our long-time desire. Your company has 24 years in this fields. So many people ask why didn't have your wiki page. MSathis (talk) 07:39, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

@MSathis: Please try not to ask the same question on multiple noticeboards like you did at the Help Desk. It can create confusion and may lead redundant answers being given. As for this is our long-time desire, that's great as long as your desires are compatible with Wikipedia's purpose. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:13, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

MSathis, I am an administrator and so I was able to view your deleted draft. It was poorly written, obviously promotional and failed to provide any convincing evidence that your company meets the stringent Notability guideline for companies. Wikipedia is not a business directory. It is an encyclopedia that includes articles about notable companies. Plus, you have not yet complied with the mandatory Paid Contributions disclosure. We do not care at all about your long-time desire. Cullen328 (talk) 08:20, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for your feedback Cullen328, Can you suggest me any wiki writer for company page. MSathis (talk) 08:45, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Sorry Marchjuly, Hereafter I didn't like this. Thanks for your feedback. MSathis (talk) 08:44, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

MSathis, not even the most skilled "wiki writer" can overcome an inherent lack of notability. Don't waste your money trying. It simply isn't possible. Cullen328 (talk) 08:54, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Companies that offer to create articles for pay are almost all scams or not competent. If references do not exist, no amount of dancing around that void will succeed. Also, you may find articles about companies that exist despite poor referencing. That does not mean yours can too. It just means those have not yet been improved or deleted. David notMD (talk) 12:15, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Which type of press coverage we need for a article to post on Wikipedia?

For example - I am writing about my life then I need a press coverage about my life. now let me know which type of press you accept as a valid Avijit Patra 91 (talk) 07:52, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Avijit Patra 91: A good rule of thumb would be sources that you do not have control of. Yes. We need people to cover you not because you pay them and they need to cover you independently. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 07:56, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Avijit Patra 91. The overwhelming majority of efforts to write an autobiography on Wikipedia are complete failures. Please read WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY for the many reasons why. For the type of sources that are required, study WP:RS and also WP:RSP. You have an obvious and glaring conflict of interest when writing about yourself and are expected to defer to experienced, uninvolved editors. Self-promotion is strictly forbidden on Wikipedia and accounts that engage in advertising and marketing are blocked swiftly and routinely. If you are the very rare sort of person who is both notable and capable of writing neutrally about yourself, then use the Articles for Creation process. If you succeed. we will dub you the "rarest of all unicorns". Cullen328 (talk) 08:36, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Avijit Patra 91, looking at your user talk page, I see that you are involved in blockchain/cryptocurrency activities. Based on that information, I would estimate that your chances of success are less than one in one hundred billion. I am not sure how many crores or lakhs that is, but "infinitesimal" is another synonym. Experienced Wikipedia editors are intensely skeptical of everything having to do with that broad topic area, because it is rife with fraud and deception. Cullen328 (talk) 08:50, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

@Avijit Patra 91 Wikipedia does, of course, have an article on Sam Bankman-Fried. Given recent events, he probably now wishes there wasn't one as it is already up-to-date with his arrest and likely extradition. This is one example of why an article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:26, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi! This is a new page I just submitted today. I wonder if there's a way to make this page a separate one. There's another page similar to this; however, that one is his father's. Please see the links below for your reference:

Edcel Greco Alexandre B. Lagman (son)

Edcel Lagman (father)

Please advise. Thank you.

Bmjc98 (talk) 07:01, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Bmjc98, they already are separate pages. You appear to be asking for something that already exists. Please rephrase your request. -- Hoary (talk) 07:26, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Okay. How come when I checked my Sandbox, the page Edcel Greco Alexandre B. Lagman has this message:

"This page is a redirect. The following categories are used to track and monitor this redirect:

• From a page move: This is a redirect from a page that has been moved (renamed). This page was kept as a redirect to avoid breaking links, both internal and external, that may have been made to the old page name."

I would appreciate if you could help me understand this. Also, I have a question, is the page live now? Thank you. Bmjc98 (talk) 07:46, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Edcel Lagman is an article. Edcel Greco Alexandre B. Lagman is a different article. User:Bmjc98/sandbox is a redirect to the latter. This all seems sensible. Maproom (talk) 08:51, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Gotcha! Already fixed this issue. Thank you for the help. Bmjc98 (talk) 13:31, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

@Bmjc98 What you may wish to do is to blank your sandbox page so it no longer redirects. To do that you need to navigate directly to it for a new edit. This is a direct link to that page. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:56, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you so, so much. I have just cleared my sandbox now. Thank you again. Another question, though. How will I know if the article is live? Because when I searched the article I published, it won't show up. The article about his father would come up instead. Again, thank you for the help. Bmjc98 (talk) 13:30, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

The article is live. Both articles are found in a Wikipedia search. If you are looking in an external search engine, your new article will be NOINDEXed until it has either been reviewed through the new page patrol process or 90 days have elapsed. - David Biddulph (talk) 13:38, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

I see. Thank you so much for the help. I totally appreciate your taking the time to answer my question.Bmjc98 (talk) 13:51, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

You may wish to use appropriate hatnote templates on each article. - David Biddulph (talk) 13:01, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Never heard about it, but I will definitely on this tomorrow. Thank you. Bmjc98 (talk) 13:32, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

I want to know the list of user script which I am using in Wikipedia so how I can get the list? Please ping me if someone will reply. Thanks. ​​​​​​​𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝟕𝟐𝟖🧙‍♂️^{Let's Talk !} 15:01, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

@LordVoldemort728: Check out User:LordVoldemort728/common.js. Interstellarity (talk) 15:17, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

I notice that when every candidate requests adminship, they always put in whether they edited for pay and whether they operate other accounts. There doesn't seem to be a rule regarding this. Why does everyone do it anyway? Interstellarity (talk) 15:19, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

@Interstellarity, there aren't many actual written rules about the process, but a lot of commonly accepted best practices. This one seems to be mostly common sense - if you don't mention either of those things as a candidate, and someone else brings them up, it looks bad, even if no rules were broken. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 15:29, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

(And if you don't mention it at all, someone is likely to ask about them, assuming you forgot - or are hiding something.) 199.208.172.35 (talk) 15:32, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Administrators#Becoming an administrator says that Candidates are also required to disclose whether they have ever edited Wikipedia for pay. DanCherek (talk) 16:03, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

@DanCherek: I see that. My other question is about disclosing accounts. I read the page you suggested, but I didn't see it in there. Interstellarity (talk) 16:18, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Probably just tradition (and something that !voters would ask about anyway), as the IP suggested above. DanCherek (talk) 16:20, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you DanCherek and IP for your responses. They were very helpful. Interstellarity (talk) 16:27, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi there, I would like to know if "Points of Light Award" is a notable enough for an independent article or for notability? 113.193.45.185 (talk) 17:16, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi IP user, welcome to the Teahouse. The real test is whether you can find multiple independent, reliable, secondary sources with significant coverage of the award, or perhaps the awarding organization. Do you have any examples of such coverage? 199.208.172.35 (talk) 17:21, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

We already have an article Points of Light that discusses the awards. Cullen328 (talk) 17:23, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Ah ha - if it is this one, looks like the award has a claim to notability already. Building an entirely separate article doesn't seem feasible from the amount of coverage currently on offer, though. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 17:25, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for replying. Actually my question is if a person is awarded the "Points of Light Award" is that enough to support their notability for an independnet article? 113.193.45.185 (talk) 18:03, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

It's an indicator of notability, though as an apparently daily award, it's going to be a harder sell than usual. Was there a lot of good coverage of the person in reliable sources as a result of the award? That would be the important thing, though WP:BLP1E might apply. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:10, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello. In general, the answer is No: notability generally rests not on what the subject has done, but on what has been published about them. Having said that, there are specific guides to notability for particular areas (eg WP:NMUSIC that say that if they have achieved certain things, or won certain awards, it is likely that they will pass the criteria for notability. But the reliable independent sources are still required. ColinFine (talk) 18:12, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello ColinFine and 199.208.172.35, as per my knowledge the subject doesn't have enough independent coverage that establishes notability but I'm not 100% sure. The article is Jagraj Singh which was rejected at Draft:Jagraj Singh in October and then recreated. The article has some sources but they are either unreliable or passing mentions/interviews etc. but no coverage that discusses the subject in detail and that is the reason I wanted to know if only holding this award makes someone notable. I don't think I'll be able to nominate the article for deletion because the deletion page is protected so is there a way where I can add my request and someone else on my behalf nominate it after their research? 113.193.45.185 (talk) 18:19, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Yes, there is - see here. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:24, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, but it says "Only a registered, logged-in user can complete steps II and III.". 113.193.45.185 (talk) 18:29, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Yes. That's why it says, just after that, If you are unregistered, you should complete step I, note the justification for deletion on the article's talk page, then post a message at Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion requesting that someone else complete the process. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:32, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Ahh great!! I missed that. Thank you for pointing it out. Ok so first let me make sure the subject is not notable enough for an independent article then I shell nominate. Is there also a way to ask other users to review the page if it's notable or not? 113.193.45.185 (talk) 18:36, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

No "official" way - there used to be a noticeboard, but it was shut down. Someone else might chime in here with an opinion, but otherwise, the best place to ask is probably the talk page of a relevant WikiProject. Unfortunately Wikipedia:WikiProject Sikhism seems to be inactive. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:40, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

• So, 113.193.45.185, while notability is one factor in deciding if it is worthwhile to create a distinct, stand-alone article, it is not the only one. Sometimes, two things are so closely related, it actually makes more sense to cover them in the same article. Notability in the Wikipedia sense is required in order to create an article, but it is not mandatory that we create such an article. Sometimes, it actually makes more sense to just add the information to an existing article rather than create a new one. Whether or not to create an article is often as much about deciding how to organize the information we publish at Wikipedia, and not just about notability. Sometimes, organizing every single thing into its own little article isn't the best way to do it. I'm not saying what is better in this case, but in general, we shouldn't always be looking to create new articles as our only way to improve Wikipedia. Sometimes, the better way to do things is to expand existing articles rather than creating a new article, even if we could do so, it isn't always best. --Jayron32 18:40, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

hello, I am new to edits but wanted to make edits to the page of the org I work for. I was informed of COI (I should have known that myself, apologies to the QC person) and am now not sure what edits we would be able to make, if any. Currently staff and commissioners have changed and those changes are not reflected correctly on the page which I would expect I could make with the correct justification/sources? Additionally there are several instances of inaccurate items on the page that the organization would prefer to correct - even just by adding additional information if not acceptable to delete others- but that feels much closer to the conflict of interest concern of Wikipedia. Any suggestions or places you suggest I look to learn more about this process and what is allowed vs. not. 216.136.14.162 (talk) 19:00, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

forgot to tag the page. Accrediting Commission of Career Schools and Colleges 216.136.14.162 (talk) 19:00, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi IP editor, welcome to the Teahouse. Please do read WP:PAID carefully. It's not impossible to operate as a paid editor as an IP, but it would be much easier on everyone if you registered an account so you could make the required declaration on your user page. As far as updating the article, you can make edit requests on the talk page (Talk:Accrediting Commission of Career Schools and Colleges), which would be reviewed for inclusion by other editors - either the WP:Edit Request Wizard or the {{edit request}} template can be used, whichever you find more convenient. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 19:12, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

I am guessing you want to change names and numbers in the Infobox. On the Talk page, you need to be specific, as in change name A to B along with providing the new reference. The refs appear to by #1, 2 and 3. For 2 and 3, it appears that the URL goes to the current website, so for those, all you have to propose is that the access dated be changed to now. David notMD (talk) 20:14, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

So I just uploaded and added some images of a GriGri rock climbing device of the latest edition, but I cannot figure out how to move the image around the page and place it on the right hand side beneath the other images that are already there. Can someone help, and also maybe teach me how you do it? I'm using both visual and source editor when it comes to images. TY — Moops ^⋠T⋡ 21:51, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Take a look at Help:Pictures. :) XAM2175 ^(T) 23:17, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

how do make a page 24.116.116.33 (talk) 22:01, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi anonymous editor - you can create a draft through the article wizard and submit your draft to members of AfC for review of inclusion within Wikipedia. To create an article directly, you must be autoconfirmed - which means you need an account. Hope this helps! --Harobouri • 🎢 • 🏗️ (he/him • WP:APARKS) 22:07, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to Teahouse, for creating a page, why not try WP:AFC Lemonaka (talk) 11:55, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

An encyclopedia article, not a social-media-type "page". David10244 (talk) 03:32, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi,

an ex colleague of mine create a new article on Wikipedia which after 9 months is not live yet. I have the draft link but when I entered with her Wiki credentials, I don't see it anywhere and as it is not live (and my purpose is it being live) I'm trying to understand what I should do next CWCAMS (talk) 09:53, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

You should not be using another editor's account; it is liable to be blocked as a compromised account. You'll see the account's contributions by clicking on the "Contributions" link at the top right-hand corner of the window. The draft has not been submitted for review, but to submit it in its current form would be a waste of reviewers' time as the bulk of the text is unsourced. - David Biddulph (talk) 10:01, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

@CWCAMS Important: you need to create your own account, and not use the account "CWCAMS", if that account was created by "an ex colleague" of yours, as @David Biddulph has said. You are not even supposed to know the login credentials of someone else's account. David10244 (talk) 04:06, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello @CWCAMS, and welcome to the Teahouse. Assuming this is about Draft:Luca Nichetto. Drafts aren't automatically moved to article space, they have to be submitted for review. If this draft was submitted, it would not be accepted. There are no inline citations for most of the text, and it has advertising speech like

"Today, the studio works with a variety of brands and clients from around the world and its expertise is sought out across all design disciplines. A deep passion for, and knowledge of, industrial and craft manufacturing processes runs through every aspect of the studio’s work. Its projects abound in carefully selected cultural references and a keen attention to detail. The practice’s unique position within both Scandinavian and Italian design culture has given Nichetto Studio acclaim that extends beyond the confines of the design industry."

which is wrong for WP. See also WP:COI. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:06, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

• I've added the information to allow submission of the draft, though I agree it shouldn't be submitted yet. 331dot (talk) 10:18, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

  The OP has ignored the advice from three of us and submitted the draft without improvement. I assume that a reviewer will soon decline the draft. - David Biddulph (talk) 11:02, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

  We tried. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:32, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

• I am not convinced that the photos in that draft, which were uploaded to Commons, are freely-licensed either. I have nominated them for deletion at commons:Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by User:CWCAMS. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 12:48, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

  Edit (12:59, 14 December 2022 (UTC)): link updated. I also removed David Biddulph’s post where he pointed out the error; hopefully he will not mind. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 12:59, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, I would like to know if it would be possible to get an article written on my aunt? She's written several books, published poems, worked for Death Row Records with Suge Knight as an editor on their magazine and also knew Tupac quite well. She has also worked with Snoop Dogg. There are some articles on her if you look her up. Do you think this is would qualify for an article? If that's the case, I really don't feel qualified to write it as you can probably tell I'm quite young. Countessnatasha (talk) 17:46, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

@Countessnatasha: Have a look at Wikipedia:Golden rule. If the sources about your aunt meet all three of those criteria, and there are multiple such sources, then she is likely notable enough to merit an article here. Also, see WP:CREATIVE for notability guidelines about creative professionals.

I'll add that notability is not inherited, so her associations with other people and companies don't matter for her own notability. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:49, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

And if you don't feel comfortable writing it yourself, @Countessnatasha, you could post on the talk page of the Women in Red WikiProject - here - and someone might be willing to take it on, especially if you include links to those articles about her. You could also post an entry at WP:Requested articles, but the chances of anything happening that way are lower. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 17:53, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

@199.208.172.35 and @Countessnatasha Requested articles is sometimes active, Its mostly people adding requests now that there is about 10k plus requests on the page combined. I know for a fact that some wikiproject article requests are way more active so it would be better to add it to there then the main page.`~HelpingWorld~` ^(👽🛸) 04:07, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

A couple days ago the page Malina (mythology) looked like this. No proper citations.

So I looked into it, and tracked down several versions that cite where they heard the story from:

• The Arctic Sky (1998) has 2 versions, from the storytellers George Kappianaq and Hervé Paniaq, both from Igloolik.
• Knud Rasmussen's Report of the Fifth Thule Expedition 1921–24 has 2 versions, one from the Pâdlermiut storyteller Kibkârjuk and one from the Iglulik storyteller Ivaluardjuk.
• Franz Boas's The Central Eskimo (1888) has an Akudnirmiut and Oqomiut version of the story, though the storyteller's name is not cited.

What's not included in any of these cited versions is the name "Malina".

• Sister's name:
  • Unnamed (3 versions)
  • Siqiniq, literally "sun" (2 versions)
• Brother's name
  • Aningaat (2 versions)
  • Unnamed (2 versions)
  • Taqqiq, literally "moon" (1 version)

One more half-source is Frank Wilbert Stokes's painting in the Eskimo Hall of the American Museum of Natural History in 1909. It's the image that's the artwork for both the pages Malina (mythology) and Igaluk. In the pamphlet on it, the figures' names are spelled Ahn-ing-ah-neh and Sukh-eh-nukh -- clearly an early attempt to spell Aningaat and Siqiniq.

Plus, "Malina" doesn't even sound like an Inuit word. Initially I thought it was just an usual name. But with this as well, I now think it's an internet myth.

