I'm working on an article that was reviewed and needs further revisions based on the sources available. Can sources be deemed inadequate if they are paywalled? And are paywalled sources still considered when evaluating an article? ESGenthusiast (talk) 12:30, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's perfectly allowed to use paywalled sources, and often the best sources are difficult to access, either because they are paywalled or because they are only available in print. WP:PUBLISHED and WP:RSC are relevant here. That said, if important sources are hard to access then you might have to wait longer to find a reviewer. Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 12:40, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@ESGenthusiast See also WP:PAYWALLED. Many long-term editors (and reviewers) are members of The Wikipedia Library and hence have access to such sources. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:42, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ESGenthusiast, I agree. On Wikipedia, also, we have Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request (or WP:RX for short) specifically to request another editor to send you material that you don't have access to. So using paywalled or offline sources is very much a part of the proccess. Good luck, Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 05:40, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to cite "The Encyclopedia of Mammals" so found another article that cited it to see how it's done, but that raised some questions. Then checked WorldCat to gather more data. Here's the info I have, followed by my questions. my book = my copy of the mentioned book; Mammal = Mammal article (book mentioned in Further Reading but I assume the format should be the same as cited); WorldCat = info from that cite.

my book has:  edited by David Macdonald, assistant editor Sasha Norris

Mammal has:  MacDonald DW, Norris S

WorldCat has:  authors:  David W. Macdonald, Sasha Norris

my book has: this edition published in 2006, copyright 2001, 1st published 2001, reprinted 2002, 2006

Mammal has:  2006, 3rd edition

WorldCat has:  2006, copyright 2001

My book has just the 1st name while others have 1st & 2nd initials or 1st name & 2nd initial. (I know capitalization is wrong in Mammal article.) That's correct info but that's not what is on the book. How should I list the name? My book lists them as editors, others list them as authors. Does this matter? How can I list as editor/assistant editor while using the Cite form.

It looks like the help files say if a book is reprinted (without major changed), I should use the original publication date. If so, looks like the Mammal article is wrong. But do I list the reprinted date anyplace?

As an added complication, this book was also published as a new edition in 2006, but looking at the ISBN, the Mammal article is using the same edition as my book. Sunandshade (talk) 21:03, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sunandshade: Welcome to the Teahouse! Per WP:SAYWHEREYOUREADIT, use the information in your copy of the mentioned book if that's what you used for your Wikipedia edits. Online resources may be incorrect, or different editions may have slightly different credits. You can use {{cite encyclopedia}} for references. GoingBatty (talk) 21:36, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GoingBatty Sunandshade "Online resources may be incorrect" just like with articles/pages/websites on films and TV shows.

I have found countless films and TV shows which have had incorrect release dates by a year or two, in most places online, as most places get their production information from IMDB, if they don't have a Wikipedia article.

However I've also found occasional films and TV shows, which have been incorrect by 3, 4, 5+ years too.

I recently stumbled one which was listed on IMDB as being released in 2001 as a film.

However it was actually a 2 episode TV series which was released in the year 2000, so I've corrected. Danstarr69 (talk) 13:36, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Editorial versus authorial contribution to books certainly can be an important distinction to make, for example when the book is a volume of chapters by different authors. If it's something like an encyclopaedia, usually the editors are responsible for most of the entries as well, and sometimes the entries aren't even individually credited, so calling the editors "authors" is ok.

Worldcat is often sloppy about this distinction, as is google books. (An added complication for google books is that if a Wikipedia citation to a google books source has been generated by a script instead of manually entered, it will always misattribute authorship to the editor(s), even if the google books page itself has correct attribution.)

As to the first name versus initials thing, it sounds like the Mammal article is using Vancouver style referencing, which omits every part of a person's first and middle names except for the initial letters, which it includes smooshed together without any punctuation. It's very common in some scientific fields. You can achieve this affect by setting the |veditors= parameter to |veditors=Macdonald DW, Norris S. If you cite their full names like |editor1=David W. MacDonald|editor2=Sasha Norris, it's altogether possible another editor will change the citation style to Vancouver in order to comply with WP:CITEVAR, so it's not something to worry about too much.

For the publication date bit, you can use |date=2006|orig-date=2001. Reprints from the same publisher usually retain the same pagination.

Online resources may be incorrect is an important bit of wisdom to keep in mind. At some point, any database was populated by a human, or by an algorithm. Both commit errors. Folly Mox (talk) 12:41, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Folly Mox "Vancouver Style?"

It's called proper English, like the example I've just used by putting the question mark inside the speech marks, rather than outside like Americans would.

I'm constantly correcting things like that on IMDB, especially now than IMDB has started allowing people who use capital letters and initialisms in their names to be added as they are, which most people with stage names like rappers use. Although for some reason it can sometimes takes multiple attempts to get a nickname which contains capital letters in random places to be added.

For example, a few months ago it took me 5+ attempts to add some aliases to a group of rappers from Birmingham. I can't remember the name of the group, however I know that the groups name could be abbreviated (like 1D instead of One Direction), and they all used the groups acronym in their solo rap names occasionally.

The same goes for titles eg Mr, Mrs, Dr etc, however even they are occasionally overruled by the American admins, so you sometimes have to go back and correct them again, as that's how they are listed on screen in British productions, and is what their own guidelines say should be done. Danstarr69 (talk) 00:55, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Insofar as there is not consensus on what "proper English" is, any argument which begins "It's called proper English" has been lost in that first sentence. The rest is just a parade of prejudice and opinion. --Tagishsimon (talk) 01:02, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This section is almost exclusively a copy and paste from a website called EarlyChristian Writings.com.

In this instance, it is best to confirm the sources (linked here), or just the website? Or would you suggest basic reformatting the wall of text?

Thanks! Doctor165 (talk) 21:26, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Doctor165: Welcome to the Teahouse! I suggest rewriting and summarizing what the website says, and then adding a reference for the web page. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 21:38, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Doctor165, thank you very much for this report. Earwig's tool agrees with you and reports a high likelihood of copy violation, with the similar passages highlighted.

Note that copying may occur in either direction; that is, sometimes websites copy from Wikipedia. Once it's established that we copied from them, the copyrighted material must be removed from the article, and the record of it in the page history must be permanently expunged from Wikipedia; any editor can do the former, and an administrator can delete the old versions from the history page.

The important thing to do, is to signal right at the article using Template:Copyvio that the material is suspected to be a copy violation, which will signal administrators to have a look at it and make a determination, and take the appropriate action. I have added the template; you can see the result now at Barnabas#Alleged writings.

Whether or not you choose to rewrite or summarize the former text is up to you (please don't remove the template, if you do), but by far the most important step is to signal the suspected violation. There are a couple of steps after that (logging the notice, and notifying the contributor) and I'll take care of those. If it turns out that the copying went in the other direction, the investigating admin will simply remove the template. Thanks again for signaling this potentially serious problem, and happy editing! Mathglot (talk) 23:23, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've had an account for a couple of weeks, and I'm concerned on how to register, as I can't edit certain articles. If you have an answer, please tell me and thank you. Oo-rah! the marines are here (talk) 01:37, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Oo-rah! the marines are here: There's no need to register any more than you already have – you do have an account. Some pages are protected from editing for a variety of reasons, but you can still contribute! If you see a page that you would like to edit but that is protected (this will be shown by a lock icon at the top right of the article), you can submit an edit request detailing exactly what you would like changed (ideally describing exactly where you would like the change to be and exactly what the changed text should read instead) so that someone can make the edit on your behalf. You might want to use the edit request wizard to help with this. After making more edits (10 for most, then 500 for essentially all the rest) you will automatically be given the ability to edit protected articles. Tollens (talk) 01:43, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Then how come I am still blocked from editing an article that only registered users can edit? Oo-rah! the marines are here (talk) 04:21, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind, I found the answer. Oo-rah! the marines are here (talk) 04:21, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(EC) Explained at Wikipedia:Why create an account?, once you have had an account for 4 days and made 10 edits, you can edit semi-protected pages (gray lock), create new articles, rename pages and upload files. Once you have had an account for 30 days, and have made at least 500 edits, you can edit extended protected pages (blue lock). Right now you have made 2 edits. --Tagishsimon (talk) 01:45, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Oo-rah! the marines are here (talk) 04:22, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Oo-rah! the marines are here: The table at Wikipedia:Protection policy#Comparison table might be a helpful summary for you. GoingBatty (talk) 04:31, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My account has 10 edits and is 4 days old, but I still can't edit gray lock pages. Oo-rah! the marines are here (talk) 03:05, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Oo-rah! the marines are here: It appears your account is indeed autoconfirmed. Maybe try again. Tollens (talk) 03:10, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:"I'm a sinner. He is my guarantor" - a Bangladeshi folk song Mozammalhoquetipu (talk) 07:07, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The draft now appears to have been reviewed. Tollens (talk) 10:25, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

FYI

 – Merging to section above. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:42, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My article on "I'm a sinner. He is my guarantor" song has been declined. If I could get help from an expert on how to improve my article and specifically in which are to improve, I would be grateful.

As per my knowledge, I have used reliable secondary sources and the subject deserves a Wikipedia article.

Also I like to know, if I myself being the traslator can not write an article. Is it strictly prohibited ?

Looking forward to the help Mozammalhoquetipu (talk) 12:07, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Mozammalhoquetipu Your Talk Page already has a message about your conflict of interest. You are still allowed to create a draft and use the articles for creation process, as you have been doing. The main issue in this case is not your COI but the fact that the draft does not demonstrate that the song is wikinotable. To do that, you need three or so reliable sources that are completely independent of anyone associated with it and discuss it at some length. See this summary. The song cannot inherit its notability from the "legendary" film in which it was originally used. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:44, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Responder

I am thankful for your above detailed advice.

I have begun to enjoy the wikipedia article writing.

As per your above kind advice, I am trying to improve the article.

Sincerely

Mozammal Hoque Tipu

Literary Translator of music Mozammalhoquetipu (talk) 11:03, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Experts

I want to know how to edit the headline of a draft. I can edit the body of my article. But when I want to edit the draft head line, I don't find any option to do that.

Can anybody help me how to do that ?

Sincerely

Mozammal Hoque Tipu Mozammalhoquetipu (talk) 11:49, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Mozammalhoquetipu If by "headline" you mean the title, then this can be fixed if your draft is accepted. By Wikipedia's manual of style, song titles would be italicised and this one doesn't need the extra information about its being from Bangladesh. I suggest you don't worry about this: your draft is very far from being acceptable in its current state as it fails to demonstrate that the song is notable enough to have an article. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:15, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Michael D. Turnbull: Just going to point out here that song titles shouldn't be italicised, but enclosed in quotation marks. In the case of article titling, leaving it unitalicised is the standard (cf. Let It Go). —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:52, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi everyone I was wondering if an experienced editor could assist me.

I have written a section on the attitudes that the Japanese and the Americans had towards one another on the Pacific War page as this was missing from the article however I have had feedback suggesting it is too essay like. After the initial feeback of this I redrafted my work and resubmitted to present a more neutral work summarizing what historians have said about the issue however it has been declined again for the same reason? I am not sure how to make the section less 'essay like' as I personally don't think it reads like an essay at all. Please can someone point me in the right direction and help me see where I have gone wrong as the feedback is very vague. Thank you Goldenl03 (talk) 13:15, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Goldenl03, it seems from your edit history that you have never edited Pacific War, though you did once edit its talk page.. What edits are you referring to? Maproom (talk) 14:52, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

He is refering to Draft:U.S Attitudes towards the Japanese, @Maproom NW1223<Howl at me•My hunts> 15:07, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes sorry I am referring to my draft I sent for review Draft:U.S Attitudes towards the Japanese

Goldenl03 (talk) 16:17, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Goldenl03 I edited it slightly for format. Given your title, consider adding sections for after WWII. Yes, this would be a radically different article, and perhaps outside your interest in the topic. David notMD (talk) 17:18, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Skimming the draft, I don't see any significant difference between it and Anti-Japanese sentiment in the United States or Japan–United States relations. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 23:16, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I just got an update regarding the bidding race for "Coyote vs. ACME":

On December 7 and 8, it was announced that Netflix reportedly offered less than half of the film's budget cost and was turned down, and Paramount had made a bid with a theatrical release plan for 2024. Amazon remains interested, and Sony and Apple have still not made any bids.