I've done a write-up of the cited versions here. Since the name Malina is wrong, and the page Igaluk is basically just a clone of it since its the same story, I think the best thing to do now would be to delete the pages and create a single new page called "Sun and Moon (Inuit myth)" or something. What's the protocol around such things? Eievie (talk) 00:08, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

@Eievie: Start a discussion on the article's talk page, and get input from and consensus with other interested editors. RudolfRed (talk) 01:06, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

@RudolfRed I already tried that, but as a low-traffic page I'm not getting anything. Eievie (talk) 01:22, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Eievie, I recommend moving the article to a more appropriate title and removing any names that cannot be verified. Cullen328 (talk) 01:31, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Eievie, I found this book published in 1923 that says In the myth the sun is called Malina , no doubt a derivative of the verb maligpoq ' she is pursued ' , the name of the persecuted woman in the cult; the name of the moon is given as Aningat , which signifies "their elder brother". So, it is not an internet myth. Cullen328 (talk) 01:43, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

In a 1970 book by Claude Lévi-Strauss and his colleagues, they wrote On sait que les gens du Mackenzie et les Groenlandais orientaux nomment la fille - soleil Malina (Maligna) , contrairement aux autres groupes qui lui réservent le nom de Seqineq (Suqunuq) My French skills are crude at best but it seems that this verifies the usage as well. Cullen328 (talk) 02:03, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

That's interesting, thanks. I'll work those sources in. That said, I still think it remains that the name "Malina" is a somewhat uncommon detail in versions of this story, not a consistent feature. That the Malina page and the Igaluk page have the same content also remains. I'm still basically of the opinion that merging and remaining them would be better. Eievie (talk) 17:12, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

So I've got the Malina page remade. Who do I talk to about deleting the superfluous Igaluk page? Eievie (talk) 01:29, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

@Eievie Presumably the Igaluk article wouldn't be deleted but would be converted into a redirect to the other. You can discuss this at its Talk Page, maybe making some of the relevant Project members aware of your suggestion. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:55, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

I can put a message there, but as an extremely low-traffic page I don't expect any response. I changed Aningan and Anningan to redirect to Sun and moon (Inuit myth), but I'm still looking for a citation of the story that actually uses the name Igaluk before I lump that one in there too. Eievie (talk) 18:40, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

You can, if you wish, specify that these names were according to William Thalbitzer and Claude Levi-Strauss. DS (talk) 05:32, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi there, I am new to Wiki and would like to undo a page name change on the below page currently titled 'Raimi Productions'. The entire page is relaying information about Renaissance Pictures, an entirely different company that has since ended. The page currently claims 'formerly Renaissance Pictures' but that is incorrect. I am an employee at Raimi Productions and from the source can tell you that the entire page is just Renaissance Pictures information - none of it is related to Raimi Productions. It won't let me undo as I am not high enough in status yet. How do I get this reversed?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raimi_Productions S.roberts00 (talk) 20:18, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

S.roberts00, in this case, both you and the article are correct. There is only information from before 2019, and the article needs updating. Since you are paid by Raimi Productions to edit the page, you must declare WP:PAID on your user page. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 20:50, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi there, how do I declare that? Also I do not want there to be a Raimi Productions page, I just want to change the page back to be named Renaissance Pictures as we are two separate companies and this was done in error. A simple undo of the page name change is all that is needed. Thank you for helping. S.roberts00 (talk) 21:56, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

@S.roberts00 Please put {{Paid|aaa}} on your userpage, aaa is the one who paid you edit here. Lemonaka (talk) 22:00, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello Sroberts, and welcome to the Teahouse. The claim that it was renamed to Raimi productions was unsourced, (except in the edit summary, where it was sourced only to an unreliable source) so I was tempted to undo it. The policy of WP:COMMONNAME says that the article should be named according to the name that the bulk of the sources uses. But the whole point is moot, because there are no sources (well, one blog, which is completely useless as a source). So, unless somebody finds and cites several independent reliable sources that talk about the company at some length, the article will probably be deleted as not establishing that the company is notable. ColinFine (talk) 22:19, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

@ColinFine If the article doesn't get deleted, should it be moved back to its original title? Will anyone remember to do that? David10244 (talk) 05:04, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

That will depend on the sources. If, for example, there are adequante sources for before 2019 and nothing since, then it should probably be moved back. If there are sources for Raimi, and they are cited, then it can stay at Raimi. Either way, discussion on the talk page is the way to go. But the priority (after S.roberts makes the mandatory declaration) is finding the sources. ColinFine (talk) 09:33, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks; I was assuming that the OP is correct (and has references) that the "Productions" company is not related to the "Pictures" company. David10244 (talk) 03:39, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Now that I read this again, it seems a bit out of the ordinary. It seems to me that the OP is not trying to edit or undo a move on an article about his (or her) company, as you (@ColinFine) and @Lemonaka have said. He is trying to undo a move of an article about a company that has a similar name to the company he works for, which was (perhaps incorrectly) moved into the name of the company he does work for. Is that still a COI? (Sorry if I misgendered the OP.)

If I move a random company page to the name "IBM", would someone who works for IBM need to declare a COI to request an undo-move?

Isn't there a "move discussion" page? Thanks. David10244 (talk) 03:53, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi, @David10244 if you decided to move a page, you'd better get a consensus on talk page of the related articles. If the target place of the moving was taken by another article, you may turn to Wikipedia:Requested_moves and followed instruction there? I'm not quite sure. Lemonaka (talk) 07:28, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Hey, let's solve this case. I will start a discussion on the related talk page. I have pinging you there, please give us your opinions. Lemonaka (talk) 07:36, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacki_Randall This page has many inaccuracies and is in need of correction. Any help is greatly appreciated! Thanks! Her128 (talk) 05:06, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

@Her128: You posted the same question at the Wikipedia Help Desk. Generally, it's not a good idea to post the same question at multiple noticeboards because it can cause confusion and lead to redundant answers. Someone has already responded at WP:HD#Trying to correct "my" page.. don't know what I'm doing/how to navigate.. Help please?; so, please check there. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:19, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi, @Her128, welcome to teahouse. I answered you on Talk:Jacki Randall Lemonaka (talk) 07:58, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

I would like to write a bio for my son, an actor, athlete. How can I get started? ZoieNYC (talk) 19:51, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi @ZoieNYC, welcome to the Teahouse. This is going to be especially difficult for you, since you have an evident conflict of interest - please see WP:COI for more about that. The very first thing you should do is to read up on our notability standards; WP:NPERSON is the general standard for people, with some specific guidance for performers and athletes. You are going to need to find multiple independent, reliable, secondary sources with significant coverage of your son. Once you have those, you can start writing a draft, and, finally, submit it for review. Help:Your first article describes the process. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 19:58, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

I want to add to the above a very good reason for not writing this article: imagine how you (and possibly also your son) will feel if this article gets declined several times at Articles for Creation with the comment "no evidence of notability". Or, worse, imagine that another editor submits the article for a deletion discussion at Articles for Deletion, and soon there are five comments there saying some variation of "who even cares about these roles/games" and "this is just some nobody." Not really an experience I'd wish on anyone's parents (or kids). -- asilvering (talk) 03:46, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi @ZoieNYC, welcome to the Teahouse. I strongly recommend you not do so, because this is clearly conflict of interests, and your son maybe not reached the notability for having a page on wikipedia. A lot of articles got deleted for failing notability. Lemonaka (talk) 08:05, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello. I have written a book that will be published sometime in early 2023. Is it appropriate for me to complete a summary webpage about the book once it is published? I am more than happy to give more detailed information if you require it. Thanks in advance Volcanoman7 (talk) 01:21, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Volcanoman7 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell about their own works; in terms of books, a book would need to meet the criteria written at this page, as shown with significant coverage in independent reliable sources(for books, usually independent, unsolicited reviews do it). If your book does merit an article, ideally you should not be the one to write it, as you have a conflict of interest. 331dot (talk) 01:24, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

The notability criteria are at Wikipedia:Notability (books). You are presumably aware of conflict of interest? - David Biddulph (talk) 01:25, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

WP:TOOSOON also applies. If the book sells well and is reviewed by major publications (NY Times, Washington Post, etc.) then someone else may submit a draft about the book. Until then, use social media to promote your book and yourself. David notMD (talk) 02:59, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

@Volcanoman7, welcome to teahouse. I strongly recommend you not to do so. There is clearly conflict of interests and may fail wikipedia:Notability Lemonaka (talk) 08:11, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi

I made some updates to a page that was moved to draft in the hope of having it published again - https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Bango_(company)&action=edit

Please can you advise me how I submit the page for review?

Many thanks

Sukey Suk mil (talk) 10:15, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

@Suk mil: to submit a draft, add {{subst:submit}} at the top of the page. lettherebedarklight晚安 10:51, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

@Suk mil You removed the earlier decline notice from the draft Draft:Bango (company), which you should not have done as future reviewers will want to check the issues identified have been addressed. I have restored it and it also contains a resubmit button. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:29, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

You could just press the resubmit button to resubmit it for review. Lemonaka (talk) 11:30, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

@Suk mil In a recent edit you added an edit summary Updated content and references to much better reflect the benefits for the end users of our customers which suggests that you are a paid employee of Bango. If so, you are required by Wikipedia's Terms and Conditions to make a paid editing disclosure. See WP:PAID for how to do that. It is not forbidden for employees of companies to create drafts but the rules of disclosure must be followed. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:35, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Furthermore, Suk mil, to better reflect the benefits for the end users of our customers is Promotion, which has no place in Wikipedia. If somebody wholly unconnected with the company has talked in a reliable source about the benefits of your products, then that may go in the article, cited to that source. Conversely, if somebody unconnected with the company has talked in a reliable source about how awful the products are, and how they don't benefit anybody, then that too should go into the article. But what the company say or want to say about their own products does not belong in the article, period. --ColinFine (talk) 11:58, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

@Suk mil@ColinFine@Michael D. Turnbull, hi all, this draft looks like an advertisement, CSD G11 tagged for this draft. Lemonaka (talk) 12:01, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

@Lemonaka Yes, and I noted that a previous article about the same company was deleted after a discussion in February 2022 now at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bango plc. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:04, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Sadly, OP-blocked for undisclosed paid editing. Lemonaka (talk) 08:15, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

I would like to write a biography about my grandmother (passed away in 2006) in German. She published several novels and has written a number of poems that are not published. I would like to publish some of those poems or a link to them online. Is this suitable for a Wikipedia article? MarkGerber2405 (talk) 13:32, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

MarkGerber2405 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The German Wikipedia is a separate project, with its own editors and policies, so I can't really speak to what they permit, but I know that this version would not permit hosting poems. A link to a website that does may be okay, if your relative merits an article according to our notability criteria, and sufficient independent reliable sources cam be found. 331dot (talk) 13:37, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

@MarkGerber2405, welcome to teahouse. For creating a biography with enough notability, why not try WP:AFC? But please use wp:reliable sources for your article. Happy editing. Lemonaka (talk) 08:23, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

I checked the page but I have to be a new page reviewer to ask questions. I checked the New pages feed and when I went to the oldest part, I found that some articles havent been reviewed since 2004 and 2005, why arent they reviewed yet? `~HelpingWorld~` ^(👽🛸) 04:11, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, HelpingWorld. The New pages feed only goes back to 2012. The reason that some very old articles have never been reviewed is very simple: Nobody has yet volunteered to review them. If you want to work on them, feel free. Cullen328 (talk) 04:52, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

if you are seeing old articles in the NPP feed, it is likely they were redirects until recently and now have content. Slywriter (talk) 05:04, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

@HelpingWorld, welcome to teahouse. Please be brave and also be careful when reviewing these old articles. Some of them may have disputes that make no one would like to review them. Lemonaka (talk) 09:30, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

I have some queries about the RTRC (real-time recent changes) tool. Should I ask them here or ask them somewhere else?

Thank you. ContributeToTheWiki (talk) 19:24, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, ContributeToTheWiki, and welcome to the Teahouse! Feel free to ask!

Asparagusus (interaction) 19:50, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

@ContributeToTheWiki, welcome to teahouse! If you have some questions about RTRC, you could ask on m:User_talk:Krinkle/Tools Lemonaka (talk) 09:35, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello everyone,

I am writing a wikipedia page about a museum in Cyprus and was hoping for reassurance that my references were good. The museum has two buildings, one in Nicosia and one in Limassol. Both are run/founded by the same artist and serve the same purpose. The first museum building opened in 2008 and the second opened in 2019, they are notable for being the only museums dedicated to printmaking on the island and their founder Hambis Tsangaris is an important artist of printmaking and Cypriot folk art. I think anyone interested in the history of the museums and this artist's life story and art would benefit from a wiki page.

I have references from a wikipedia page, a book, a short YouTube documentary, online newspapers and magazines. Could I share a few of them here and ask if they are appropriate for the Wikipedia page I want to write.

My references for the museums include:

Platanisteia (the wiki page of the village where the museum is)

https://mycyprusinsider.com/top-5-museums-off-the-beaten-track/ a travel website which writes about the museum

https://books.google.com.cy/books?id=AVNx6BczLpsC&pg=PT33&lpg=PT33&dq=hambis+tsangaris&source=bl&ots=CM7v4gn361&sig=ACfU3U2Kae43PqHaL7rP68C4TjCk4gDAcw&hl=el&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjBvpL43vj7AhVDyoUKHcowDvE4PBDoAXoECBYQAw#v=onepage&q=hambis%20tsangaris&f=false a book which includes paragraphs on the museum.

My references for Hambis Tsangaris, the artist himself include:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fcqzJiI42cM a short documentary on the art of printmaking, focusing on the artist.

https://www.cyprusnet.com/event/opening-of-engraving-exhibition-by-hambis-tsangaris a website page

https://www.welcomemagazinecy.com/welcome-magazine/2019/10/25/hambis-tsangari a magazine artice

This is the museum's own website, please let me know if I should include this as well.

http://printmaking.cy/

many thanks in advance! Orangeleavesfalling (talk) 10:15, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

@Orangeleavesfalling, great choice of topic, if we can have this article we should. You can't use WP as a source on WP, see WP:USERG. The video looks WP:SPS afaict, but with the museum website it'll make a fine WP:EL. See also WP:ABOUTSELF (about using the museum website as a source). The book looks ok. cyprusinsider looks WP:BLOGish, but welcomemagazinecy looks usable. cyprusnet doesn't say much. Here is a source you should use:[2]. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:00, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

This source [3] may be ok too, it's from [4]. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:05, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your encouragement and help! I shall re-examine my resources and return! Orangeleavesfalling (talk) 11:37, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi Orangeleavesfalling! A few notes on these sources:

• Wikipedia pages are never considered reliable sources, though the Platanisteia page may reference reliable sources which you could use.
• The travel website and the book both look questionable to me – the book publisher, "Islebright books", appears to exist only to publish the works of Chris Alden. It's not clear to me who writes mycyprusinsider.com or why we should trust them. For something to be a reliable source for wikipedia, it needs to have a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy – does that fit either of these? Do other unquestionably reliable sources refer to them?
• The Welcome Magazine link doesn't work for me, but the publication seems to be a purely promotional thing writing puff pieces: I am sceptical that it would be considered a reliable source.
• A documentary absolutely can be a reliable source, presuming that it is made by a reliable publication - a BBC 2 documentary is probably reliable; a History Channel documentary is less likely to be. I don't know enough about Kazanti to know whether they would be considered generally reliable.
• The museum's own website is a reliable source for uncontentious facts about the museum (e.g. the name of its director, its address, it's date of foundation). It does not, however, count towards demonstrating that the museum is notable, which is Wikipedia's way of saying "reliable sources have written about this enough that we can write an article on it".

Ideal sources which would count towards demonstrating notability would be academic articles or book chapters about the museum, nonfiction books published by mainstream non-academic publishers or articles in major newspapers. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 11:41, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

This welcomemag link may work: [5] Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:59, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Orangeleavesfalling: The book content is a travel guide listing. It's not in-depth (see examples of trivial coverage), and it's uncertain how independent of the listed businesses such books are. The Cyprus Mail article looks sponsored (see other articles by the same author). To me, it doesn't look like this subject passes WP:NORG. —Alalch E. 11:55, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

IMO, the book is not passing mention either. Partial GNG-point, assuming it's independent/not WP:SPS. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:02, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Btw, why do you consider the Cyprys Mail article [6] sponsored instead of local media writing about their own? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:05, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

I don't think it's a partial GNG point because WP:NORG stricter sourcing requirements can't be bypassed when the subject is a business/institution. The book is a directory that lists businesses' phone numbers, addresses/directions, and short descriptions of service offerings, which is explicitly described as trivial coverage in the guideline. See also Wikipedia:Businesses with a single location#What not to look for. The Cyprus Mail article is based on quotes and a copyedited first-person account given by the owner. The article then proceeds to list working hours, address etc. Such sources where "local media write about their own" are very often promotional. —Alalch E. 12:25, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Obviously the CM article has plenty of quotes which, if used, should be in-text attributed. I don't consider it "very" promotional, and think it's usable in context. WP:BIASEDSOURCES have their uses. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:31, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for clarifying! I shall do my best to gather more resources from more in-depth sources. Orangeleavesfalling (talk) 11:39, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

I have a question about this new User's name in the context of the majority of edits are in categories where there was violent deaths. Is this "uncivil?" I didn't know where to take my concern or even if it is an issue worthy of attention. Please, see: Special:Contributions/ImDeadAsADoornail Thank you, -- Ooligan (talk) 08:32, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

@Ooligan, welcome to teahouse. If you suspect someone violated username policies, please file a report at wp:UAA. Lemonaka (talk) 08:43, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

@Lemonaka I have read the policy and filed a report. Thank you for you prompt and helpful response. Cheers, -- Ooligan (talk) 09:22, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

FOR THE CURIOUS: "dead as a doornail" dates back to the 1300s. Iron nails were hammered into doors with the heads visible from the outside, either as a decorative pattern or else to bind boards together. Either way, the protruding point on the inside was hammered sideways so as to be flush with the inside of the door. Such a nail, bent, could not be straightened and used again because the bend section would be weak, hence 'dead'. Including ImDeadAsADoornail in this missive. David notMD (talk) 12:32, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi

I have some engineering projects for the company i represent that I think will contribute well. I was thinking of adding the edits under a See Also section on the pages... or adding a few lines of text directly to the page.