According to the film's budget, someone needs to make a bid that is higher than the film's original budget: 70 million dollars

Netflix could have a second chance if they can offer a better deal than $70M.

The goal of the bidding race is to go higher than 70 million dollars.

Here are my sources: https://puck.news/newsletter_content/what-im-hearing-shari-ellison-redbird-paramount-2/

https://deadline.com/2023/12/coyote-vs-acme-paramount-amazon-contenders-1235658240/

And that's should be it. Can anyone add it in there? DukeyDukeyToo (talk) 18:00, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No. WP does not do running commentaries on commercial affairs. --Tagishsimon (talk) 18:12, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hullo peoples. Apologies for asking questions two days in a row, but I feel like I need help with this, because it's about the copyright of an image I want to upload. This image is a miniature California flag from this website, and I want to add it so that I can use it for a top icon on my user page. The license for this image (along with all other flag images on the website) is under the "Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial-Share Alike 2.0 UK: England & Wales License". I'm using the Commons Upload Wizard for this, and under the "Enter a different license in wikitext format" section, I supposedly have to add a template for the license, but I'm not sure where I would find such a template. I was hoping that someone here would be able to procure such a UK copyright license template. That's all. Thanks! Antrotherkus (Talk to me!) 19:40, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You cannot upload such a file to use on your userpage. It is not freely licenced. Files that are not freely licenced are only allowed to be added to mainspace articles. NW1223<Howl at me•My hunts> 19:51, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ok 😕 Antrotherkus (Talk to me!) 19:56, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Antrotherkus. Will none of the flags in Commons:Category:Flags of California work for you? They are all freely usable. ColinFine (talk) 20:30, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oh whoops, didn't check there. Silly me. Thanks for pointing that out! Antrotherkus (Talk to me!) 20:54, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Antrotherkus. You might try one of the userboxes on this page, or figure out the file used for the small flag in them: {{User interest California}}. BlackcurrantTea (talk) 20:37, 19 December 2023 (UTC) (I am not watching this page, so please ping me if you want my attention.)[reply]

is there any way to make redirects in bulk? cogsan _{(give me attention) (see my deeds)} 19:48, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/Create new pages? --Tagishsimon (talk) 20:46, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

yeah, that seems like it would work

i'd just need a bunch of text files, but that's easier than what i was doing before

thanks cogsan _{(give me attention) (see my deeds)} 20:56, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Cogsan: generally, mass-creating pages in articlespace is a BAD idea. See WP:MASSCREATE. Cremastra (talk) 20:50, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

from a quick read of that section, i can assume one of 2 things

1. i fucked up because i made 82 redirects
2. i didn't fuck up because i wasn't using a bot or script, and have a minor spelling mistake to prove it

cogsan _{(give me attention) (see my deeds)} 21:00, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The redirects you made look fine, but, yeah, it's best not to use an automated process for those. If your odds of messing up when you do something manually are 1 in 100, then your odds of messing up that thing when you use a bot or script are probably going to be more like 1 in 10. Cremastra (talk) 21:02, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

in that case, it's probably a good thing i won't get into another situation where it would be a good idea to make over 20 redirects in quick succession for a while

if something like this does happen again though, i'll either see if i can learn how to use a script for it and then try to get approval, or just do it manually at a somewhat slow pace

thanks cogsan _{(give me attention) (see my deeds)} 21:38, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm looking at an image (aerial photograph) recently added to Charlemont High School, Jamaica, which has a watermark with the photographer's business name on it. I can see the file should be tagged with {{Watermark}}, but the file has no edit option for me. What am I missing - do I tag it on Commons instead? Thanks. Tacyarg (talk) 20:29, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If there is an edit to be made, yes, it would be on commons. As it is, this file and another by the same uploader look like copyvios and have been marked with 'permission required' banners on commons ... I've removed them from the article for this reason & because the aerial photo & caption was tending towards an advert. --Tagishsimon (talk) 20:45, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Tacyarg. I consider it highly likely that image is a copyright violation. It has already been removed from the article and nominated for deletion on Commons. KKDT, are you the person who actually took that aerial photo? Cullen328 (talk) 20:49, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The School administration is aware of the photo. The Person who took the drone photo he is a past student of the school. I am apart of the Team that manages Social media. why was the Logo Removed....... They know about this! This is factual Information not False.... and the school Administration Know about. everything that is going on. Why is there a problem? KKDT (talk) 21:19, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@KKDT One problem is that Wikipedia is not social media and you are required by its terms of use to disclose your WP:PAID status if you are making any edits related to your employer. That link describes how to do so. Mike Turnbull (talk) 21:35, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@KKDT: commons:File:CHARLEMONT HIGH SCHOOL LOGO.png and commons:File:CHARLEMONT_HIGH_SCHOOL_Kreative_Kaptures_Aerial_JAN_2023.jpg each have a template that explains that the file is missing evidence of the permission you're stating exists, along with instructions on how to provide the evidence. GoingBatty (talk) 21:40, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@KKDT: You're also using the improper syntax for the images in the infobox, and reverted my fix without using an edit summary. GoingBatty (talk) 21:51, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

can you tell me whats the correct way? KKDT (talk) 21:52, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It was correct as GoingBatty did it, so the simplest thing to do now is to self-revert your last edit (with a suitable edit summary). Before doing that, please place the paid editor template on your userpage. Mike Turnbull (talk) 22:01, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please understand that wikipedia DOES NOT like to be used to advertise photographers, as your watermark and your caption did. Since you have control of the image, I suggest you upload a new image without a watermark, and desist from adding photographer credits to the caption. --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:02, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ok will do that! Im the one who did it... ill revert that KKDT (talk) 22:04, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@KKDT: Template:Infobox school shows the correct way to use the parameters and provides an example. GoingBatty (talk) GoingBatty (talk) 22:04, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The visual Editor is easier to use tho... the Bracket Bracket throws off everything for me but ill Look into it thanks for the info.. Im making changes to the water mark right now KKDT (talk) 22:20, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@KKDT: You can use the VisualEditor to edit the infobox. Click edit and then click the infobox. You'll see the Image parameter has the instructions "Image file name with no wikimarkup". Remove the wikimarkup and click "Apply changes". GoingBatty (talk) 22:25, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