Wiki: Polar Epsilon - Wikipedia

Company: IES Site

Any suggestions would be appreciated, thank you. Kevin at IES (talk) 20:56, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Kevin at IES, welcome to the Teahouse. Links in See Also sections should only be to other articles on Wikipedia, not to external sites. There is such a thing as an External links section, but your link doesn't sound like it fits the usual criteria for links in such a section. If an independent, reliable, secondary source discusses your company's link to an article subject, that might be a reason to include a sentence about it in the article, but the sentence should be cited to the aforesaid source, not the company website. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 21:17, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi, So you are suggesting that if i find the source try editing directly on those pages... Kevin at IES (talk) 21:30, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

@Kevin at IES, I would recommend making an edit request on the talk page instead, since you are a paid editor. You can use either the Wizard (Wikipedia:Edit Request Wizard) or the template ({{Request edit}}). 199.208.172.35 (talk) 21:34, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Ok Kevin at IES (talk) 21:38, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

@Kevin at IES Please don't add external links pointing to your company's web pages directly into articles. An edit request would be OK, but Wikipedia is not for linking to your own company's web pages. David10244 (talk) 03:31, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

ok Kevin at IES (talk) 13:47, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Are there special tags that are like citations and notes but are not? - S L A Y T H E - (talk) 13:46, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

I'm not sure what exactly you are looking for but there are hundred of different templates. See Help:Cheatsheet for some of them. Shantavira|^{feed me} 14:03, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi, @Slaythe. Welcome to teahouse, do you mean {{cn}}, this is citation needed tag. Lemonaka (talk) 08:25, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

No like a special tag for to separate special "references" from regular references and notes. - S L A Y T H E - (talk) 16:16, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

You could make different reference groups like this: <ref group="whatever">blablabla</ref> and then <references group="whatever" /> at the point where you want the notes to be displayed. The above would produce: ^{[whatever 1]}

^ blablabla

■ ∃ Madeline ⇔ ∃ Part of me ; 16:29, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi friends. I recently added a stub for a new article on a French artist who seems interesting, and just unveiled a monumental work in my area. It was pretty quickly moved over to a new(ish?) namespace called "Draft".

OK, I can see how a Draft namespace could make sense, and I have no particular problem with it, so I played by the rules in the draft notification, fixed the article up enough I guess for initial publication, and then clicked the bit blue "Submit for Review" button.

This reveals that there's a waiting list of something like 4 months. This kind of thing seems sort of, well, un-wiki (wiki means quick). So I reckoned I would come back here and ask about it.

So, can I just publish the draft on my own? Is this not considered acceptable in 2022? I mean, I understand that pages created in good faith are constantly attacked by people acting in bad faith, so rules have their reasons, but still, it seems like the foundational idea here is to gather knowledge through quick creation and improvement of articles.

Anyway, I know the community has been through a lot, so I bow to your collective wisdom. Mark J (talk) 19:28, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

You are allowed to move drafts to mainspace once you feel they're ready; AfC is not compulsory. Just remove the template from the top and move the page. The template messages conveniently omit this. ■ ∃ Madeline ⇔ ∃ Part of me ; 19:38, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, MarkJaroski. Welcome back to Wikipedia. This is about Draft:Danielle Jacqui. A lot has changed since 2004. Babies born then are now young adults and Wikipedia has matured as well. On your talk page, you say that the draft is a translation from the French. Please follow the instructions at WP:TRANSLATE, and attribute your version to the French article and its authors. This is a legal requirement. The biggest problem at present is that the draft article is unreferenced. Verifiability is a core content policy and your draft needs to summarize published reliable sources (not Wikipedia in any language), and you need to cite those sources. Read Referencing for beginners. If you try to move the draft to main space without addressing such issues and bringing it much closer to 2022 standards, it will not stay in the encyclopedia for very long. Cullen328 (talk) 20:05, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Cullen328, Nice to meet you. I guess I don't understand how an article with a dozen primary sources is unreferenced. Thanks so much for including the link to Referencing for beginners. I'll give that a read and ask again if it still doesn't make sense. Mark J (talk) 20:16, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

MarkJaroski, I did not notice the references necause the reference section is filled with improperly formatted categories. I apologize. Cullen328 (talk) 20:22, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

The formatting is proper as drafts don't belong in content categories. ■ ∃ Madeline ⇔ ∃ Part of me ; 20:31, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. I think I still don't understand how to credit French Wikipedia. It used to be back in the day that we would add a template to build the language links, but I guess there's some other way to do it now, which is fine of course. I'd just like some guidance into how to do it. -- Mark J (talk) 21:43, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

@MarkJaroski, this is about crediting, not linking - see Help:Translation#License requirements. You'd do it in an edit summary (ideally the first one, but you can just make a null edit now with the wording outlined on the page I linked). 199.208.172.35 (talk) 21:47, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Done. Mark J (talk) 21:55, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict) For the actual attribution you can do a dummy edit to have it in the history, and add {{translated page}} to the talk page. Interlanguage links are another thing, which is hosted on Wikidata these days. ■ ∃ Madeline ⇔ ∃ Part of me ; 21:47, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Yes, dummy edit, not null - my bad. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 21:49, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you! Mark J (talk) 21:56, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Maddy from Celeste The format was not proper because it had "no wiki" tags included which I subsequently removed. Theroadislong (talk) 20:34, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! Mark J (talk) 21:43, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Reading through WP:BLP may be a good idea. And punctuation goes before cite. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:15, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

There is a backlog of drafts awaiting review, but the system is not a queue. Reviewers select. Thus, could be days, weeks, or sadly, months before a review. There are no shortcuts. Yes, there are references, but for a biography, all factual statements need to be verified. Or removed. There is a lot of content without references. David notMD (talk) 20:23, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Do we still have the concept of a Wikipedia:Stub where we can create something that gets a topic started, and then have other Wikipedians do some of the lifting? Also, I have to confess that I've completely forgotten how the inter-wiki links system works. It's been a while. You know, the day-job and all of that. So more pointers will be helpful. I know I've got a lot here to read already. Mark J (talk) 20:29, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Stubs exist. But for articles about living people, it's reference as you write. David notMD (talk) 20:34, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

A stub is an article deemed too short to provide encyclopedic coverage of a subject. This is not a stub. It just needs to be referenced properly. Cullen328 (talk) 20:38, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Please see Help:Interwiki linking. Cullen328 (talk) 20:40, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

"Public and private collections" not that helpful for notability, even if you add the names of the pieces of art and a reference. A listing of solo shows (referenced) would be better, an a review as a reference better than just an announcement. (And you thought translating an article would be easy.) David notMD (talk) 20:42, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

I'm getting pretty close to giving up. Mark J (talk) 20:52, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

That was the structure in fr:Danielle Jacqui, so I just carried it over. I was hoping that some wikigardner would fix it if it was wrong, but I guess that doesn't work anymore. Mark J (talk) 21:45, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

@MarkJaroski Well, there are a LOT of articles now. David10244 (talk) 04:24, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

MarkJaroski Danielle Jacqui is an accepted article!! You can put your burden down, or else contribute more, or else put it on your watchlist so as to see if anyone edits it. From here, it goes to New Pages Patrol for a last look before being made visible to search engines such as Google. David notMD (talk) 02:27, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Contributing more? Yes! Well done with the article Danielle Jacqui, MarkJaroski. As I read it, I was reminded of Ron Gittins. Gittins gets a mention in the article Oxton, Merseyside but surely merits a full article. On the off chance that your interest in residences-converted-to-artworks extends beyond Bouches-du-Rhône, I draw "Ron's place" to your attention. -- Hoary (talk) 09:21, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

There are talented and (relatively) untrained artists on every continent. I'm glad to learn about Mr. Gittins, and maybe we should consider adding a page for him. I started translating the page on Danielle Jacqui after trying to link to her from the page on Ferdinand Cheval, where there's a fairly long list of artists who have done very personal monumental works like this, so if you like Ron Gittins you should check them out. Mark J (talk) 17:14, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

The grandfather listed for Ben Shapiro is actually my great uncle. I believe Ben Shapiro's grandfather is another Nathan Mayer Shapiro. My greatuncle lived in France and knew my grandmother well. Basically, they have the wrong man on the Wikipedia page, but I am not sure how to fix it. My greatuncle was a famous artist; the link talks about his art. Pastora1 (talk) 16:43, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Courtesy link Ben Shapiro, Nat Mayer Shapiro AdmiralAckbar1977 (talk) 16:54, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

The info was added in this edit, so you could try asking the editor concerned. - David Biddulph (talk) 16:57, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you sir. Much appreciated.. Pastora1 (talk) 17:44, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

@Pastora1 Welcome to the Teahouse! The Ben Shapiro article listed Nat Mayer Shapiro in the infobox, but not within the article. The Nat Mayer Shapiro article does not mention Ben at all. Therefore, I removed Nat Mayer Shapiro from the Ben Shapiro article since there is no reliable source provided. GoingBatty (talk) 16:57, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you Pastora1 for pointing that out. Next time you come across erroneous unsourced content, feel free to try to edit the page to remove it yourself. In that particular case you could not have done it; the page Ben Shapiro is protected (because it attracts much vandalism).

If AgeOfPlastic wants to explain this edit, it would be appreciated. The lead of Ben Shapiro article says [he] was born (...) to a Conservative Jewish family of Russian-Jewish and Lithuanian-Jewish ancestry, which does not really square with the biographic details outlined in Nat Mayer Shapiro. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 17:03, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you very much. It actually does square with my greatuncle. My greatuncle's parents came from the same town as my greatgrandparents, Radoshkovici in present-day Minsk. I am Ashkenazi Jewish. I am actually probably related to Ben in some way, but not as close as the link suggests. Ben's grandfather, another Nathan Mayer Shapiro, came from the same general region and was also obviously Jewish. Our relatives came from the same

region, had same exact name, and all Jewish people are at least a 31st cousin. However, they are two diffent Nathan Mayer Shapiros. Thank you, again. Pastora1 (talk) 17:25, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

I wasn't able to edit because I think it is a protected page. Unhonestly, I wasn't sure how to edit it anyway. :) Nothing against Ben Shapiro; he is interesting to listen to, but I do not think our Nathan Mayer Shapiros are the same even though I believe we are probably more distantly related in some way. Pastora1 (talk) 17:32, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

I'm a new editor who would like to start improving the Worker Protection Standard page. Much of it is outdated and at least one link goes to a non-existent website. It also doesn't really fit with the mode of style for other laws and/or regulations. The biggest issue, however, is that the latter half of it is comprised of DoD (Department of Defense?) worker protection information which has nothing to do with protecting agricultural workers from pesticides. The information presented appears to be valuable so I don't want to just arbitrarily WP:Blank it. Should we use a disambiguation page and create separate pages for each (which I don't know how to do yet) or would it be better for me to just copy/paste the irrelevant parts to the Talk page so I can start working on it? Vetus Agricola (talk) 23:15, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

You can always raise up these issues on the talk page and discuss them. If something is unsourced, it should probably go at some point. You could also ask another experienced volunteer for help if you want to create a disambiguation page. If you want, I could give you a little help -- although I'm sure there are many more editors who have more experience than me. Sincerely, Fellow Wikipedian, Professor Penguino (talk) 23:42, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Vetus Agricola, the article is an absolute mess. It has way too many primary sources, and, in my opinion, the notability of the topic should be questioned as well. The only major content was provided by User:Nanoatzin who has been blocked for suspected sockpuppetry and legal threats. So you are looking at an 11 year old article, created before our currently high standards. Good luck. 2601:84:8A00:2DE5:F402:4063:EB1:7778 (talk) 01:07, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Editors often copy content to their own Sandbox to work on. Talk is for discussions, not editing workspace. (An exception is for PAID/COI editors who are asked to propose changes on the Talk page.) David notMD (talk) 02:39, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

@Vetus Agricola The page history will always preserve the old edits with the irrelevant stuff. If you can think of an article to relocate it to, you can move it there (make sure your edit summary in your removal says what you're doing and links the destination article, and likewise the edit summary for when you're adding the content to the other one - this is to preserve attribution for the text). If you can't, just kill it. If this makes you nervous, you can post on the talk page about it with a link to the last diff that holds all the irrelevant stuff (ie, the last one before you started editing) to make it easier for other editors to find. -- asilvering (talk) 03:01, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks to all for the help! Another user took care of the "offending" DoD information for me. Vetus Agricola (talk) 19:28, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

I am planning on writing an article about a currently living person, and i plan to contact the person for some personal information (like date of birth and place of birth). Would this appropriate to use in a article? Rabawar (talk) 21:54, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Rabawar Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. First, if you communicate with the subject of a draft or article, it's a conflict of interest and original research. Articles are typically written without any involvement from the subject. Second, Wikipedia summarizes what published reliable sources that can be verified say. We can't verify your interview with the subject. Perhaps they can direct you to where that information can be found. 331dot (talk) 22:18, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

One would naturally think so, but in fact it is not. The person would be a primary source, and we do not reference primary sources, we reference secondary sources: an interview that is published. That information has been vetted by the publishing source whereas any information you got directly would be on your say so only. WP doesn't publish personal opinions. Jenhawk777 (talk) 22:22, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

@331dot@Jenhawk777 thank you both for the replies, I'll see if I can find a secondary source with that info. Rabawar (talk) 22:54, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Rabawar, Joe Biden (I learn from Wikipedia) "was born on November 20, 1942, at St. Mary's Hospital in Scranton, Pennsylvania". I venture to suggest that had he instead been born on December 3, 1942, at St. Mabel's Hospital in Hazleton, Pennsylvania, this would probably have made no difference. If such data are presented, of course they must be right; but they're seldom worth the effort of the search. Reliable sources should have plenty of more important material for you to summarize about this "currently living person" and their achievements. -- Hoary (talk) 00:04, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Can someone please help me with this: what are the best sources for the draft page at Tirrito Cars Italy? There are so many websites talking about the company’s 3-concept car series on the internet, but I can’t find any sources that talk about the company. The only one I could find was the one source on the Internet Archive. ThomasDuhTankEngine2843 (talk) 20:54, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Good day. If you cannot find any sources, I would not make it into an article. ✶Mitch199811✶ [Talk] 21:00, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

I figured there are missing sources for the “models” section. Turns out there were some use in the sources I found on the web. Not much is known on the company, but the concept cars the Italian firm made did hit the mainstream media. ThomasDuhTankEngine2843 (talk) 21:04, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

@ThomasDuhTankEngine2843, in that case, it might be best to write about the cars, and not the company. Go where the sources are. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 21:15, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

ThomasDuhTankEngine2843, The Italian firm currently has only a series of concept cars [...] By "currently has", do you perhaps mean "years ago had"? (I infer from the draft's external links that the company's website is dead.) Production was planned to 50 units and each unit was priced around $500,000. They were never mass-produced. No surprise there, if only fifty were planned. Were any sold? The impression I get from the draft is that this (like rather a lot of companies advertising expensive cars) is merely a defunct advertiser of vaporware. If it has been taken seriously by writers who are worth taking seriously, it could be notable; but until persuaded otherwise, I'd start with the assumption that it isn't notable. -- Hoary (talk) 02:22, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello.

Apparently i misunderstoond some copyright laws regarding uploading a picture on Commons. I took it down from the article it was used in. I don’t know what i should do next; i guess it have to be deleted some how? I’ll be more careful in the future.

(https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Hasan_Hamidulla.jpg)

E-Hakim96 (talk) 04:07, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi E-Hakim96. You can request the picture be deleted from Commons by following the guidance given in c:COM:DR since the file is no longer eligible for speedy deletion per Commons' speedy deletion criterion G7. In the desk top mode of the file's page on Commons, you should see "Nominate for deletion" near the bottom of the left side-bar. If you click on that link, a new window will open that you can use to nominate the file for deletion. Just say you uploaded the file by mistake or whatever, and it will eventually be deleted. You might also want to take a look at c:COM:L and c:COM:Own work for future reference. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:42, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

I went looking for an article (Unconscious bias) and was redirected to Implicit stereotype. I would like to create/recreate the article on Unconscious bias and remove the redirect. There are more studies than there used to be, and I do not think it is adequately covered in the article that absorbed it. Can that be done? How? This is way beyond my skill set, but I would like to learn. Jenhawk777 (talk) 21:21, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

When you get redirected, you can click the link in the little "redirected from" to get to the actual redirect page. You can then edit that to turn it into an article. If you want to draft an article first, you can make a draft and then ask on WP:RM/TR or using {{db-move}} to have the redirect replaced with your article. ■ ∃ Madeline ⇔ ∃ Part of me ; 21:26, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Jenhawk777: Click this link [7], click edit, remove all the text related to the redirect and you can create the article that way. Alternatively, you can work on an article in draftspace and nominate that page for WP:G6 when it's ready to be moved to mainspace. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 21:26, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you so much for responding Madeline and Clovermoss🍀. I do appreciate it, but I must be missing something. I have now tried both approaches and cannot find any access to the original article. Additional suggestions? Jenhawk777 (talk) 22:16, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

@Jenhawk777: Are you talking about Implicit stereotype? Or the link I gave that doesn't automatically redirect you? I've taken a look at your recent contributions [8] and it doesn't look like you've made any related edits. Maybe I'm missing something context-wise? Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 22:21, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Edits to implicit stereotype? No, I am not interested in editing that one. I am interested in reopening and editing unconscious bias. If I type in unconscious bias I get the redirect that says it is a redirect to implicit stereotype; there is no access that I can find to unconscious bias. If I go to implicit stereotype, there is a little script that says it is a redirect from unconscious bias, click on that and it takes me right back to the same redirect page. The link takes me to the redirect page automatically. Jenhawk777 (talk) 22:27, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

@Jenhawk777: This link should work [9]? You can click edit source and just remove the redirect/create an article in a single edit if you want to. An example of what this looks like [10]. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 22:34, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

@Jenhawk777, as far as I can tell, there was never an article at Unconscious bias. It seems to have started life as a redirect. There is nothing to recover. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 22:35, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Although it was originally a redirect to Cognitive bias rather than Implicit stereotype. @Jenhawk777: You may want to see if the information you want to add can be incorporated into either of those two articles. Deor (talk) 23:36, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

I have just discovered that! I will now write one. I will also add paragraphs as Deor suggests. Should I reinstate the redirect until then? Thank you all so much! Teahouse rocks! Jenhawk777 (talk) 07:03, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Brijendra Pratap Singh

why content tab come on top

please shift that after brijendra pratap singh paragraf and befour education paragraf Skpnthi (talk) 07:11, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

@Skpnthi the default behavior of MediaWiki (the software behind Wikipedia) is to place the TOC before the first heading after the initial page title generated for every page. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 07:21, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

 Done, the level 1 heading doesn't go in the text. That's title of the article. Cmr08 (talk) 07:17, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi everybody!

I have one unresolved problem lasting for years: every time I try to ad an English translation to BluOr Bank`s (Latvian bank, working all over the Europe) page on Wiki, I get a ban and my translation being deleted. Reason: advertising. I am not trying to advertise something, I just try to ad a translation for the comfort of users that do not read in Latvian. Why Wiki don`t want to add it? Georgijs.nikitins (talk) 07:22, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

@georgijs.nikitins: this is your only edit to en.wiki, and the only other edit you have done is to update the employee count of bluor bank on lv.wiki.

if you wish to create an article, you may use the article wizard. lettherebedarklight晚安 08:18, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

You'll find advice at WP:Translation. Note that the rules here may well be different from those on the Latvian Wikipedia. - David Biddulph (talk) 08:21, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

So, I can log in again. I changed my password so hopefully that will fix the problem. Anyway, on to the point. I found a Video Game that isn't on the wiki yet, and I might make an article about it later in the future. My problem is that there's no reliable sources for it. It's called "Extreme Car Driving Simulator" and the only results for it are the google play reviews and unblocked gaming websites for kids who procrastinate instead of doing their homework. Is there another way I can search for these sources (if any at all)? The Power is There at Your Command (talk) 03:43, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello @The Power is There at Your Command. Welcome to the teahouse! Unfortunately, if the sources don't exist, we can't have an article about it. You may want to try one of the sites listed at alternate outlets for other options. Thanks, echidnaLives - talk - edits 03:47, 16 December 2022 (UTC).

Ah, okay thanks. Aw man. 😥 The Power is There at Your Command (talk) 03:49, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, it sucks. Sorry. echidnaLives - talk - edits 03:51, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Well the game has been getting popular again recently with the updates, so hopefully, there will be some sources created for it in the future. Also, my own IP address has been threatening me apparently. It looks like it's stopped, but where to report if it happens again? The Power is There at Your Command (talk) 03:54, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

WP:AIV, most likely. Sarrail (talk) 03:55, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

K. The Power is There at Your Command (talk) 03:56, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

@The Power is There at Your Command, you may find something interesting at Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:24, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi. There's the wrong photo on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ekkehard_von_Kuenssberg The main photo is of Ekkehard's son (Nick) - but labelled as Ekkehard. Ekkehard really looked like this: https://www.qnis.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Ekke-Kuensberg.jpg I'm old, chronically ill - & not really up to learning something new. - Is someone able to replace his son's photo with the real one of him, please? Thank you. ROSIEDEUTSCH (talk) 04:43, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi ROSIEDEUTSCH. You can make a request that the file be uploaded at Wikipedia:Files for upload. You should try and include some information about the file's provenance in your request to help aid in the assessment of it's copyright status and also aid in verifying that it's really Ekkehard von Kuenssberg. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:49, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi ROSIEDEUTSCH. Sure - Ive deleted the offending photo and hope to load a replacement unless Marchjuly beats me to it (copyright isnt important for fair use). Sorry about the aggravation Rosie and hope your illness eases. Have a good xmas Victuallers (talk) 09:17, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

I added the entry of Freedom Factory Raceway(a legitimate business and raceway in Bradenton) to the Bradenton Florida wiki page and linked it to the owners website which is also the website for the raceway and the entry was removed within a minute, why isn't a legitimate business owner from Bradentons Business not allowed on the Bradenton Wiki page? 192.249.224.14 (talk) 03:28, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello! Hopefully you have a good day today. While Freedom Factory Raceway may be a legitimate business in Bradenton, Florida, it can't be placed there because the raceway is not enough to have on the article, and is not notable enough to be placed on the point of interest section of the place. Thank you. ✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 03:45, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, IP user, and welcome to the Teahouse. Any reasonable sized town will have hundreds of businesses: articles on towns would be useless if they listed them all. Wikipedia has a policy of only listing things that are notable. ColinFine (talk) 09:32, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

I have created a draft Draft:Ram Rati Bind which is about a politician who served as Member of Lok Sabha, Lower House of Parliament of India but that draft has been declined. I want the reason about it. This article meets WP:POLITICIAN because he has been members of legislative body at national level. (Please ping me if someone will reply.) ​​​​​​​𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝟕𝟐𝟖🧙‍♂️^{Let's Talk !} 08:07, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

courtesy ping to Cabrils. —usernamekiran (talk) 08:42, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, LordVoldemort728. You are correct that this person clearly passes WP:NPOLITICIAN and so Cabrils should not have declined the draft. Drafts that have a likelihood of surviving Articles for Deletion should be accepted, and in my experience, articles about verified members of national legislatures are kept pretty much 100% of the time. On the other hand, the draft consists of only three sentences and is pretty uniformative. Surely you can do better than this. A member of the Lok Sabha deserves better coverage than you have written so far. I have written seven sentences in response to your question, and you should be able to exceed that count and produce a more informative article to be proud of. Cullen328 (talk) 09:00, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

@Cullen328 I have added one more sentence that says, In Lok Sabha, he served as Member of Committee on Human Resource Development. ​​​​​​​𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝟕𝟐𝟖🧙‍♂️^{Let's Talk !} 09:08, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

@Cullen328 I have also found some mentions about him like

• https://speakerloksabha.nic.in/speech/SpeechDetails.asp?SpeechId=77
• https://www.hindustantimes.com/india/bsp-retains-three-ls-seats/story-ayqzGXfpyW0VaE5AAQjgsI.html

​​​​​​​𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝟕𝟐𝟖🧙‍♂️^{Let's Talk !} 09:16, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

If the added sentence, and those references (assuming they are reliable) are added to the draft, then that's probably sufficient. Ping me and I am happy to review. FYI in future it might be more productive (more efficient??) in the first instance to communicate with the reviewer rather than posting here. Cabrils (talk) 09:23, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi LordVoldemort728. It's probably helpful to include here the comment I posted on the draft when I declined it:

"Well done on creating the draft, and it may potentially meet the relevant requirements (including WP:GNG, WP:ANYBIO) but presently does not. Wikipedia's basic requirement for entry is that the subject is notable. Essentially subjects are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject. To properly create such a draft page, please see referencing for beginners or the article Easier Referencing for Beginners. Please familiarise yourself with these pages before amending the draft. If you feel you can meet these requirements then resubmit the page and ping me and I would be happy to reassess. As I said, I do think this draft has potential so please do persevere!"

I would also note the following from WP:ANYBIO (emphasis added): "People are likely to be notable if they meet any of the following standards. Failure to meet these criteria is not conclusive proof that a subject should not be included; conversely, meeting one or more does not guarantee that a subject should be included."

As my comment states, "I do think this draft has potential so please do persevere!".

Yes, being a member of a legislative body at national level generally should meet WP:NPOLITICIAN. However, as Cullen328 notes, the article is a bare three sentences. I declined the draft not because it was inappropriate for Wikipedia, but rather that is simply required the addition of a couple of reliable sources, which should be easy to find given the subject is a member of a national legislature. With respect, and my comment is, in my view, very respectful and encouraging, the draft is just not quite complete. Other reviewers may come to a different view, but I do feel I explained my reasoning in my comment, and as Cullen328 points out, the draft can relatively easily be amended to fix the issue. Again, as I wrote in my comment: "If you feel you can meet these requirements then resubmit the page and ping me and I would be happy to reassess."Cabrils (talk) 09:16, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

@ ​​​​​​​LordVoldemort728|​​​​​​ Draft amended and so now accepted. Cabrils (talk) 09:36, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

I think that we have a good outcome here. Cullen328 (talk)\

Micheal Bentine made some appearances in the 'Goodies', but there is no mention of him. Am I dreaming this? Should I include a reference to him? 176.22.125.130 (talk) 11:32, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

You can list him at List of The Goodies guest stars if you have a reference to a reliable source. - David Biddulph (talk) 11:36, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

I'm a bit lost regarding the API usage, and I don't want to flood wikipedia with my questions. Vincent-vst🚀 (talk) 11:39, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Perhaps mw:API talk:Main page, or otherwise WP:VPT? - David Biddulph (talk) 11:44, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

thank you @David Biddulph Vincent-vst🚀 (talk) 11:54, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Just asking. Kernel123 (talk) 01:25, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

@Kernel123: See WP:Verify, a key policy of Wikipedia. RudolfRed (talk) 01:29, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello @Kernel123, welcome to Teahouse. Everything on Wikipedia must be verifiable through reliable sources - poorly sourced material may be removed. --Harobouri • 🎢 • 🏗️ (he/him • WP:APARKS) 01:32, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Also because wikipedia does not record what you or I think about anything. It records only what reliable sources say about a topic. It would not be much good as an encyclopedia if it did anything else. --Bduke (talk) 01:36, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

It's a difference of viewpoint between Wikipedia and some other encyclopaedias. Some encyclopaedias feel it's sufficient to give the reader a quick overview, and assume the reader wants to know no more; they aim to skim the surface of a huge range of general knowledge, and they're not bad things for general human education. Wikipedia prefers to go a step further: it likes to give the reader a foothold in the wider literature, so they can read further, and find out more. This has two important side-effects: it encourages readers to check their facts (not believe everything they read from a single source) and it makes Wikipedia a bit more reliable (although we strenuously deny our own reliability). It's also key to Wikipedia's operation as a "written by anyone" encyclopaedia. We need some credentials! You either get credentials by saying "Professor X, an acknowledged expert on worms, wrote our articles on worms" or you get it by saying "our articles on worms were written by goodness knows who, but they're based on a wide range of wormy reviews by many authors as knowledgeable as Professor X". WP chose the latter path. Elemimele (talk) 07:06, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

It's so that a reader in Manchester next week, or Minneapolis next month, or Mumbai next year, who sees the information and doesn't know whether it is correct (somebody may have made a mistake when entering it, or have misunderstood a source, or somebody else may have come along later and vandalized it) has a way of checking it, if it's important to them. ColinFine (talk) 12:38, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

To verify that information is correct? I'm sorry I just don't understand how this is even a question.. Ogusokumushi (talk) 14:42, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

I know quite a bit about vacuum cleaners and I noticed the page on Vacuum cleaners being very old / outdated.The images are also out of the 90's. I wanted to spend some serious time on it, but the article is protected by someone who is not around anymore I saw on his or her Wikipedia account (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Anthony_Appleyard). Can I just start with it? (I know this would take like a lot of time to improve this article.)

I'm also wondering isn't this page outdated in the first place because of this protection? SarahBx (talk) 07:51, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Please remember that Wikipedia content must be based not on what you "know quite a bit" about, but on what can be referenced to independent reliable sources. That said, you or any other autoconfirmed editor can improve the page. Other editors can make edit requests on the article talk page. It is of no consequence to the article that the administrator who protected it is sadly no longer with us; if a valid argument were to be made at WP:RFPP that the protection ought to be removed, any administrator could do so. - David Biddulph (talk) 08:06, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

UPDATE: Protection removed 16 December. Have at it! (with references). David notMD (talk) 15:28, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

What was the last common ancestor of dinosaurs and mammals? Allaoii ^talk 19:09, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Allaoii. If you can't find the answer at Most recent common ancestor or one of the articles linked therein, you could try asking at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Science. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 19:16, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

We can't know exactly which species, but the last common ancestor of dinosaurs and mammals would have been one of the early amniotes. Note that since birds are dinosaurs, your question is the same as asking "what was the last common ancestor of humans and chickens". --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 20:35, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Allaoii, welcome to teahouse. However, this is a place for asking something related to editing wikipedia, you may have a try on Wikipedia talk:BIOLOGY Lemonaka (talk) 08:14, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

never mind the reference desk helped Allaoii ^talk 16:43, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Dude can you tell me what the answer was? I've been meaning to look it up.. Ogusokumushi (talk) 14:34, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

@Ogusokumushi, the answer is at the Science ref desk. Here's a direct link: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Science#Help. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:47, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! Ogusokumushi (talk) 16:20, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

There are many issues I have with the forum for Moca, Dominican Republic. I am new here, so I am unaware as to how I can edit this page, but the lack of information on this town is a bit shocking. It is filled with culture and history, like how coffee is often grown there, and the name is based off of a palm tree. I deeply apologize if I have not formatted this correctly, like I said earlier, I am new. Thank you. Furudehanyuu (talk) 16:37, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

@Furudehanyuu Welcome to the Teahouse, and thank you for your interest in improving the Moca, Dominican Republic article. To learn how to edit, I suggest you start at Help:Introduction. When you're ready to add new information to the article, you would gather published independent reliable sources that have provided significant coverage of Moca, and use the sources as references (see WP:EASYREFBEGIN for a helpful video). You can also post concerns and suggestions at the article's talk page - Talk:Moca, Dominican Republic - to collaborate with other editors. Thanks, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 17:01, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Furudehanyuu, and welcome to the Teahouse, and to Wikipedia. Don't worry about the formatting so much: the important thing is that you have reliable published sources for any information you want to add: your personal knowledge is not enough. If you don't feel up to editing the article directly, you could open a discussion on the talk page Talk:Moca, Dominican Republic. ColinFine (talk) 17:01, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your help! Furudehanyuu (talk) 17:34, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

@Furudehanyuu: @ColinFine: You might take a look at the various versions of this article in other languages (there are a couple of dozen of them, though I suspect the Spanish-language one is likely to be the most comprehensive one) listed on the left side of the page. At the least, this may provide some ideas about other content to include. If you were to use the content directly (i.e. just translating it), then you need to give credit (I believe there's a template for this). I am not especially familiar with the precise conditions under which that's required, but at the very least, this will let you know what other people thought was content that would be relevant to this article. Fabrickator (talk) 16:30, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

It may give ideas about what to include; but unless the information is backed up by a source, it should not be included in the English version. ColinFine (talk) 17:01, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

the U.S. State Department estimated that "approximately 45 percent of the population is Sunni Muslim." then why the Wikipedia page on Islam by country state that Muslim population on Ethiopia is only 31 percent?

and that's my source for evidence https://2001-2009.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2007/90097.htm Lion 19999 (talk) 16:15, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

@Lion 19999 Wikipedia can be edited by anyone, so it is only natural that mistakes will show up now and then. You can edit the page directly or by suggesting something at the talk page, as long as you have a reliable source. Granted, I see that your source is from 2001-2009, so it might no longer be accurate? Club On a Sub 20 (talk) 16:47, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

If you look at Islam in Ethiopia, the figure given is 33.9%, and is cited to the 2007 Ethiopian census, presumably a reliable source. THe IR Freedom Report that you cite states 45%, but gives no source to back that up. The figure you mention, 31.3%, in Islam by country, is cited to the World Factbook, published by the CIA, and labelled "2106 estimate".

Thus, all three figures are cited to what appear to be reliable sources. The 33% and the 45% are both 2007-9, and one is the official census of Ethiopia, the other an official publication by a department of a different government. that gives no sources for its figures. The third one is also from a US government publication, and gives no source, but is several years more recent.

It is not the job of Wikipedia or its editors to decide between conflicting information in sources, if the sources appear equally reliable, and often the best thing to do is to present the inconsistency - "source A says X, while source B says Y". But in this case I think that the fact that the 33.9% figure comes from the Census, and that the %31.3 figure is ten years later, but still similar, suggest that the 45% figure in the IR Freedom report is an outlier, and should be ignored.

One other point to note is that statistics of this kind are notoriously affected by definition. It seems likely, for example, that the census figure depends on the number of people who actually ticked the relevant box in their census, while the IR Freedom Report uses estimates from some other criterion: since it does not give the source of the information, it is hard to tell. ColinFine (talk) 17:28, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

@Lion 19999 As is usual with Wikipedia, you can see exactly which source our figure was derived from. In this case it is at this URL (cia.gov) which states that their figure is from 2016. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:34, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

I received a rejection on an article submission and have not gotten a response from the editor who rejected it to see 1. their reason for rejecting, and 2. If my edits would be acceptable. Any advice on how to get them to respond, or how to move forward if they are not responding? Rushistoriia (talk) 21:08, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to The Teahouse, your draft Draft:James T. Andrews was not rejected it was declined for lack of reliable sources. Theroadislong (talk) 21:13, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Actually, Declined three times by three different reviewers, the most recent September 2022. You have reached out to the person who most recently declined it, but responses are not obligatory. The problem continues to be weakness with quality of references, plus some ref formatting weaknesses. David notMD (talk) 22:21, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

I just created a page using my sandbox. User:Km4water/sandbox - Wikipedia Now I would like to publish the page. What do I do next? Km4water (talk) 21:37, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to The Teahouse, I have added the submit template, but please don't submit without improved independent reliable sources. Theroadislong (talk) 21:46, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks -- the references I have supplied look pretty good to me. Can you be specific? Km4water (talk) 22:38, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

@Km4water: Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1173. There are buttons on the templated boxes at the top of the page that will allow you to submit it for review, but I can tell you right now no reviewer will approve it because you haven't cited properly. Please read WP:EASYREFBEGIN. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:46, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks -- the references I have supplied look pretty good to me. Can you be specific? Km4water (talk) 22:38, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

First, that is not proper referencing, those are hyperlinks, which are not allowed. Use guidelines at Help:Referencing for beginners to convert those URLs into properly formatted references. See any other article for what refs look like. The softwear will place a superscripted number in the text and insert the refs under References. David notMD (talk) 22:43, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Was wondering why some very credible people are listed as "Conspiracy Theorist"? This was a term invented at the time of the Kennedy to demonize any with alternative theory to what now seem impossible. Every cop. military planner, investigator conspire to theorize. They truely are conspiracy theorist. But would it damage them to have that above they're name and picture on this site. I believe it would. When I see Experts in a field listed as conspiracy theorist on this site it seems this site is not interested in either the facts or engaged in demonization against the person. A demonization title to discredit? I don't understand why that would be a title over someones picture unless thats all they do or have done. If one feels the need such a bogus title that litterally means a theory of two or more planning were would it end? Why not let people decide. Who decides who is a conspiracy theorist? Also that would make anyone on this site working with a co-worker to cowrite, edit etc.. a conspirator and me a conspiracy theorist for mentioning it. I have a theory this site conspires in subjectivity therefor im a conspiracy theorist by definition. So it's basically just name calling, demonization, arbitraty and capricious. Is this of fact? It's very subjective simply because we all are conspirators, all have conspiracy theory so is it just that certain people are to be demonized? Does that now mean that title goes above the ablum I've written, produced etc... the work in the oil industry, the electrical fabrication, plans, installs etc.. No I believe. It's just a part of me not a title. I'm sorry it just comes across as demonization in arbitrary capricious manner. Is they're work examined for validity or fact? Who decides lifetimes of expert factual work get stuck under a heading of conspiracy theorist? I believe this is more product of cancel culture. I also believe that some may warrant mention but not title. Not of relevence is the sense due to conspiracy theory has been misued and breaks further our langauge. Would it not be more prudent to simply list the claims as unproven or open/unfounded theory and allow people to conclude? Just the facts or is it just more propaganda? 69.169.10.167 (talk) 22:14, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Lemonaka (talk) 22:18, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources say about a topic. If the preponderance of sources describe someone as a conspiracy theorist, then we do, too. Wikipedia has a strict policy about how living people are written about, WP:BLP. If an article inaccurately summarizes its sources, please detail the specific errors on the article talk page. 331dot (talk) 22:20, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you!