KKDT, please do not claim a logo that you did not design and a photo that you did not take as your "Own work". Cullen328 (talk) 22:29, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have moochi ball tea? 2600:1702:39D0:19E0:4491:CDD:F548:C9C7 (talk) 21:25, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently not but you could try the ice cream. Mike Turnbull (talk) 21:31, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No, but we have some good earl grey, I think. Cremastra (talk) 23:01, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No, but do you like green tea? Or some doughnuts? Babysharkboss2 was here!! (Talking Heads) (DANTE) 23:39, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ha-ha, very funny. TypoEater (talk) 15:12, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Seniors! i hope you are doing well. actually i am new here, and i don't know how to add categories by Using hotcat, please guide me. Thanks you Youknowwhoistheman (talk) 07:36, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is explained here: Wikipedia:HotCat#Adding a category. Do you need additional guidance? --Tagishsimon (talk) 08:28, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Actually one more question is here. If we make small edits, is it necessary to show it as a minor edit? What if we don't show him the minor edit? Youknowwhoistheman (talk) 08:56, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Youknowwhoistheman Please read WP:MINOR. The idea is that other editors don't need to check edits marked as minor, so they should only be called that in limited circumstances. It doesn't matter if you don't mark a minor edit as such but it is misleading if you mark as minor something that is more substantial. Edit summaries are always useful. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:32, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An influencer describing themselves as a himbo has been included in the article on himbos. Is their own opinion relevant? Is their inclusion even relevant to the article in the first place? Blackdogcity (talk) 07:49, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Blackdogcity: Putting aside the question of whether the source was reliable, the story did not actually identify the influencer as a himbo, merely asserted that he was flogging clothes under a himbo brand. So, removed. Good catch. --Tagishsimon (talk) 07:58, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please STOP YOUR ONGOING BEGGING adverts asking for money. If you can’t manage the operation - CLOSE IT DOWN & go away - Stip ruining our experience 👎😡👎😡👎 2A00:23C4:D0F:1D01:9C29:17CA:2F74:C7EF (talk) 07:58, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia's football, wikimedia's rules, I'm afraid. --Tagishsimon (talk) 07:59, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

But, if you create an account, you can use your preferences to stop the ad banners, so there's that route to consider. --Tagishsimon (talk) 08:00, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Either sign up for an account or ignore the ads. I have had an account for over 14 years and have never seen any of those ads, except when I deliberately look for then because somebody is complaining about them. I donate my time and my knowledge, which is vastly more valuable than mere cash. Cullen328 (talk) 08:13, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I mean your experience is probably going to be bit more ruined if Wikimedia does "close it down and go away". --2001:8003:1C20:8C00:F211:A254:7DA9:FB24 (talk) 08:25, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If it helps, the fundraiser has an end date (I don't know what), so if you don't like the above suggestions, you can consider avoiding WP until then. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:53, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome and thank you for your question about donations! To hide the fundraising banners, you can create an account and uncheck Preferences → Banners → Fundraising. The Wikimedia Foundation does not track the identity of IP addresses, so it doesn't know your age, income level or whether you donated in the past.
None of the Wikipedia volunteer editors here who add and improve content in articles receive any financial benefit. We all simply contribute our time because we care about building a great encyclopedia for you and innumerable others around the world to use.
If you cannot afford it, no one wants you to donate. Wikipedia is not at risk of shutting down, and the Wikimedia Foundation, which hosts the Wikipedia platform and is asking for these donations, is richer than ever.
You are welcome to communicate directly with the donor-relations team by emailing donate@wikimedia.org. Thank you! -- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 10:07, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Do English-language editors on Wikipedia use American English, Canadian English or UK English for spelling, punctuation, etc.? Chikaren (talk) 09:36, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Chikaren Welcome! Language is one of a few issues where the en-WP-way is to keep it consistent within an article. If you edit the article London, you use UK, if you edit New York, you use American. And if you edit cheese, you follow the style that is there already, assuming there is one. More at WP:ENVAR. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:50, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Chikaren (talk) 09:53, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

For more information, see MOS:ENGVAR. Just wanted to let you know that more information about this is available. TypoEater (talk) 15:04, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wait, oops, I didn't see that someone else had already said that. My bad! TypoEater (talk) 15:12, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with everybody, except that when we edit cheese, we should use French English. Mathglot (talk) 11:51, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fromage that. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:13, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

hey seniors, Greetings.

actually i am little bit confusion with on account login into my office system and personal phone, is this possible? Youknowwhoistheman (talk) 10:10, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There shouldn't be a problem with this, Youknowwhoistheman. -- Hoary (talk) 10:51, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks you so much. Youknowwhoistheman (talk) 10:53, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello DrowssapSMM, — Preceding unsigned comment added by SEV08RO (talk • contribs) 12:43, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

can it be considered a mention of his name on another wikipedia page? In his case, a selection to a team for a match in European cups. I read carefully before making this request and I thought that the mention of websites, newspapers, YouTube, etc. was sufficient.

Also, when denying the article, it says: "Submission is partially not in English." and I don't understand what the problem is. SEV08RO (talk) 12:40, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@SEV08RO Since this is the English Wikipedia, the entire article should be in English before the article goes to main space. The section about his professional(?) career is not English. —C.Fred (talk) 12:45, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please read about WP:NSPORT and WP:GNG. All references in must be to WP:reliable sources - organs that have a reputation for editorial oversight and fact-checking. Wikipedia, like all other user-generated sites, is not reliable, and nor are self-published websites or YouTube videos. Many people are mentioned in Wikipedia articles (including me) but that does not mean that they are necessarily notable in Wikipedia's sense. ColinFine (talk) 12:50, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Looking closer at the article, not only does it need editing from the standpoint of English grammar, but it also needs review by editors who are independent of the subject and his club. Based on your claim that you own the image of Tica in the article, it would appear you have a conflict of interest. —C.Fred (talk) 12:54, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On any article where Machpelah Cemetery (Queens) is linked, rolling over the link shows a picture but no text. I compared a couple other articles that work, but I can't find any difference. How would I fix this? (also, what is the proper name for these little article popup/previews?) JD Cornbread (talk) 14:17, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @JD Cornbread, welcome to the Teahouse. The problem here was the coordinates template - when placed at the top of the article, it often interferes with the preview image in the popup (see here for more information; there's also a different preview feature, Navigation Popups, which account holders can choose to use). I've moved the coordinate template to the bottom of the article. 57.140.16.1 (talk) 14:25, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

JD Cornbread I remember this was mentioned once in the Village Pump Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)/Archive_206#Page_previews_(popups)_broken - it has to do with the coord template being broken. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 14:26, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I often access Wikipedia through my school, which has some idiots that vandalize Wikipedia from time to time. I know this because I get notifications about how changes I did not make have been reverted, when I am not logged in. Is there a risk of me being IP banned due to my peers' poor behavior, and worse, is there a risk of that being associated with my account? ProteinFromTheSea (talk) 14:48, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ProteinFromTheSea, I may have solutions. If you're worried about a blanket ban to all IPs from your school it should not affect you if you log in - in fact, that actually happened to me. If everyone at your school is editing from a single shared account or something like that (however that would work) you should create your own account. If neither of these are your situation, I'd love to hear more about your problem so that I can suggest ways to fix it. Best regards, TypoEater (talk) 15:02, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My family page is Beaver Creek Indian Tribe and someone by the name of YuchiTown keeps undoing my changes despite proof. The live chat provided no help as noone answered. All we wanted to do is change pee-dee to muscogee, and its offensive that i was told it was "an interesting research theory" when my tribe is trying to update our paperwork. We are not from that area, we are not from south carolina. we SETTLED here. 64.234.38.130 (talk) 15:34, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You need to come up with a reference pointing to a reliable source at the time you make the edit, not 'later'. You are in essence competing with a very reliable source which disagrees with your assertion. --Tagishsimon (talk) 15:40, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that you have edited this article as User:ECreekNation and User:Edit807, and now here not logged in, hence an IP number for the account. Going forward, use only one account. Per what Tagishsimon wrote, changes to the article require references. Your response on your Talk page "I’m having the chief call the support line/ someone at the office as you are not authorized from my knowledge." will fail. There is no "support line/someone at the office". Editors are volunteers who live where they live and edit what they want to edit. David notMD (talk) 16:56, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Im not logged in as I’m using a different computer, I tried logging in and my password doesn’t work hence my ip address. The speculation as I’m trying to advoid anything is insanity. We are the source of that page as it’s OUR tribe. If you would like to delete the wiki page for false information we will be more than happy. 64.139.248.177 (talk) 17:04, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Would you like to contact the tribe yourself at this point if I’m just not providing enough resources though I’ve submitted these resources 64.139.248.177 (talk) 17:09, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, IP user. You are in a similar situation to somebody who is not happy with an article about them personally: you are welcome to make suggestions for improving the article, but your changes will not necessarily be carried out, and any information you want to introduce must have been reliably published. See WP:FAQ/AS. ColinFine (talk) 19:47, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:RS. That is what wikipedia articles need. --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:11, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you I will look into it, I fixed my login. Edit807 (talk) 17:18, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there,

My page edits (Draft:GoLinks) keep getting rejected for not having the right references. I read the criteria multiple times but looks like it might be impossible to get the page published? Other companies such as Asana seem to have been published with sources similar to this page.

Will take any advice. Thanks

Alexaklop (talk) 15:47, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:COI and WP:PAID. Wikipedia is not a platform for company marketing. A Senior Content Marketing Manager should know that. Your references are in the main churnalism not WP:RS. I think there's a vanishingly small possibility that your company will get an article. --Tagishsimon (talk) 15:52, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Uman Hi I just wanted to have someone look at my page and suggest some edits because what keep happening is someone will find one issue and I fix it and publish and then someone finds another issue and then I republish but if I could have someone look at it as a whole and make and let me know what issues are with it overall I can fix it and get published without all the back and forth. Nabil vega (talk) 16:10, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nabil vega, I'm puzzled by the phrase "'Collective Impact' Model with Collaborative Representation of Artist Uman". Is that the name of a work (or exhibition, etc.)? If not, why that capitalisation? Maproom (talk) 16:40, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It a term when a smaller independent gallery works with a bigger Blue Chip Gallery to share the responsibilities of an artist. Usually and artist would leave their smaller independent gallery for the more resourced gallery. So the term is important and also showing a shift in the art world. its a specific model but I can also uncapitalize it. Nabil vega (talk) 17:08, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Nabil vega: I suggest you review the adjectives in the draft. For example, what's a "taste-making" gallery? What source states that she "dazzled with their unorthodox and wholly original approach"? What source described her I Want Everything Now show was "successful"? Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 21:17, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the suggestion Nabil vega (talk) 21:21, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

made the changes and added more inter wikipedia links to bolster the notability and connections to the broader artworld. Nabil vega (talk) 22:00, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nabil vega, the "Personal life" section mentions her dogs and cat by name, and her chickens. This is referenced to an ARTNews article that says nothing about either dogs or cats or chickens. Why is that and how did you obtain that pet information? Cullen328 (talk) 22:16, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

this information was in an earlier version of the article I can remove that detail Nabil vega (talk) 15:06, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