It's a subjective terms when put together. So name calling, or slang term used by these "Reliable Sources"? I was suprised. Black's Law dictionary has no definition for these words together. So less accurate terms are ok, or slang is ok due to a proponderance? Your terms seem to indicate as to not demonize. Even if there is a preponderance to warn the reader, or discredit in fact & truth, would not this site be weary of this as a TITLE? Curiously how would you define Conspiracy Theorist? Most words used as a title have a legal definition. 2600:1700:A7D0:3DB0:90ED:93D6:B1B0:D407 (talk) 00:29, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Do you have a particular article you are concerned about that you can link us to? -- asilvering (talk) 01:57, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

I'm surprised to read that "Most words used as a title have a legal definition." What's your evidence for this? -- Hoary (talk) 06:42, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

What does Black's Law Dictionary have to do with anything? David10244 (talk) 03:58, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Rather than conspire to theorize, I define it as someone who theorizes about conspiracies. A conspiracy theory is a theory about a conspiracy, not a conspiracy to create a theory. HerrWaus (talk) 00:47, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

I get the feeling this person might be a conspiracy theorist ^[Joke] Club On a Sub 20 (talk) 17:27, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

I mean it really depends on who is reading. I really don't see any way else to put it, and it's quite hard to find a term like "conspiracy theorist" and not have it seem offensive or subjective to anyone at all. Also just having simple beliefs and being a full on conspiracy theorist are different. You can casually believe in something and not let it consume most, if not all of your life, which is usually what the term is used for. Basically if it's such a defining personality trait then yeah, it should probably be used on said person. Ogusokumushi (talk) 14:41, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Ray Byars, Professional Motorcycle Racer and Harley Davidson Dealer from Beaumont, TX No References: I submitted an article for Ray Byars, an Amercian professional motorcycle racer and Harley Davidson dealer. After submitting it, an error popped up saying there were no references; however, I did have references. Could someone please tell me how to fix it? Cjmodica (talk) 01:00, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

@Cjmodica: Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1173. It doesn't seem you're citing them in a way that the software recognises. Please read WP:EASYREFBEGIN carefully to learn how to properly cite material on Wikipedia. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:49, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

If you want more assistance, the title looks quite long. I'd suggest shortening it to Ray Byars. Sarrail (talk) 01:58, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Given that you created Tommy Byars with references I cannot understand how you created this draft without proper references. Fix it. David notMD (talk) 02:11, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

I don't know what I did wrong. Can you help me or show me which template to use? Cjmodica (talk) 02:44, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

See Theroadislong's comment. Which template are you askin' for, anyway? Sarrail (talk) 02:46, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, I think I have corrected everything. Cjmodica (talk) 04:11, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Bahulaksh I have made this article. Please help me to improve. Ayantik Basu (talk) 05:01, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Bahulakshi Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 07:25, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Ayantik Basu, the article has four titled sections. None of these four is even partially referenced. Everything must be referenced. Specify the reliable sources that you have used. -- Hoary (talk) 09:45, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Ok Ayantik Basu (talk) 05:37, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

im new here thanks for the worm welcome.i amrequest for shauwn mkhize's person or business email address. Im planning on opening a business i want our own business woman to help me on it.. 102.249.1.8 (talk) 13:07, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

As it says at the top of the page, the Teahouse is "a friendly place where you can ask questions to get help with using and editing Wikipedia". Wikipedia does not disclose email addresses for the subjects of its articles. - David Biddulph (talk) 13:11, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. Shauwn Mkhize has a link to her twitter feed, so you could contact her that way. Given that your only other post was to call somebody "soo rude" for giving an accurate summary of the position, I wonder if your "worm welcome" was intended ironically. ColinFine (talk) 14:13, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, @102.249.1.8, welcome to teahouse. Teahouse is a place for asking things related to Wikipedia. If you'd like to get somone's personal information, you are going to the wrong place. Please refrain from doing so, this is called Doxxing and likely to be blocked away. Lemonaka (talk) 21:16, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Her Instagram profile is linked from Shauwn Mkhize (Q107316660): you might be able to message her there if you can't reach her via Twitter. ⁓ Pelagic ( messages ) 07:27, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

why are my recent changes to the page regarded as 'not constructive'? M Bitton reverted my changes and I would like them to be return as they are very vital information! Mtu wa asili (talk) 20:47, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Good day, I noticed that one edit you made added Swahili as a language. Also you added a name in Swahili(?) which may have not been wanted. The editor that reverted you on the basis of "misleading summaries," most likely referring to when you said "Fixed typo" you changed the position of Arabic and French. ✶Mitch199811✶ [Talk] 20:58, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

I would like to note that I just glanced at the situation and I would ask the person who reverted you. ✶Mitch199811✶ [Talk] 21:01, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

@Mtu wa asili - Welcome to Wikipedia! I recommend you read Wikipedia:Canned edit summaries, but the TL;DR is that those buttons you see that say "Fixed typo", "Added content", etc, should only be used if you're actually fixing a typo or adding content. You aren't required to use them on every edit (though you are, to some extent, required to communicate with other editors).

In this specific case, I would ask @M.Bitton here. Do note that "misleading edit summary" isn't a good reason to revert an otherwise good edit - if the infobox content is in dispute, though, you two should talk it out. casualdejekyll 20:25, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

@Casualdejekyll: what makes it a "good edit"? The addition of a non-official language or the misleading edit summaries to make it prominent? M.Bitton (talk) 21:48, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

@M.Bitton, I can't claim to know anything about the topic of the article, I was just WP:AGFing. casualdejekyll 00:24, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Mtu wa asili, I randomly picked one of your edits from March. Special:Diff/1074868607 is obviously incorrect. The reference at upenn.edu is not published by University of Dodoma. ⁓ Pelagic ( messages ) 07:59, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

... and the number inserted contradicted the cited reference. - David Biddulph (talk) 08:21, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

I have been editing Wikipedia articles for quite some time (close to a decade). However, I have started editing more often in the recent past.

1. Still, I lack a clear understanding of all these syntax and semantics related to discussing issues and coding pertaining to the non-visual editing of articles. Do you know any place that is a good starting point for quick reference and still not highly technical? I am conformable with writing on topics and citing relevant primary literature as I was trained as a chemist and Biophysics with bachelor's and doctoral level education in Sri Lanka and the US. But I often find it is too demanding to deal with jargon and technical explanations provided on help pages. Moreover, the technical details provided are often not elaborated enough or only provide details to be useful if you already know some HTML or related coding languages. I don't say it is not useful, but I already have some background and am comfortable enough to search and find relevant information. However, this process takes away time to do actual editing of pages. Also, this might prevent actual subject matter experts from editing and adding information to Wikipedia pages.
2. There are no clear-cut ways to reach moderators of each page, and they often need to spend some time digging here and there to find where and when to report issues that go out of control.
3. Visual editing is limited to editing text here and there and but not adequately address editing and manipulations of images and such. Lipwe (talk) 04:58, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

@Lipwe: for 1), perhaps Help:Cheatsheet is a way to start source editing. Help:Introduction also has topics on both visual and source editing. Help:Wikitext is more advanced and lists a lot more possibilities. For 2), there are no "moderators for a page x". Content disputes should be generally resolved at the associated talkpage, following the BRD cycle. We do have admins and an arbocm, but neither of those settle content disputes. Things that went out control (i.e. when content disputes became conduct disputes) should generally be reported to some noticeboard. For 3), I believe most experienced editors and the WMF are aware that the Visual editor does have its limitations and problems, including but not limited to working only on pages that contain Wikitext (which is still the mayority) and poor mobile support. Victor Schmidt (talk) 08:13, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Lipwe, what kind of organisms are you interested in? You might find collaborators, and places to discuss ideas, at some if the many biology-related wikiprojects. Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory/Science#Biology ⁓ Pelagic ( messages ) 10:07, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

I'm new here so I just want to know. Sirhewlett (talk) 21:50, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Sirhewlett, welcome to the Teahouse. That depends on what you mean by "largest" and "here". Wikipedia's own article does claim it is the largest and most-read reference work in history. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 21:53, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

On the Guiness World Records, records show that Wikipedia is, the biggest encyclopedia online. Sarrail (talk) 21:59, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

@Sarrail, @Sirhewlett 55 million articles as of 2020? No. Per Wikipedia:Size_of_Wikipedia, the English Wikipedia has 6.5 million articles and 57 million pages as of now (Dec. 2022). Guinness says that in 2020, there were 55 million articles. (I presume they mean English WP.) I doubt that all WP languages have 55 million articles total.

Wikipedia and/or the English Wikipedia might be the largest encyclopedia(s) in the world, but Guinness has unfortunately messed up the concepts, and has wrong info. And bad grammar. And inexplicably places WP in the United Kingdom, which is not really a location anyway. David10244 (talk) 04:35, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Guiness World Records first says a total of 55,632,716 articles on 18 January 2020 and later: "on 18 January 2021, it had 6,231,239 articles in English, out of a total of 55,632,716 articles written in 315 languages." The first date is wrong but the quote is right. meta:List of Wikipedias says the current total articles is 60,121,102. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:42, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter Well, I was wrong. I was misled by the number of pages in en:wp being so close to the number of articles that Guinness mentioned. I'll strike my incorrect info.

I'm surprised to see that there really are that many articles, and also surprised to see that another language (Cebuano) also has 6 million articles. I thought that en:wp was "by far" the largest Wikipedia. I should have checked my sources. Now I have a better picture of all of WP!

Although, is WP one encyclopedia, or 300 encyclopedias? :P David10244 (talk) 12:46, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

The Cebuano Wikipedia has 6 million bot-generated stubs nobody reads. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:52, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter Oh, interesting. So WP has 55 million minus 6 million "real" articles... :p. David10244 (talk) 10:41, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

If we ignore similar articles in some other languages... PrimeHunter (talk) 11:58, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

@Sirhewlett And if you need a slightly more reliable source for the view that Wikipedia is the largest ever, then this arcticle from The Economist in 2021 gives that. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:08, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, en.wikipedia, for not switching to that new style "Vector from mediawiki". Thank you for keeping wikipedia as we all know it! Sarri.greek (talk) 05:37, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Unfortunately, it has been decided that the English Wikipedia will be switching to the new Vector, probably next month. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 05:44, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello @Sarri.greek, welcome to Teahouse, to keep old style vector, why don't have a try on Special:GlobalPreferences#mw-prefsection-rendering. Set the preference appearance to vector-legacy may help you. Lemonaka (talk) 07:54, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you @Thebiguglyalien and Lemonaka: for your reply. I am so sorry that your community has accepted that Vector :( Is there a page with the Vote on this issue? the reasons of acceptance as the default, etc?) I come from el and en.wiktionary, with classic style. Sarri.greek (talk) 08:08, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

@Sarri.greek, I don't know either, a lot of tools also need to be modified a lot for this change, if my knowledge serves me right... Lemonaka (talk) 08:10, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

@sarri.greek: wikipedia:requests for comment/Deployment of Vector (2022) is where the request for comment took place. lettherebedarklight晚安 14:04, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

@Sarri.greek, the latest update post is here, and they do invite comments (but not votes, there's no voting to be done at the moment). 199.208.172.35 (talk) 15:35, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

FWIW, I've been using 2022 Vector for the last few months, and have no complaints. -- Doktor Züm (talk) 08:53, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Okay, I will have a try on that. Lemonaka (talk) 09:46, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

@Doktor Züm Translation tool on meta has terrible bug against Vector 2022, I have changed it back. Lemonaka (talk) 12:29, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

I belong to Ghoghari Vishasrimali Jain community. It is a very minority sub-caste of Jainism. I recently got the history of the same and want to publish it on Wikipedia so that the Ghoghari community world wide can be aware of their history. I created the article here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Ghoghari_Visha_Srimali_Jain but unfortunately it got declined. I am not a pro-wikipedia creator but its a genuine effort and not meant for any commercial purpose. So if someone can look at it and guide me on how can I improve as per standards and can submit it again. Thank you in advance. Dharmeshrdoshi (talk) 06:28, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

@Dharmeshrdoshi You need references: footnotes to where the information is from. Have a look at WP:REFB and the links in the decline notice. -- asilvering (talk) 06:31, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. As I have mentioned that I find this historical references from some old regional language magazine scanned pages and that too is no where online. So I can't give any reference. My idea is that let it come on Wikipedia and if any other contributor having more idea about this can add more details to this page. Unfortunately, there is nothing available for Ghoghari Visha Srimali Jain community online and it is my sincere effort to have this page as the start point. Dharmeshrdoshi (talk) 12:40, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi,@Dharmeshrdoshi, welcome to the Teahouse. For submitting an article to be accepted, please give us Reliable sources to prove this article has enough notability. Happy editing. Lemonaka (talk) 11:32, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. As I have mentioned that I find this historical references from some old regional language magazine scanned pages and that too is no where online. So I can't give any reliable source reference as defined in the policy. My idea is that let it come on Wikipedia and if any other contributor having more idea about this can add more details to this page. Unfortunately, there is nothing available for Ghoghari Visha Srimali Jain community online and it is my sincere effort to have this page as the start point. Dharmeshrdoshi (talk) 12:41, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

@Dharmeshrdoshi There's no References under ==reference==, what are you talking about? Lemonaka (talk) 12:43, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

If you can't give any reliable source reference as defined in the policy, then there can be no article. Note that sources don't need to be online. You can give a citation to the magazine, perhaps with relevant parameters (such as date) filled in at {{cite magazine}}. - David Biddulph (talk) 12:49, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

I wrote a Master's Thesis in 1992, when "on-line" was still a novelty and rare. It didn't occur to me to look for my sources on line, and I doubt if I would have found anything (I don't actually remember the state of the Internet back then). It always seems a bit funny to me when people worry about whether picking up a physical book or journal to do their research (or who seem to think it's not allowed). I happen to have easy, physical access to one of the world's major libraries. And it sometimes feels a bit like laziness--getting flabby--that I look up pretty much everything on line now, disregarding the fact (that some people don't even realize) that most of it ISN'T on line. Uporządnicki (talk) 13:18, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

please move this page draft to the article (live space)

Draft:Brijendra Pratap Singh

I create this page with available reliable sources. this is the biography of the Madhya Pradesh state cabinet popular minister. and may I redesign this page please move this draft to live space on Wikipedia. I don't have a move option in my Wikipedia account so please help. Skpnthi (talk) 07:16, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

It was submitted for AFC review just a day and a half ago. The submission box says: "Review waiting, please be patient. This may take 4 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 3,501 pending submissions waiting for review." - David Biddulph (talk) 07:35, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Skpnthi With the edit you made to this page, you should now be autoconfirmed and can directly create articles or move them from draft space. However, as you don't have a lot of experience in having articles accepted, it is highly recommended that you allow the review process to play out, so that if there are any problems with your draft, they are found now, and not later. Do you have a particular need to have the draft appear in the encyclopedia quickly, and ahead of thousands of others also waiting for reviews? 331dot (talk) 07:44, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Much of the content is not referenced. This will lead to the draft being declined again. Work on referencing everything (or deleting what cannot be referenced) while waiting for a review. If you decide to skip AfC and make it an article, the New Pages Patrol may revert it to draft status, or even start an Articles for Deletion (AfD) review. David notMD (talk) 08:27, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

User:Maproom removed seven references because those existed only in References rather than being embedded in the text of the draft. If those references have value, copy them and insert into the text. David notMD (talk) 08:38, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

continuation

please move this page draft to the article (live space)

Draft:Brijendra Pratap Singh

I edit again this page with available reliable sources and remove without resource content. this is the biography of the Madhya Pradesh state cabinet minister. and may I redesign this page please move this draft to live space on Wikipedia. I don't have a move option in my Wikipedia account so please help. Skpnthi (talk) 13:17, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Presumably you didn't read the replies which you received above. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:26, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

I'm not an expert, not involved in the process, have never attempted to create an actual article. But I suspect that to get anywhere with this draft of yours, one small thing you need to do (and I'm not saying there isn't a lot more) is, get rid of phrases like:

• "... one of the most eminent members of [his party]"
• "... has been doing remarkable work in ..."
• "With his bright academic future ..."
• "Seeing his diligence and his commitment to good work and excellence ..."

There are a couple of other questionable points; these are just the most blatant points that make your draft a CV/resume, not an encyclopedia article. Uporządnicki (talk) 15:10, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

I do not know what it means 2A00:23C5:A8C:C601:3563:7BB5:30B1:ED6C (talk) 15:05, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

See ISBN, and for WP uses, WP:ISBN. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:37, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

I want to know — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.113.35.161 (talk) 12:05, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, @41.113.35.161, welcome to the Teahouse. However, your question is too vague for me to understand. For stanna, please see Stanna Lemonaka (talk) 12:28, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Young Stunna

Going through your edits, I assume you're referring to the singer Young Stunna? Unfortunately, I'm not familiar with him, but we have a reference desk where someone may be able to answer. You can click here to ask them. ◇HelenDegenerate◆ 18:02, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

I want to ask if there is a timespan to an unblock request, like how AFDs are usually addressed after 7 days. Even ANI gets addressed within a stipulated timespan. Is there any guideline/policy/essay that says unblock requests will be addressed after a stipulated period? This is for educational purposes. HandsomeBoy (talk) 20:34, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

HandsomeBoy, WP:UNBLOCK just says usually resolved in a day or two or more contentious may take a week or more. Not sure that matches reality. I'm not sure if there is any further direction given to Admins elsewhere that they should resolve in a specified timeframe. Though I do know some admins will procedurally close Unblock requests that sit around too long without any admin reviewing. Slywriter (talk) 20:54, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi, this is a new account but I've been on Wikipedia for about a year. I'm considering starting work on the Gerwyn Price - Gary Anderson Rivalry in Professional Darts, the sources I've found so far are listed here. I'd appreciate a temperature check on whether you would consider this topic notable enough to warrant it's own page (as opposed to expanding existing pages)? I know that this is an informal forum and the opinions here don't guarantee a consensus but WP can be disheartening when you spend time on something only for it to be deleted so this would make me feel more confident about starting. Thank you! Resequent (talk) 18:46, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Resequent. Let me begin by saying that I am an American and know very little about professional darts popular in the UK, although I am familiar with the recreational game. You should be aware that sports rivalry articles in general are controversial and many have been deleted. If you enter WP:RIVALRY in the search box, you can find quite a few such debates, mostly about professional tennis and American team sports at both the college and professional level. That being said, the most important factor is the quality of the coverage in reliable, independent sources. Are there other darts rivalry articles? Can you get input from other editors who work in the darts topic area? Cullen328 (talk) 19:23, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the reply, I wasn't aware rivalry articles were controversial, although WP:NRIVALRY did strike me as being fairly unsupportive of the subject. There are no current darts rivalry pages. I think it's probably better to assume it's not notable in this case then to save effort. Resequent (talk) 19:32, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

@Resequent, fwiw, I see they are mentioned at List_of_sports_rivalries#Darts. NRIVALRY sounds somewhat brusque, I read it as "existing is not enough." Category:Sports rivalries is far from empty. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:37, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

...ok, that may have been because you added it. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:45, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Without looking at the sources, it's possible that a mention on their wikipedia pages would be WP:DUE as the bar for including information is much lower than a stand alone page. Slywriter (talk) 20:49, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Are acknowledged rivalries between teams more likely to be accepted than between individuals? David notMD (talk) 22:16, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Is there a way ti view DRAFT PAGES about a particular person or subject, which have not yet been published? DrGeorge22 (talk) 22:38, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Dr George, and welcome to the Teahouse. If you know the name of the draft, you can search directly by putting Draft:name into the search box. If you do not, you can use Advanced search to search for the name in any draft by specifying "Draft" as the namespace (and removing other namespaces such as "Article" if necessary. See Help:Searching ColinFine (talk) 22:46, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi,

If an article is already submitted but, it is taking a long time to get reviewed. Then, can I ask a Wikipedia Articles Reviewer to review my article at any time on talk page.? Thanks. Perfectodefecto (talk) 18:47, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

At the top of the draft it says: "Review waiting, please be patient. This may take 4 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 3,498 pending submissions waiting for review." Why should your draft take preference over the thousands of others? - David Biddulph (talk) 18:52, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

As best I can tell, you have submitted three drafts this month, two have been declined and recently resubmitted, and the third submitted today. How dp you get to "...is taking a long time to get reviewed."? David notMD (talk) 22:24, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

And in direct answer to the question, asking for a review on the talk page of the submitted draft gets nothing. If a reviewer looks at a Talk page at all, it would be after already having selected to do the review. David notMD (talk) 04:13, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi,

I have to admit to finding the Q&A environment confusing. When I post something it seems to get archived very quickly so when I see a reply it goes to a ‘content has been moved or deleted pop-up 9x out of ten.

My questions are: 1) how often is this archiving? 2) is it automatic or manual (ie can I rely on it being after a precise amount of time so I know I should check back within x days)? 3) if someone does reply and I can’t find their reply because it’s archived somewhere is that considered fine or is it poor etiquette? 4) when I can find a record of the edit that was there answer I can see an option ‘thank’. my reflex is to use that but then I wondered does it just jam up another editor’s inbox and so better saved for when someone has done some serious work in a collaborative context or as advocacy in a dispute over editing?

TIA EthicalAugur (talk) 13:27, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

EthicalAugur, if "‘content has been moved or deleted['] pop-up 9x out of ten" I'm surprised. (1), (2): I don't know. (3) Is what considered fine? Surely not your inability to find something; so, your looking in the talk archive? If yes, looking in the talk archive, of course this is considered fine. (4) Thanking somebody (by clicking the "Thank" option) doesn't clog up anything. (It's about as vapid as "Like" in Facebook.) -- Hoary (talk) 13:34, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Many aspects of learning to edit Wikipedia involve things that are not apparent until they happen and someone has something to say about it.

RE: your response to 1 and 2) be surprised then, because this is the case. It is a bit doing archiving of messages.

Re your response to 3) I was asking whether it’s considered bad etiquette not to respond to a reply on a post I’ve put up, particularly when that post is in the teahouse, it seemed like people making the effort to respond probably prefer acknowledgement of their offer of a helping hand. Sometimes that isn’t the case in social media so I was asking.

4) Your belief that ‘thanks’ are as vapid as ‘likes’ are noted. I wasn’t sure how ’thanks’ exist for the receiver. Thanks to @Asilvering I now know where these show up and can make a more informed choice about whether or not to use that function. It’s quicker than typing a reply and at least would let someone know that I’ve seen their message if working on a project together.

I’d say that things work well for those of us who aren’t easily disheartened. I looked to join a group and straight away fell into a soggy pit of ‘is’ ‘is not’ WP:GRATUITOUS over a clearly gratuitous image. It’s no mystery why so few editors are women, the protocol and behaviour toward new editors makes politics look like a tea party, at least you get to know the actual names of the politicians. If I were to ever really seriously give this a shot I’d have to organise a team of people I already know to work in this space. I’m clearly far too much of a snowflake to take it on by myself. EthicalAugur (talk) 10:20, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

To answer your question 2, it is automatic, with the parameters set up to archive a thread at least 48 hours after the last contribution to the thread. - David Biddulph (talk) 13:41, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Unfortunately, the bot which used to deliver notifications of and links to archived posts is broken. I'm afraid there's not much more to do except check for replies more frequently. 97.113.177.161 (talk) 13:43, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

This makes sense. It was behaving differently to previous logins. EthicalAugur (talk) 09:46, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

"Thank" goes into a "thanks log" (here's yours, for example: [11], [12]). I'll thank you for your post so you can see what it does. That's it. You're just sending a smile to someone else. Anyone who doesn't like receiving the notifications for them can just turn them off, so don't worry about it. :) -- asilvering (talk) 00:48, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, that was really helpful. EthicalAugur (talk) 10:20, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Is it really necessary to gather all the third party reliable sources for each & every content, when the article is about on Awards and very long in length.

Can I have some idea, how much minimum references should I provide for such kind of articles.? Perfectodefecto (talk) 04:57, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Partially answered on your Talk page. You have started to reference confirmation of the award winners (yes, that could get very long!). However, your declined draft Draft:ESPNcricinfo Awards is about the awards, and you have no references yet about the creation and importance of the awards in the world of cricket. For example, what is the history of the awards, and how did it come to be owned by ESPN? David notMD (talk) 10:41, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi,

I was wondering whether or not using different reference templates in the same article is against Wikipedia's guidelines? I created an article awhile back (this one) and I decided, for stylistic reasons, to use different templates: the shortened footnotes as well as the typical <ref></ref> template. However, I've read that an article must have a consistent citation style and was wondering if this applies to reference templates. I have seen other articles do a similar thing, but I'm unsure if they are properly adhering to Wikipedia's guidelines.

Should I change it? Earle Bartibus Huxley (talk) 18:34, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

@Earle Bartibus Huxley, articles, including feature articles, often mix sfn templates with the use of regular citation templates. The shortened footnotes are especially useful for book sources which are cited multiple times for different pages, but often aren't needed for other sources used. See the Richard Nixon article. StarryGrandma (talk) 23:56, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

@StarryGrandma Thanks. Earle Bartibus Huxley (talk) 12:20, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Hey,

I was wondering whether it was possible to use a file from a Wikipedia of a different language on the English Wikipedia. I am specifically looking at this file to be used on the top of this page. I looked around everywhere but can't seem to figure this out :[

Thanks Soggy Pandas (talk) 22:27, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Soggy Pandas. When you say "a file", do you mean what Wikipedia means by a File (some media, or an external document, imported as a whole) or something else?

If you mean Wikipedia's sense, it depends whether the file has been uploaded to Commons or not. If so, it can be directly used in any Wikimedia project (in particular, any language edition of Wikipedia). If not, it will have been uploaded to the particular Wikipedia it is used on. You can download it to your divice, and it may be possible to upload it to English Wikipedia and use it here, or it may not, depending on its licensing. See Image use policy. ColinFine (talk) 22:43, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

It isn't on Commons, as it is a logo, which is non-free, so I suppose it will have to be re-uploaded to the English Wikipedia. FYI, I have linked the file in question above.

Thanks for the answer :) — Soggy Pandas (talk) 22:52, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

@Soggy Pandas The file you linked is an .svg file which probably means there are additional problems given that such files are vector graphics that can be zoomed, becoming high-resolution in the process and hence arguably copyright infringements. The safest thing to do would be to transfer a .png version of adequate (low) resolution for the article, uploading it on English Wikipedia by carefully following the instructions at WP:LOGO. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:23, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello. What's wrong to add working disambiguation links? 95.90.178.53 (talk) 10:56, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

You added a link to the dab page Sequencer. You presumably intended to link to one or other of the articles listed there, so you should have been specific. - David Biddulph (talk) 11:14, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

... mmh is not good to link through the wiki pages for readers too teach? Whats the correct disambiguation link for Sequencer? 95.90.178.53 (talk) 11:30, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Music sequencer ... got it :) 95.90.178.53 (talk) 11:31, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

done, I hope it's ok now. regards 95.90.178.53 (talk) 12:33, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Of more importance than the disambiguation link is the fact that PISCIDE has no references to independent reliable sources to demonstrate the notability of the subject, hence the article is at risk of being deleted. I see also that you are a member of the band, so because of your conflict of interest you should not be editing the article. - David Biddulph (talk) 13:02, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

But I know all details about the band which no fan can add correctly, we drive our own label. We live in the year 2022 ... what sources, the music speaks. What is to do know? You deleted PiCNT (talk) 13:37, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

@PiCNT, please read reliable sources and PAID. You cannot add information based on your own personal experiences and you should be making requests on the talk page rather than editing the article directly. 97.113.177.161 (talk) 13:49, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

lol, paid - the band is passion, we are friends and independent from any major - but the article was written by kinda major (see article talk) back in the days - but without no updates fixes etc for ages ... all I did was typo fixes, disco updates, added working disambiguation links - nowt more not less - it's your job or hobby to make wiki better ... so do it and take a look in the history of changes ... google is full of sources, and then you tell me again these links are not good ... it's crazy, anyway, if all wiki articles are written by "aliens" then who knows maybe wiki is completely "from another world" - I mean from time to time also wiki should ask the "living origin" to get more details known ... finally, do what do you like with our article - I'm out. PiCNT (talk) 09:51, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

@David Biddulph, new articles like this are just tagged, and left in mainspace? Finding sources is the best outcome, but based on what happens to other articles, if no one proposes an AfD, then ths unreferenced article might stay for a decade... I know that an AfD requires a wp:BEFORE, which would certainly help. (It ought to be a draft, until it gets sources.) David10244 (talk) 07:12, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Oh, wait, I suppose NPP will get to it at some point. Sorry for the intrusion... David10244 (talk) 07:15, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

It's been around much too long for NPP, but of course anyone can propose deletion if they wish. - David Biddulph (talk) 14:42, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

I thoroughly enjoyed the article on Lydia (Rose) Weld, who was aunt to the person who raised me. When "Great Aunt Rose" heard in 1959 that my sister and I were to be sent to Baldwin School, a boarding school in Bryn Mawr, PA, she fired off a letter to my Aunt Dotty, Lydia's niece, in which she described her experience at Miss Baldwin's school, which she (and her twin sister Violet) attended in the late 1800's. It is a wonderful description, in her own words, of the school and of her world at the time. It's no question that she was a remarkable woman. Though only related to her by marriage, I am grateful to have heard the description of her experiences at Baldwin.

My Aunt Dotty died in 1986, and I always assumed that her Aunt Rose's letter was part of papers that she had saved. I spoke of the letter to other family members, and one of them located it, and sent it to me. I am elated to at last have it in my possession!

The question that now occurs to me is, can it be included in her Wikipedia page? If so, how? I have scanned the material, some of which is descriptive and not by her, but nevertheless interesting. The remaining pages were undoubtedly by her. I have a few family stories shared by those who knew her personally, but I don't know if they would add anything meaningful. The existing article, as far as it goes, seems accurate to me. Can the letter she sent to her niece be included in the page? Please let me know. I have scanned the pages, and can send them to you.

Sincerely yours,

Mariah Skinner 12.195.137.54 (talk) 22:29, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Mariah. What a delight for you to find the letter. Unfortunately, the answer is No. One of the core policies of Wikipedia is verifiability, which means that a reader anywhere, anytime, can in principle find the source for the information (eg online, or by ordering it from a library), and so we require that the information be contained in reliably published source. ColinFine (talk) 23:15, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Mariah: one way forward would be for you to send the letter to someone at the Baldwin School, who might be interested in having the story of Weld's experience there put on their website, given that she is of some notability. Once that was done, then the information would be published and could be cited in articles on Wikipedia. Similarly, if you could interest a local newspaper in publishing a modern article based on the letter, that would be equally good for citation. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:08, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

COURTESY TO TEAHOUSE: Article is Lydia Weld. David notMD (talk) 22:45, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

I drafted the article about a company that does significant work supporting a specific JDK and JRE: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:BellSoft. This support is essential for the software developers' community because it allows them to have a choice. Sometimes a new company decides which environment to use in their devices or software bundles to rely on Java (or a language also compiled to Java bytecode). If the company has a choice, it's better for everybody. Thus, it's important to share the knowledge about the choice.

If someone unfamiliar with software development in Java reads my drafted article, it may not look clear enough. It needs improvement.

Therefore, I'd suggest first improving the Java Runtime Environment article, which a reader of my article may first look at, if they are not familiar with the topic enough. To be precise, Java Runtime Environment needs to be created because now it redirects to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Java_(software_platform)#Java_Runtime_Environment. It is much harder to read and understand than, for example, https://www.redhat.com/en/topics/cloud-native-apps/what-is-a-Java-runtime-environment.

What else would you suggest to improve my article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:BellSoft? Thank you! Philip Torchinsky (talk) 15:26, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

What??? When did that happen? Miraheze is run by WMF-banned users? It's recommended on the mediawiki.org wiki though. Can that seriously not go there? Among Us for POTUS (talk) 05:51, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Oh yeah, on here. Among Us for POTUS (talk) 05:52, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Almost nobody cares other than you, and that website is irrelevant. Cullen328 (talk) 06:16, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Erm. Mediawiki.org is an official WMF site. I'm simply asking because I feel that Miraheze is a good recommendation for people who want alternative outlets. Among Us for POTUS (talk) 06:21, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

If you want to ask, Among Us for POTUS, then a good place to ask would be Wikipedia talk:Alternative outlets. -- Hoary (talk) 07:06, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you Among Us for POTUS (talk) 16:20, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Among Us for POTUS, this was also being discussed on my talk page - if you have a question about by my edit, you should really just ask me directly (like the IP did)!

In any case, yes, a WMF-banned user has full access to the Miraheze servers, including users' private data, etc. I have no idea why people want to keep recommending it knowing that history. I request you undo your edit restoring it. Legoktm (talk) 07:07, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

I've removed it. Anyone wanting to readd it is welcome to argue on the essay's talk page for readding it. If they get agreement for readding it, then it may be readded. -- Hoary (talk) 08:57, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

That's quite surprising. What were they banned for? Among Us for POTUS (talk) 16:17, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

@Among Us for POTUSFor why someone is banned, Please contact ca@wikimedia.org Lemonaka (talk) 21:58, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

if we're not discussing the details of this drama, Why is this called the Tea House?? Etippins (talk) 16:19, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

FWIW:Special:CA/John F. Lewis Lemonaka (talk) 11:48, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

"Erm" is not actually a word. It is something that certain people type when they have nothing substantive to say. Cullen328 (talk) 07:44, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Maybe it's just a disfluency... David10244 (talk) 08:34, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

I'm well aware that "Erm" is not a word. It's a slang. People use knowing that it's not a word for the same reason that they'd use, say, "wtf", knowing it's not a word. Among Us for POTUS (talk) 16:18, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Disingenuous, Cullen. Whether "erm" is a word or not, it has a prgamatic function - something like "I'm about to disagree, but I don't want to be to forthright about it". ColinFine (talk) 13:39, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

What does that even have to do with this conversation?? You adding that was more non substantive than the "Erm" itself.. Ogusokumushi (talk) 20:36, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

@Ogusokumushi I disagree; I think CF was right to mildly "slap back" (IMO). David10244 (talk) 06:18, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Not really. This is Wikipedia, not really the place for "slap backs". Correct me if I'm wrong though, I just thought the remark was unhelpful. Ogusokumushi (talk) 14:30, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Cullen's remark on the use of erm was unproductive, sounds vindictive, and I would've expected better from a Teahouse host. This has already gotten off-topic, so any further discussion on this particular matter should go to Wikipedia talk:Teahouse.