So, I updated a new version of a map. When I open that image on commons, I see the latest version, however on Wikipedia I see the old version. How long should I wait approximately? PS: It's not about cache. Aredoros87 (talk) 17:06, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know the details, but it can take a while. Worry after 24 hours. Raise a concern again after 48. Should be done before that. --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:45, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the answer. I was talking about this file. In this article it's still not updated. Aredoros87 (talk) 18:27, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Aredoros87 it's updated for me. I would recommend WP:PURGE to force refresh the image that is retrieved. This is usually not urgent, but when someone sabotages the images with disturbing content, purge is your friend. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 19:51, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot. I tried purge. It didn't work out, but I checked another page with that picture and it was already updated. Seems like I have problem with cache. Aredoros87 (talk) 19:58, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I just started using wikipedia and I was just wondering if there is a max amount of times that you can edit an article if you made a few mistakes, thanks! Soup Muncher II (talk) 17:36, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is no such thing as maximum number of edits. However there is a three-revert rule, so be careful when reverting. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 17:38, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Soup Muncher II: Other than the physical limitations of the database, there are no hard limits. However, if you are repeatedly editing to game the system, you will get flagged, and the 3rr that Delta mentioned. - UtherSRG (talk) 17:39, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you make a mistake, just fix it, and indicate what you are doing in the edit summary. Other editors will appreciate your honesty. It's not all that rare that I'll make a mistake and then fix it with an "Oops" comment in the summary, along with some detail of how I screwed up previously. Mathglot (talk) 11:55, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What can be broken before it can be used

41.122.4.148 (talk) 17:58, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A glowstick Soup Muncher II (talk) 17:59, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Do you have a question about using or editing Wikipedia? 57.140.16.1 (talk) 19:57, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Eggs. Mathglot (talk) 11:56, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The human spirit. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.205.111.170 (talk) 18:00, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I want to expand List of cabinets of Greece in order to create articles about all Greek governments. However, I don't know what the appropriate title is. This article for example,Second Cabinet of Kyriakos Mitsotakis writes about member of cabinets only, but i want to create articles about government work also.

Thank you...D.S. Lioness (talk) 18:17, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. You should start a discussion on talk page of that article. Aredoros87 (talk) 18:30, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

there isn't a general rule about the proper title? D.S. Lioness (talk) 18:59, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There's actually. Take a look on WP:AT Aredoros87 (talk) 19:35, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much D.S. Lioness (talk) 17:26, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I submitted an article that was rejected. The editor who rejected it said they or another editor could proofread my next attempt before I submitted it for publication. So I rewrote the article on the draft page... but now I'm not sure how to submit it to an editor without publishing it. This is the draft page, although I don't think you'll be able to see the updated version since I haven't clicked on "publish changes": https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Qmerit&action=edit Msbreslow (talk) 19:15, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please just hit publish and if you think it is ready submit. there is no pre-review option.Theroadislong (talk) 19:31, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the response and the comment you left on the draft page. I've updated the draft to (hopefully) address everyone's concerns (and clicked on "publish changes" like you said - I appreciate the explanation). Msbreslow (talk) 20:27, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Msbreslow. "Publish changes" means "save" - it doesn't mean "publish to be part of the encyclopaedia". It was changed a few years ago, to remind editors that all edits are visible to anybody who goes looking for them: there are no private pages anywhere in Wikipedia.

You can continue to edit Draft:Qmerit, publishing your changes, until you have dealt with the issues mentioned by the reviewer, and then submit it again with the "Submit" button.

Note that you should remove any reference that doesn't mention Qmerit, or that only mentions its name, and also most references that come from QMerit, including from press releases (in particular, I think the Tom Moloughney piece is just regurgitating what QMerit says, rather than being truly independent). ColinFine (talk) 19:34, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the explanation! I went ahead and hit "publish changes." Looking back, I felt the same way as you on the Tom Moloughney piece - that's one of the references I removed. Msbreslow (talk) 19:38, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I made a draft:Darknet_(Neural_Networks) and seeing it is my first article I did not know if I fixed the problems User:BuySomeApples kindly showed me. " This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of websites). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia. "

I found some more references that are longer about the floss program, darknet, but should I resubmit it for review now, or is it better to check more Wikipedia guidelines before using the resubmit button, so it will not be reviewed too soon? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Other Cody (talk • contribs) 22:06, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Other Cody: Welcome to the Teahouse! I suggest adding a |website=, |work=, or |publisher= parameter for each citation template. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 22:51, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can I upload files from my Desktop Downloads file to Wikipedia? MaryKathleen7 (talk) 22:19, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think you can as long as it follows Wikipedia policy. special:Upload Other Cody (talk) 22:25, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@MaryKathleen7: You need to be sure that the file you are uploading is either in the public domain, or covered by a licence which enables it to be copied on wikipedia. (Or that there is some reason why a fair use claim can be made for the use of the image.) If you do not know, or are unsure, then you should not upload it. Per the link which Other Cody provided, most files should not be uploaded because they are encumbered by copyright and lack a free licence. The most recent file of yours that I've seen, which you mention below, was a copyright violation, something taken from a third-party website which did not provide a licence for reuse. So, to repeat: If you do not know, or are unsure, then you should not. --Tagishsimon (talk) 00:20, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I uploaded a file which I now want to delete. How do I do that? Thank you ahead of time. MaryKathleen7 (talk) 23:15, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've marked the WP and Commons instances of this image as copyright violations; both should be speedy deleted shortly. --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:22, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I will try to get permission to use the photo. Can the permission be verbal or must it be in writing? MaryKathleen7 (talk) 01:04, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The easiest thing to do would be to have the photographer/copyright holder upload the image themselves. Please see donating copyrighted materials. 331dot (talk) 01:08, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

MaryKathleen7, 331dot is correct in describing the easiest way. There are other ways as well which are more complex and are described at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. In all cases, the free licensing of a photo is a legal transaction, and precise legal language must be used. Only the copyright holder, who is usually the photographer, can freely license their work. Verbal permission is not acceptable in any case. Cullen328 (talk) 03:14, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, MaryKathleen, and welcome to the Teahouse. In addition to what 331dot and Cullen328 said, note that permission to use an image in Wikipedia is not not enough. The mission of Wikipedia is to provide a freely-reusable collection of information, so as a rule we require not that images have permission to use them on Wikipedia, but that the copyright holder has licensed them in such a way that anybody may freely reuse (or change) them for any purpose, commercial or not, as long as they attribute the source. You'll need to make that clear in approaching the copyright holder. ColinFine (talk) 11:25, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm in the midst of making some minor edits to a rapper's article, and there's a section where a song he was featured on by a notable artist followed by a song he was featured on by a less notable one - "In June 2021, Carti was featured on rapper/producer Pi'erre Bourne's song "Switching Lanes" from his The Life Of Pi'erre 5 album and on rapper Lil 1 Dte's single, "Homixide" from his self-titled mixtape." I have a citation for the Pi'erre Bourne song, but Lil 1 Dte isn't notable enough to have an article written about the track.