In any case, it seems other users like Hoary, Lemonaka, and Legoktm have provided helpful responses, which Among Us for POTUS seems to have found satisfactory. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:29, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Certainly new developments in spectroscopy are happening every year. There has been much development in applications and new techniques. DrGeorge22 (talk) 17:18, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

@DrGeorge22, the usual Wikipedia:WikiProject#Inactive_projects, probably. WP:REVIVE may be of interest. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:32, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

The main page is no mention that Argentina won the World Cup I tried to mention it on the talk page but It was removed 107.19.16.177 (talk) 18:49, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi IP user, welcome to the Teahouse. Your edits were reverted because you had suggested this at the wrong venue - please see WP:ITN/C for more details. Harobouri • 🎢 • 🏗️ (he/him • WP:APARKS) 18:53, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

In addition, it has already been nominated, so you may feel free to voice your opinion here. Harobouri • 🎢 • 🏗️ (he/him • WP:APARKS) 19:00, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

I thought I was donating to Greenpeace but somehow donated to Wikipedia. How can I get a refund. It was very misleading as thought I was on Greenpeace webpage 2A00:23C6:6A1E:B801:9020:D280:DBDD:201C (talk) 19:59, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Please contact donate@wikimedia.org for inquiries on this. Tropicalkitty (talk) 20:03, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi,

If I have required independent sources for an article, then, where should I put these on my Article body to establish notability. briefly, I want This Article's subject to be notable. so, May I have some examples to resolve this issue.? Thanks. Perfectodefecto (talk) 21:37, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

The sources should be placed directly after the content that they support. See WP:REFB for extra help. Theroadislong (talk) 21:56, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Submission declined on 14 November 2022 by Eagleash (talk).This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are: in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject) reliable secondary independent of the subject Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

I made jpg copies of the referenced sources (newspaper articles and documents sent and received) and put them on the scenic7creeks website as web pages so they could be referenced. Why aren't they reliable or in depth or independent of the subject? Scenic7creeks (talk) 19:20, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Because your website is unreliable by our definition, See WP:RS. - Roxy the dog 19:35, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

and the "article" was a copyvio thereof. G12 filed. Star Mississippi 22:13, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

You can reference physical documents. Nobody's stopping you from that. You can't reference your own website. casualdejekyll 19:38, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

@Scenic7creeks - Welcome to Wikipedia! Please read Referencing for beginners. casualdejekyll 19:40, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Courtesy link User:Scenic7creeks/sandbox. Theroadislong (talk) 19:40, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

(Ec)Your website besides being unreliable is violating the copyright of article publishers. Setting that aside, you need to cite the specific articles, not the links to your hosting of them. Then you need to read WP:PAID and WP:COI and comply with them. Plus request a change of your username. After all that, please read this guide and decide whether the subject meets Wikipedia definition of notability before resubmitting. Yes, it's alot but following all that will make your time here more pleasant and productiveSlywriter (talk) 19:43, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Search the "Wikipedia:How to create a page" (English) in Slovenia (slovenščina) langue. Anyone know where this page is? Regards, Wname1 (talk) 20:04, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia:How to create a page has links to other languages at the foot of the left-hand toolbar. The one you want is to sk:Pomoc:Ako vytvoriť nový článok. - David Biddulph (talk) 20:10, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

I mean this country https://sl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glavna_stran SL or sl not SK or sk https://sk.wikipedia.org . Where is it? Regards, Wname1 (talk) 20:31, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

There does not appear to be a corresponding page on that project, based on the list of linked pages. It's possible that a page has been created there but hasn't been linked across projects yet, but in that case editors here on en.wiki are not going to be much help in finding it. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:38, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, I missed the one letter difference between slovenčina and slovenščina. The latter doesn't have a direct equivalent of Wikipedia:How to create a page. Probably best to ask at their help desk. - David Biddulph (talk) 20:40, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

I can not find the help desk also on "sl." page. Anyone know where it is? :-) Regards, Wname1 (talk) 20:47, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Our WP:Help desk links to sl:Wikipedija:Forum za pomoč. - David Biddulph (talk) 20:51, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the good solution (Wikipedija:Forum za pomoč). Great would be "Wikipedia:How to create a page" in "sl." page to know? Wname1 (talk) 21:07, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

@Wname1 you are more than welcome to boldly create the Slovenian page for it. I don't speak Slovenian, but if useful, the Bulgarian page bg:Уикипедия:Вашата първа статия might be linguistically most similar. Otherwise, take a stab at translating from the English page. Keep in mind, that each language edition of Wikipedia has different policies and cultures though, so translation may not be super straight forward. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 23:06, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello,

Thank you so much for this space and help.

I'm seeking assistance to write about my coffee company located in Tanzanian (mainland) and Zanzibar (Island) which has gained a popularity and to bring more awareness as we proceed on coffee farming in 2023 in Zanzibar and produce Speciality Coffee, Liberica and finally open doors on coffee tourism in Zanzibar.

I would appreciate anyone willing to help.

Thank you,

Muntazir, Founder & CEO. 102.217.80.231 (talk) 20:36, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello Muntazir, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid that "to bring more awareness" is another way of saying "to promote us", and promotion is forbidden anywhere on Wikipedia.

If your company has been discussed in depth by people wholly unconnected with your company (and not prompted or fed information on behalf of your company), and published by reliable independent sources - and only if those criteria are met, see WP:NCORP - then Wikipedia could have an article about your company. The article would not belong to you, would not be controlled by you, would not be for your benefit except incidentally, would not necessarily say what you wanted it to say, and should be based almost entirely on what those independent sources have published about the company, not about what you or your associates say or want to say. (See WP:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing).

You are strongly discouraged from writing such an article, but not forbidden. However, writing an article successfully is difficult for a new editor, and much more difficult if you have a conflict of interest, as you have.

What I suggest you do is:

1. look for published sources wholly unconnected with you and your company that contain significant coverage of the company. They do not have to be in English, or online, but they do have to be published by somebody with a reputation for editorial control and fact checking. See WP:Golden rule.
2. If you cannot find at least three such sources, give up, as any further time and effort you spend on this is guaranteed to be wasted.
3. If you can find such sources, then there is a possibility of an article. If you wish to continue, you must make a declaration of your status as a paid editor - this is mandatory, and you really need to create an account to do this effectively.
4. Then read your first article to see how to proceed.

But my recommendation would be that you give up this project. If your company is notable, then at some time somebody will notice it and write an article about it.

One other possibility is to post at WT:WikiProject Tanzania, and see if anybody there is interested in working with you. ColinFine (talk) 23:38, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

I am an actor, director, and producer. How do I have a page created? People contact me all the time about creating a page for me but I want to make sure it's legit and that it's done right according to Wikipedia rules. How do I get this done? Mcgier (talk) 23:43, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Mcgier Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia has articles, not pages. This is an important distinction. Articles are typically written by independent editors wholly unconnected with the subject. If you meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person, someone will eventually take note of coverage of your career in independent reliable sources and write about you- but it will not be yours to control or dictate what appears there. An article about you is also not necessarily desirable.

Third parties often attempt to contact people and claim to offer Wikipedia editing services, but these have varying reputability, and many are scams. If you hire someone to write about you, do not hand over any money until you see the product. They can make no guarantees(such as writing an article that will not be deleted). They must also declare that you hired them, per the Terms of Use. 331dot (talk) 23:49, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, I'm a relatively new user who has been working on translating a few articles from Japanese Wikipedia to English. I've just hit autoconfirmed status today, which as far as I know allows me to create new articles, including articles that are primarily translations of articles from other Wikis. I've been using the Content Translation tool to work because it's 1000x more convenient to use than plain text editing and it's just sort of where Wikipedia first pushed me when I first started. However, publishing anything directly through this tool seems to be a privilege reserved exclusively by extended confirmed users (which I am a long ways away from); but I am allowed to "save the article as a draft", which results in the article just being published to my user page. My question is, how would I go about changing this draft to a "real" article without losing all the fancy Wikipedia formatting stuff? I'm aware there's also some tagging stuff relating to attribution I have to do as well since it's a translation of another Wiki's article, and I'm not ready to actually publish it just yet, I just want to know how I'll have to go about doing that when the time comes. Thanks a bunch! Abnormal Shrimp (talk) 05:11, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

@Abnormal Shrimp: See Wikipedia:So you made a userspace draft. Once the draft is ready for the "main" encyclopedia, it can be moved there, including the entire page history and all edit contents. Victor Schmidt (talk) 08:43, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Okay great that's just what I was looking for, thanks! Abnormal Shrimp (talk) 12:12, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

@Abnormal Shrimp: Some things to remember about translating Japanese article's into English so as to create a corresponding English Wikipedia article is WP:TFOLWP and WP:OTHERLANGS. Any English Wikipedia article you try and create will need to clearly meet WP:N for it to have a chance of surviving a deletion challenge. Non-English sources can be cited to establish Wikipedia notability, but they may be harder for reviewers to assess. Moreover, as someone who has a little experience on Japanese Wikipedia, the Japanese Wikipedia community doesn't seem as rigorous as the English Wikipedia one when it comes to trying to cite only WP:SECONDARY reliable sources. Any source that is a blog or otherwise user-generated is going to be more highly scrutinized on English Wikipedia and perhaps quickly discounted than perhaps it might be on Japanese Wikipedia. In addition, You might find WP:PRIMARY sources (like official websites) much harder to use on English Wikipedia than perhaps on Japanese Wikipedia in general, but they have pretty much zero value when it comes to establishing English Wikipedia notability. There are also WP:MOS differences between Japanese Wikipedia and English Wikipedia that you will also need to be aware of when translating into English. These aren't related to a subject's Wikipedia notability per se, but they may be mentioned by reviewers and cited as a reason for declining a draft if there are too many problems. So, it might be a good idea, if you haven't done so already, to take a look at WP:JAPAN because it provides quite a bit if information on how English Wikipedia articles about Japanese subjects are expected to be written; WT:JAPAN is also a good place to ask questions about such articles. — Marchjuly (talk) 09:26, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Wow, okay, that addresses a lot of other questions I had during the translation process as well! Multiple times I came across something that I wasn't sure how to move over/translate but I was sure there was probably a precedent for; now I know where to go to find out! Providing sources definitely kind of scares me as for one article in particular I'm nearly positive there won't be any English sources for it, but practically all the sources in the Japanese article are from books, and the article itself is in the Japanese "Good Article" category, so I'm hoping it won't just be deleted outright! Thank you for all of the information! Abnormal Shrimp (talk) 12:17, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

@Abnormal Shrimp, your sources must be WP:RS, but they don't have to be in English, see WP:NOENG. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:11, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

@Abnormal Shrimp: You should also be competent enough in a source’s original language to assess it both for reliability and WP:RSCONTEXT. It’s not a good idea to simply assume that the person who cited the source in the Japanese Wikipedia article knew what they were doing. If you can’t at least access a source yourself to verify it’s being cited properly, you probably shouldn’t use it. Others (particularly those who assess your drafts) are going to expect this of you and they’re going to ask you to clarify anything that they themselves are unable to verify. If you’re unable to do this sufficiently, the source may end up being discounted and removed. — Marchjuly (talk) 20:29, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for the headsup! In the case that I can't (without a great deal of effort) access any of these sources because they seem to exclusively be books and periodicals kept in various public/university libraries across the USA and Japan, what should I do? I mean, I could request to borrow one, get it, and then I would be able to verify personally for myself that the citations in the Japanese article are accurate, but then how would the person assessing my draft verify that? Would they just take me at my word or would they too find a copy of it and check? I thought maybe I could circumvent this issue somewhat by the fact that the original Japanese article meets Japanese Wikipedia's good article standards... But okay, I understand, this is a new English article I'm creating, so by principle I must be able to verify all of the sources I use. In the case that I cannot access any of them and the article goes entirely sourceless as a consequence... I suppose I just won't be able to publish it? Do you have any recommendations on how to find scans of Japanese history books and the like? Tried the National Diet of Japan's digital collection but they didn't have a majority of them. Sorry, I guess I'm kind of reaching here. Abnormal Shrimp (talk) 21:25, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

@Abnormal Shrimp you don't need to translate or port over ALL sources, you merely need to assess that there are enough sources to satisfy WP:Notability. As long as that's the case, it doesn't matter whether it's a pure translation, partial translation, or a fresh creation of an Article, that happens to also exist on Japanese Wikipedia. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 23:09, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Oh! So, I guess the article might get hit with a "needs additional citations" flag (seeing as I can't verify most of them this seems fair), but since there's at least verifiably non-trivial coverage on the topic, the article will at the very least be allowed to exist. At least that's what I gather from WP:Notability. Great! I could be misinterpreting something else here, but I'll go ahead and just finish the translation and then cross whatever other bridges there may be when I come to them. Thank you! Abnormal Shrimp (talk) 00:51, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Maybe just focus on the content which you're able to verify. Don't try to create the article WP:BACKWARDS. Figure out the three best sources you're able to verify and then develop the draft based on them per WP:THREE. If those sources are sufficient to establish the subject's English Wikipedia's notability, then you can always expand the article at a later date as more acceptable sources are found. If you include lots of unverifiable content and cite lots of questionable sources because you mistakenly believe that "more is better", reviewers might be more inclined to decline the draft because the extra unsourced or poorly referenced clutter might make hard for them to assess the subject's notability. If you're only going to be citing Non-English sources that are hard to access, you might want to clarify them on the draft's talk page to aid others in assessing them. Provide as much information as you can about the source per WP:CITEHOW and describe it how provides WP:SIGCOV of the subject. Quoting the original source material might even be helpful. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:25, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

User talk:Celestina007/Archive 1 is an hidden archive. How to add it to main talkpage formally without vandalizing? Pravin555777 (talk) 03:27, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

If I understand you problem correctly you can add a link to User talk:Celestina007/Archive 1 on your talk page. --Bduke (talk) 03:48, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

@Bduke - I think they want to link that archive page to Celestina007's main talk page (they have been inactive since this May). Harobouri • 🎢 • 🏗️ (he/him • WP:APARKS) 04:15, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi Pravin555777. Why are you worried about one of Celestina007's archived user talk pages? Celestina007 hasn't edited Wikipedia since May, but perhaps their user talk page is set up the way they want it to be set up. As Archer1234 pointed out in the edit summary they left when reverting the edit you made to User talk:Celestina007, it's not your user talk page so it's not really something you need to be concerned about unless there's a serious policy violation involved. I'm also going to point out that all of your edits to Wikipedia with your Pravin555777 account seemed to be focused on Celestina007's user talk page. That's an odd page for any user tto be focusing on, but it's especially odd for a new user such as yourself to be worrying such a page about unless there's a specific policy-based reason for doing so. The very first edit you made to Wikipedia was to randomly remove content from Celestina007's user talk page, and that edit was also subsequently reverted. So, maybe it's time for you to move on to doing something else and just leave Celestina007's talk page be. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:49, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: The behavior you describe sounds very much like a second account was created because the first account is inaccessible for some reason (like a lost password). ~Anachronist (talk) 06:23, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

That's fine, but that's something Pravin555777 should clarify if they plan on continuing to try and edit Celestina007's talk page. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:27, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Dear Ladies and Gentlemen,

I have been notified today (18th Decmber 2022) that the Wikipedia page "Federation of International Sports Table Football (FISTF)" with all its content (100% deletion) is therefore no more readable. I was not able to find the page anymore. Why is the page gone? Reason? Who deleted all the content? Justification? We have had in the past a person troubeling the FISTF content with wrong information and 'teasing' to annoy!

Kind request to Wikipedia: "Please be so kind as to restore 'FISTF' content. I thank everyone in advance for the welcoming help and support. It will be appriciated if we can then install a lock to FISTF so that damage can be avoided.

kind regards sporttischfussball „Sporttischfussball“ (talk) 16:52, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

The article was replaced with a redirect in this edit, with the summary: Wikipedia:Database reports/Pages containing too many maintenance templates: boldly replace article with redirect to Sports table football as this org doesn't seem notable and the article content is unmanageably dense). CC @Duckmather ■ ∃ Madeline ⇔ ∃ Part of me ; 16:58, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

@Sporttischfussball: The article was in a truly awful state. It looked like a page run by a sports organisation to publicise when competitions have been held, and who's been elected to the organisation's governing body. Since Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not a club social page, what it should have been is a brief account of this federation and its history, as seen through the eyes of independent sources (i.e. if the only people who write about he FISTF are the FISTF themselves, then unfortunately they are not a suitable subject for a Wikipedia article). The general references in the article were mostly to the game itself, i.e. Subbuteo, which has its own article. I'm not surprised the article got blanked; it needed a complete re-write, and in the state that it was, would unfortunately have been a valid candidate for outright deletion. But do feel free to re-write it as a proper, and correctly sourced encyclopaedic article! Elemimele (talk) 17:22, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the kind and open answer. „Sporttischfussball“ (talk) 06:35, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Pocket FM - This article has been put down twice citing promotion. However, this is completely factual citing references for each and every facts. Need someone to help me out. Rahulnag07 (talk) 02:25, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

You have asked this at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk too. Wikipedia is not a place to merely tell about something, Wikipedia summarises what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a topic, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability.

Theroadislong (talk) 02:40, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Would appreciate a straight and to-the-point response pertaining to the problem areas. Even I have gone through the policies, and even I understand, Wikipedia is not about writing random things. The draft has references from reliable sources from all the news website, and still it was put down. Hence, I would really want to understand what I may have missed. May I request you to point to the mistakes that needs corrections. Thanks. Rahulnag07 (talk) 03:18, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Rahulnag07. Your draft throws out the word "global" in the first sentence as if that word has any encyclopedic value in the 21st century. It doesn't. It is nothing but a corporate buzzword. Your first reference is to Forbes which is notorious for publishing lightly rewritten press releases as so-called "news" coverage. Experienced reviewers know this. They are volunteers and do not want to waste time on poorly referenced drafts. The word "blockbuster" is another red flag for reviewers. That pretty much hollers that the draft is not neutrally written."Blockbuster" is an overtly promotional term devoid of encyclopedic value. A sentence like It is also exploring IP licensing for its audio-series with leading production houses and video OTTs. is an attempt to predict the future and what the heck does OTTs mean? I have never heard that jargon acronym before and the Wikilink leads to a disambiguation page, which is really bad practice. You describe the company's revenue as It has recently surpassed US$25 milliion as if that is an impressive figure. It isn't and you misspelled "million". You describe "funding rounds" as if that makes this company notable although every startup goes through funding rounds, and the dollar figures are not impressive, but you try to inflate the importance by making the unreferenced assertion that the investors are marquee investors, which is blatant puffery and marketing language. After reading your draft, I am left wondering "why is this company distinctive or interesting?" and ending up not knowing. Cullen328 (talk) 09:22, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

This is useful and really helpful. Thanks for this Rahulnag07 (talk) 08:58, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi, a recurring vandal has once again been editing the Sandbanks page. Could someone with the ability please take a look and revert the edits from the last few hours? Thank you. Dontgiveupthedayjob (talk) 18:10, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Handled. Consider installing Twinkle which makes reverting to a specific revision easier, among other things. ■ ∃ Madeline ⇔ ∃ Part of me ; 18:41, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks you for the help, I've installed it and will give it a go in future! Dontgiveupthedayjob (talk) 22:31, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Whenever i'm on WP:RCP i use something called twinkle which makes RCP much easier, reverting vandals is just a singe click, highly reccomend.

OGWFP (talk) 20:58, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Not vandalism. User:EncyclopediaUK is editing in good faith on whether notable people (Wikilinked names, in blue) live or have lived on Sandbanks from personal knowledge as a resident. I recommended to E that the proper place for the dispute is the Talk page of the article. David notMD (talk) 22:14, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi thanks for the help, I referred to it as vandalism because of the talk on the article page and because it has been going on for a few years under different usernames (variations on encyclopaedia) and IP addresses. Hopefully it's good faith and they take your advice. Dontgiveupthedayjob (talk) 22:29, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Yes I've spent years trying to correct the mistakes. I used citations and references etc many times.

Wikipedia just reverts to the old, incorrect, information as if the legacy info is reliable (it is not and the citations do not even support the legacy info if you read them).

You will note it is the only thing I have ever edited on Wiki. It is literally too difficult to correct inaccuracies.

• Harry Redknapp used to live here. He moved to Canford Cliffs. This info was removed by some admin dope who doesnt know who Harry Redknapp is ("UKs top 10 most famous people").
• Graeme Sounness never lived on Sandbanks, he lives in Lilliput.
• Geoff Boycott used to live on Sandbanks. (heard of him?).
• Jamie Redknapp never ever lived on Sandnbanks. His parents did.

I placed citations before. They got wiped. I'm basically giving up now and cancelling my DD to Wiki.

Fixing a single page is a sisyphean task and has become pointless. EncyclopediaUK (talk) 22:51, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

I've added Geoffrey Boycott for you with reliable sources. If you have reliable sources for any other person feel free to add them. Unfortunately first hand experience doesn't count. Any chat or comments can go on the talk page. Dontgiveupthedayjob (talk) 23:33, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

oh and Celia and Nick Sawyer do live here. They are lovely. EncyclopediaUK (talk) 22:52, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

@EncyclopediaUK Please don't call another editor a "dope". That is considered a "personal attack" (see wp:NPA). And anyone can remove content, not just admins. I consider myself to not be a dope, but I have never heard of any of those people. Maybe because I live in the U.S. But whether or not anyone has heard of those people is not relevant. As mentioned, it takes a reliable, published reference, which you must cite, in order to "fix" a page. Don't get mad at editors who remove unreferenced information -- they are following Wikipedia's rules. Thanks. David10244 (talk) 09:27, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Rules: No names added unless existing Wikipedia article about those persons. No names added unless confirmed by a reference. If there is a dispute, i.e., one refs says lives on, another says lives near, debate on Talk page. David notMD (talk) 23:06, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi,

My classmates and I have created a Draft Draft:Dylan O'Donnell for an Educational project. We are now waiting for its submission and trying to improve it thanks to the help of other editors.

At the top of the article, there is a comment written by an editor saying that there is a redirect from the title of this Draft and suggests asking about redirects and hatnotes here.

Any advice or help is accepted. Thanks.

LIUC.Camilla03 (talk) 09:52, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

If your draft is accepted the reviewer should sort out the disambiguation from Dylan O'Donnell depending on whether or not one of the targets can be regarded as the primary topic. - David Biddulph (talk) 09:57, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi,

I recently uploaded some images on commons while editing this page. One of the images which is a page 2 of a series of images was marked for deletion. It is a screenshot of participants of an event...I facilitated the event, took the images with a software, and uploaded it. I have also uploaded quite a number of screenshot in the past without an issue. I'm wondering if there's a rule about screenshot I'm not aware of, please share link if any. Olugold (talk) 07:13, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

@Olugold, someone here may have a good answer, but this sort of question fits better on Commons. Consider asking the editor who marked your picture:[13]. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:49, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks @Gråbergs Gråa Sång for your swift response. Olugold (talk) 10:18, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi. I am really struggling on writing an article about a person because there are not much third party sources about him. Please help how I can get that person's biography published still. Madona Jace (talk) 00:46, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. Which article are you referrin’ to? Your deleted user page? Sarrail (talk) 00:50, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

hi @Madona Jace and welcome to the Teahouse! the first thing you absolutely have to do is to read and understand the policies Conflict of interest and Paid editing, and disclose your status as a paid editor somewhere.

I am unable to view what your article contained as it has been deleted, however the given deletion reason seems to be that it was deleted due to "misuse of Wikipedia as a web host". keep in mind the purpose of Wikipedia is not to promote people or anything in any way, but to be a factual, neutral encyclopedia with equally factual, neutral articles (which means you cannot promote your subject at all - you have to describe them objectively as if you are a detached researcher, not working for pay, writing about what you have read elsewhere)

i think that could be a good way to write an article however. gather up as many good reliable sources as you can that are independent from your subject, gather up the facts and information that are stated in these sources, then write only basing off these sources without adding in your personal knowledge of things.

if by "there are not much third party sources about him" means there's only just one or no sources, it might not be notable enough, which means he isn't eligible for an article yet and you cannot turn your draft into an article. perhaps it may just be too soon however, and if more sources cover him he would be eligible for one.

unfortunately, I am not an article writer, however I believe someone who does could add more regarding this subject. happy wditing! 💜  melecie  talk - 01:45, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

I very much disagree with the deletion of this page. The subject clearly meets WP:NPOLITICIAN as a two term member of the House of Representatives of the Philippines. The editor made a common beginner's error in writing their draft on their userpage. As a new editor in 2009, I drafted an article on my talk page. In my opinion, the correct thing would have been to move the user page to draft space, and give the editor some advice about how to improve the draft. Pinging Fancy Refrigerator who tagged the page for deletion and Jimfbleak who deleted it. Cullen328 (talk) 02:16, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Yes please. Please help me improve my article. I am willing to change the tone of my article if it really gave an impression that I was promoting the subject. I am indeed new to editing and publishing in wikipedia so I did not know how to maximize interface nor was I an expert in its policies. If you would allow me to publish the same article and help me edit it, it would be really helpful to me as well. Thanks. Madona Jace (talk) 02:42, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Here is the official Philippines government page about this congressman. Cullen328 (talk) 02:44, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Given the circumstances, can't we just treat this as a WP:REFUND request? Slywriter (talk) 02:50, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

There's another discussion related to this currently ongoing at the Help Desk. It might be best to close both discussions and move then to the OP's user talk page to avoid confusion and possible conflicting advice. It would also probably be a good idea for the OP to explain things like WP:PROUD, WP:LUC and WP:OWN to whomever is paying them to make sure the subject of the article understands that they will have practically zero editorial control over any article created about them. Finally and perhaps unfortunately for the OP, if the subject clearly meets WP:NPOL, there's no need for the subject to pay anyone to create a Wikipedia article about them and there's no added editorial control gained by paying someone to do so. Of course, the OP should be as upfront as possible about this with whomever's paying them, but that's up to the OP. The OP, even if they're paid to create the article and are able to get it accepted, should understand that they too will have zero editorial control over it once it's been created and they too (like the subject of the article) will be expected to not edit the article directly, except under certain specific conditions. The OP should also realize that others aren't very likely going to help create an article that the OP is expecting to be paid for creating. -- Marchjuly (talk) 03:08, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Marchjuly, this is an encyclopedia and we should be actively striving to have biographies of every single member of the House of Representatives of the Philippines. Any bureaucratic obstacles that impede that goal should be swept aside under the fundamental founding principle of Ignore all rules. Would anybody with any good sense be trying to delete content about members of the United States House of Representatives or the British parliament or the legislative bodies of Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, France, Sweden, Spain or the Netherlands? Why is it OK to delete content about a Filipino legislator instead of fixing it? I just don't get it. There is no ban on paid editing even if some editors wish there was. Cullen328 (talk) 09:08, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Just to clarify a few things about my previous post since quite a bit of it seems to have been misunderstood. First, I'm not against paid editing as long as it's done in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines. Next, I'm not against articles about Filipino legislators. I didn't delete the OP's user page or even post anywhere that it should've been deleted. If the content on the user page was placed there by mistake (as article drafts sometimes are), there's no reason why it shouldn't be restored into the draft namespace or as a user space draft so that the OP can continue to work on it. Obviously, I can't do that since I'm not an administrator, but there's no reason why the administrator who deleted the page or some other administrator shouldn't be able to do so. If the subject of the draft is clearly notable per WP:N, then there's also no reason why an article about them can't be created. At the same time though, there's also no really need for anyone to pay for such an article to be created, but they can spend their money as they please. What I was trying to point out to OP (perhaps badly) is some things about Wikipedia that they might not be aware of. Whatever agreement the OP has with their client about creating this article is between the two. If the OP is promising things to their client that are contrary to relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines, then that's once again between the two. Wikipedia is in no way obligated to honor any agreement between the OP and their client. So, the OP and their client should realize that any article that is created will not be the property of the subject of the article, the OP or their client. There will no way that any of the three will be able to prevent others from editing said article once it enters the mainspace. Article content will be assessed entirely on whether it's in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines, not whether it's what the OP, their client or the subject want. That's all I was trying to point out to the OP since they and their client might mistakenly think that they will be able to do with the article as they please once it's in the mainspace. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:05, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

I appreciate your advice on how to improve my article on Draft:Yaoi hole, which was declined on the grounds of notability.

• I know there are not many instances where the term "Yaoi hole" is defined in terms of notability, but I assume that gender expression in YAOI is a much debated topic. I have added some sources, I wish you could tell me how many sources are needed.

• I received a comment that there is a sense of WP:SYNTH in some parts of the article. I have addressed the tags I recieved, and I appreciate your letting me know if there is anything in the rest of the article that you feel is a synth.

• There was a comment of concern about the large citation on classification. The tree diagrams in the article were created by countless people on the Internet as Internet memes, copy-pastes, or templates, and the text was all completed in 2003. Kaneda did not process the text, merely introduced the text. As I understand it, there is no copyright on Internet memes. I thought I incorporated the story of how the tree diagram was created into the article, but my explanation may have been insufficient. Should I strengthen the explanation in the article, or include it as a note, or let me know if you have a better idea.

• I think my draft is probably rough around the edges. However, since the English version of the Yaoi article is substantial in terms of the amount of text and sources, if I had the help of the Yaoi editors, I think my draft could be refined. I would like to enlist their help, for example, would it be permissible to ask them to proofread the draft in Yaoi's talkpage? Also, if there is another appropriate place for the request, please let me know.狄の用務員 (talk) 12:56, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

@狄の用務員, Wikipedia attempts to have an encyclopedic tone in articles, and to have structured articles. The tone you have used seems more fan-oriented and kind of a discursive, "inside baseball" approach, not suited to the general reader. Initially, I thought the hole was part of a ukulele. Later, I thought it had something to do with human anatomy. In my opinion, the concept should clearly be described as a gay porn manga trope.

Using wikilinks to turn a word blue so that readers may understand it is highly recommended if some of your terms have English Wikipedia articles.[[ ]] surrounding a word makes it blue, if an article exists.

Finally, there may not be sufficient research on this topic to generate sufficient reliable sources on which to base the article. Quisqualis (talk) 07:19, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice. I understand that there is a lot of room for improvement in the overall tone of the article, although I think some of the items in the article are worth sharing. I will look for quality sources and try to improve the article. Thank you very much. 狄の用務員 (talk) 13:10, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

How do I make 1996 Otokoto Riots or Ikeji festival into good Wikipedia's good article format? Pravin555777 (talk) 03:02, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

You nominate it, and then someone will review it per the criteria for Good Articles. DS (talk) 03:14, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

But what improvements should I make? Pravin555777 (talk) 03:24, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Pravin555777, welcome to the Teahouse. Either you can submit one of the articles to peer review (PR) where an uninvolved editor can help you improve the article (layout, grammar etc)., or you can nominate them for good article (GA) status where a GA reviewer can help improve the article too - they can put your review on hold for about a week (or so) to give you time to fix errors in the article before consideration for GA. Additionally, if the article needs a copyedit, you may request a copyedit at the Guild of Copy Editors. Hope this helps - Harobouri • 🎢 • 🏗️ (he/him • WP:APARKS) 04:03, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Pravin555777. The first thing I noticed is the phrase "brutal murder" at the beginning of the article. I do not think that there are any kind, gentle or friendly murders, so I fail to see what the enhancer "brutal " adds to an encyclopedia article. The neutral point of view applies to every article, even those about murders. Cullen328 (talk) 09:20, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Reading further, the article is filled with non-neutral and sensationalistic allegations. It needs a major rewrite. Cullen328 (talk) 09:24, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Pravin555777, the site hosting the source in reference 8 (www.theawarenessngr.com) at 1996 Otokoto Riots appears to have been hijacked. An Internet Archive version is available here. Cordless Larry (talk) 09:27, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Now fixed. Cordless Larry (talk) 09:37, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Both articles are on the short side of what might be considered for GA (both are also currently Start rated). If there are not more details and refs to add, there may be no way to make these longer, and shortness per se is not a disqualifier. Perhaps improve as best you can and self-decide to upgrade rating to C-Class. David notMD (talk) 13:45, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

This isn't in reference to anything I've done lately. Just wondering if it is appropriate to comment on other people's AFD's votes on an AFD nomination I started, or if that would be too argumentative. Dawkin Verbier (talk) 11:32, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

It is absolutely permitted, and in my experience, useful, for the nominator to make assertions, ask questions, and refute arguments in defense of their nomination in a formal process like AfD. Sometimes when I'm forced to nominate for deletion, it's difficult to encapsulate all my objections neatly in the nomination statement. Often another user raises a point or asks a question which deserves further discussion. I try to refrain from dominating my own nominating discussions with too much comment. But absolutely permitted. Thanks for the useful question. BusterD (talk) 11:45, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Comments usually prefaced with Comment and in some instances farther indented with ** to indicate being a comment on a previous vote or comment. David notMD (talk) 13:57, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi,

I have resubmitted these(Draft:ESPNcricinfo Awards and Draft:ESPN World Fame 100) 2 articles. But, I have doubts for its notability. May I know, does these articles contain enough independent sources to establish notability.? if not, then please guide me. What should I do then.. Thank You. Perfectodefecto (talk) 14:10, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

@Perfectodefecto - The AfC backlog is currently at 4 months (although it is not likely your draft will take that long to review, it is possible.) Please wait patiently, as there are many other submissions to review.
Notability is determined by WP:GNG - which essentially states that something is notable if it's received significant coverage in multiple reliable sources that are independent of the subject. (There are many little exceptions but that applies to almost all cases.) The easiest way to prove to others that something is notable is WP:THREE - what are your three best sources, as in the most reliable sources which provide the most coverage? Finding the answer to that question often makes the review process much easier. casualdejekyll 15:56, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

@casualdejekyll Thank You so much.

But, still I have one more doubt.. suppose, I have selected those 3 best independent sources which establish notability. then, where should I put these on the article body and how should I mention them so that, these will be highlighted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Perfectodefecto (talk • contribs)

Perfectodefecto, you should be able to leave them as a comment on the draft. If you are unable, drop them here and I'll add them as a comment on your behalf. Slywriter (talk) 16:26, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Slywriter Thank You so much. I got it.. it should be AFC Comment on the top of the article. right? now, I can add those best sources to the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Perfectodefecto (talk • contribs)

Perfectodefecto, yep click comment, enter them in and submit. Slywriter (talk) 16:40, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Please see this user's contributions Special:Contributions/209.68.99.104. He is doing too much vandalism. ​​​​​​​𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝟕𝟐𝟖🧙‍♂️^{Let's Talk !} 17:47, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

 Note: This has already been reported at WP:AIV. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:09, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

why some times I saw a mistake on Wikipedia but if I correct that mistake, it will be deleted and I check out in many websites is all the same as I change.TheAutumns (talk) 16:26, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Could you make your point clearer? Are you saying that you edited an article, it was reverted yet in other references on the internet that use WP as their source retains your edits but not the original WP article? If that is the question it could be just a case that the other internet citation has yet to catch up with the most recent edit.2603:8000:D300:D0F:A4A9:1E1:30A5:4340 (talk) 16:57, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi TheAutumns. If you mean that your edit was reverted even though many websites agree with you then it was probably reverted because you didn't include a reliable source in the edit. See Help:Referencing for beginners. We can say more if you give an example. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:41, 19 December 2022 (UTC)