In this scenario, is it best to leave a "citation needed" tag, or delete the mention of the unsourcable track entirely? EphemeralPerpetuals (they/them) (talk) 23:34, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You need to make a judgement when you come across issues like this; is the uncited assertion worth noting in this article, or not? A quick google suggests to me that Lil 1 Dte is not obscure and nor is his work "Homicide". I know little about rap, but I'd be leaning towards either finding a citation, or using {{cn}}, rather than deleting. But there may also be other choices; artist articles may have tables of the artists work (or perhaps use of the artist's work by other artists) either in the main article or a discography article, so the possibility is that the fact can be represented somewhere else than the paragraph you found it in. But it is absolutely the case that there'll be places where mentions are made of completely non-notable artists, within articles about notable artists, with a view to promoting the non-notable artist rather than improving the encyclopedia. Where you believe that's going on, then deletion is a good outcome. (And to pick up on the observation you made, whether an artist or a track has a wikipedia article can be factored in to your judgement on whether a fact should stay or go, but it should not be the only measure, nor should undue weight be placed on it. Wikipedia's coverage is far from universal; there are many well-enough known artists and tracks which do not have wikipedia articles, but which return enough google hits to suggest that they're not completely obscure. There's a very wide spectrum between notable-enough for a stand-alone wikipedia article, and so obscure as to be of no conceivable interest in / relevance to another article.) --Tagishsimon (talk) 00:06, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your advice! I think I conveyed my words slightly wrong, however - I meant article as in a secondary source online when I said "Lil 1 Dte isn't notable enough to have an article written about the track", I meant news coverage, rather than a specific Wikipedia page.

But thank you very much for your advice, I'll scour online for any reliable references to Lil 1 Dte - my guess is, however, that there may not be much news coverage of this track, and is not likely to be as the track is a few years old, which is why I am leaning more towards deletion rather than a request for a citation. I believe that the reference to "Homicide" was in good faith, but whether it is sourcable is another matter. EphemeralPerpetuals (they/them) (talk) 14:18, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bobby Vee with Strings and Things did my article recived article approved cause i didn't get notice? Samchristie05 (talk) 00:43, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Samchristie05: It did. It was moved to mainspace by user:Another Believer, but perhaps manually rather than by using the normal Articles for Creations controls which would have left a note on your talk page? Anyway: it is now an article, so, thank you for writing it. --Tagishsimon (talk) 00:48, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

the reason why i keep every of my article in Article wizard Create Draft, cause i need to create music albums on draft, and waited for you guys to get approved to my article, and it doesn't work and i edited instead of the normal Article to Creations Controls. Samchristie05 (talk) 00:57, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

thanks cause i always wanted to stick on Wikipedia Article Wizard

Draft Creation Samchristie05 (talk) 00:49, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I got hired part-time to edit some articles on Wikipedia, and my client informed me that the previous editor they hired got blocked from Wikipedia for sockpuppetry. If I continue to edit the same existing articles, won't Wikipedia think I am another sockpuppet account? How do I "prove" that I am indeed a different person or account? Glossy1718! (talk) 01:35, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:PAID. You should not, in my view, be taking work as a paid editor because you inevitably have a conflict of interest which will be to the detriment of the encyclopedia. You will not fall foul of sockpuppet policy if you are using a different IP address than previous paid editors. Ideally you will let us know who the client is so that work associated with that client can be checked for the sort of bias which tends to be introduced by the activity you have declared yourself to be engaged in. --Tagishsimon (talk) 01:41, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Korean Academy of Science and Technology :( --Tagishsimon (talk) 01:43, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Glossy1718!. In addition to what Tagishsimon mentioned above, you might want to consider having your account verified by WP:VRT. This could help to clarify to others that you're who you're claiming to be and not someone else. You can do this by sending an email to Wikimedia VRT asking what's needed for VRT to verify your account. Of course, this will only probably work as long as you're not using the same IP address as the editor who was blocked. You could also try emailing paid-en-wpwikipedia.org and explaining your situation. That email address is primarily used for reporting suspected undisclosed paid editing, but they might be able to help you with your sitution. Regardless of what you end up doing, you and your boss should probably take a look at WP:OWN and WP:BOSS. You should also be using article talk page's to make edit requests instead of trying to directly edit the articles you've been tasked to improve yourself. Finally, you should avoid repeating the mistakes of your predecessor. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:59, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Glossy1718, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm not sure why neither Tagishsimon nor MarchJuly has explicitly told you that it is mandatory for you to make a formal declaration of your status as a paid editor.

Please also note that most editors are volunteers, giving their own time; and while many of us are ready to spend time helping new editors learn what they need, it is an odd situation if we find ourselves giving our time to help somebody who is being paid but has not yet learnt what they need to know. I urge you to go slowly, and make sure you understand Wikipedia policies (especially verifiability and neutral point of view) before you attempt to work on articles about your clients. ColinFine (talk) 11:38, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you have properly declared your paid intention to provide new content and revise content for Korean Academy of Science and Technology. Per Wikipedia guide at WP:PAID, refrain from editing the article directly. Instead, create a section or sections at the Talk page of the article, proposing your changes and the references validating those changes. Add a review request. An editor will review your proposed changes and either implement or deny. Continue to add declarations of paid status for each article you are being paid to amend. David notMD (talk) 17:56, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lee Jun-ho (entertainer)

Hi. I wonder if someone could help me please. I seem to have made a right hash of this. I added a reference which is appearing under external links, but I wanted it to only appear in references. It is there, but appears with an error. It looked fine when I published it, but has now thrown an error and I don't understand what is wrong with it. This is reference 91 regarding Fundex awards (GOODDATA Corp). Ideally, it would not appear under external links at all and would appear correctly under references.

In addition, the row in the awards table that refers to the Fundex Award is a different format from everything else in the table. It seems that other data has been added using a template and I can't figure out how to get this row in the table looking the same as everything else.

If I could just get help to fix this page, I don't think I will have another go ever! I'm traumatised. You can't even seem to delete what you have edited. I didn't know about the sandbox or this site. I need to spend a lot more time learning before attempting changes again!

Thank you for any help. PetKat04 (talk) 02:44, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@PetKat04: Sorted. --Tagishsimon (talk) 02:53, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You are a miracle worker! So fast. Thanks so much!!!! PetKat04 (talk) 02:55, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

am submitting pages but its rejecting continuesly kindly asist me on this Ab.ms.abi (talk) 04:29, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ab.ms.abi: Welcome to the Teahouse. Your question here is the only one I see in your contributions, though you have made 4 edits in total, which suggests that pages you created before have been deleted. Usually they're deleted for reasons like advertising or otherwise inappropriate for an encyclopedia. If you look up the exact names of the pages that were deleted you should see a deletion log as a popup if you try to edit them, which will show which admin deleted it and why. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 04:36, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How can i overcome ands submit again and get aproval Ab.ms.abi (talk) 04:45, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ab.ms.abi, are you referring to your sandbox? Your sandbox was deleted because it was apparently misused as "web host" per the admin who deleted it. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁＝☁＝✈) 05:30, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ab.ms.abi, here is the first paragraph of what Fastily very rightly deleted: In the fast-paced world of Internet technology, one company stands out for its commitment to connecting communities globally. Town Contacts Technologies Pvt Ltd (Town) is a dynamic Internet Technology Company that has been at the forefront of providing a diverse range of Internet-related services since its inception in 2014. And it continues in the same style. This is blatantly and crudely promotional. Yes, as Tenryuu surmised above, it's advertising, and utterly inappropriate for an encyclopedia. If the assistance you're asking for is assistance in advertising Town Contacts Technologies, the answer is a flat "no". -- Hoary (talk) 07:13, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you persist in trying to create an article with such strong promotional content it will be Speedy deleted again and you will be indefinitely blocked. David notMD (talk) 09:56, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How can I cite the Kindle version of a book? LeónGonsalvesofGoa (talk) 04:30, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@LeónGonsalvesofGoa: Welcome to the Teahouse! When I tried WP:KINDLE, I was redirected to Wikipedia:Citing_sources#Books_and_print_articles, which states "If there are no page numbers, whether in ebooks or print materials, then you can use other means of identifying the relevant section of a lengthy work, such as the chapter number or the section title." GoingBatty (talk) 06:46, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@LeónGonsalvesofGoa: Rightly or wrongly, I use the at parameter to reference the Location within a Kindle book. I do this with the rp template. For example:

<ref name="aardvark" />{{rp|at=Location 33}}

I don't know if this is an "official" method, but it seems to work. Mike Marchmont (talk) 12:24, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Teahouse,

One of my subjects of interests is Australia, its defence and decision makers. A while ago I discovered (wonderfully) that photographs published openly by the US Department of Defense are all public domain. So I've gathered relevant shots onto a photo sharing platform, Flickr, and from there I choose relevant ones to upload onto wikimedia, which, for me, is a really simply process and easy to manage.

All of that has gone well, until, overnight, a user has decided to challenge, it would appear, almost all of those images. Yikes. You'll find that challenge here

My understanding is that images published to the public domain mean that they can exist on anyone's photo stream or file sharing platform, that people are free to "copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially."

I still have plenty to learn here, so am happy to have the process explained to me. I'm very keen to do things the right way, even as I (hopefully) improve articles.

MatthewDalhousie (talk) 07:41, 21 December 2023 (UTC) MatthewDalhousie (talk) 07:41, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

MatthewDalhousie, welcome to Wikipedia! First, Wikimedia Commons is a sister site of Wikipedia, but also a separate one; it would be helpful to centralize future discussion regarding this topic on that site (commons.wikimedia.org).
I think the user you mentioned's main concern is that you have tagged the images under a Creative Commons license, while they are in the public domain. Public domain is allows for anyone to use the image in any way they like, but CC licenses often can be more restrictive. As these images seem to all be created by the US government, and therefore in public domain (and not CC), they would definitely be welcome on Wikimedia Commons!
They should, however, be tagged properly using the public domain license tags. A list of them is here c:Category:PD-USGov license tags, they are broken down by department (DoD, DoE, etc.). Cheers! — Frostly (talk) 08:01, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Another matter is that the "Author" field should be set to the photographer where possible, instead of yourself. Hope that helps! — Frostly (talk) 08:03, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

MatthewDalhousie, public domain means that the text or image is completely outside the realm of copyright laws, either because the copyright has expired or no copyright has ever existed. Works created by employees of the US Federal government while performing their job duties are in the public domain and are not restricted by copyright law in any way. The purpose of CC BY 4.0 or CC BY 2.0 licenses is to allow copyright holders to freely license their copyrighted material for re-use by anyone. There is no need whatsoever to apply CC BY licenses to public domain works, and you have no right to apply a CC BY license to any work that you are not the copyright holder of. All those files you uploaded to Commons should be tagged as public domain, not CC BY. Cullen328 (talk) 08:09, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I see also that you've uploaded photos from Flickr without a link to the original source URL; it's helpful to include one to help verification of public domain status. — Frostly (talk) 08:14, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If I understand some of the elements of copyright law correctly, when a presumed copyright holder of an image donates that image to the public domain, they're waiving all their rights to it. Anyone, for example you, is then free to claim its copyright. Claiming it would not be illegal, but it would be misleading and generally obnoxious, and so I definitely do not recommend doing it (even inadvertently). And I may very well be wrong about this matter. -- Hoary (talk) 08:37, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

“Anyone is then free to claim its copyright.” Well... The point is that for that specific work, once it enters the Public Domain, there no longer ARE copyrights (and thus also no rights to license)”. People are then free to use, modify and reuse the work. To claim copyright is possible, but without modifications to the work, meaningless. To claim authorship over it would be a lie and would classify as plagiarism. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 09:55, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is located in Odessa, Florida, it is mentioned in Pasco County Library Cooperative. It is obviously a K-8 school. I am asking because I am not sure if this school is significant enough to get an article. The school was also constructed recently. NotABlanker (talk) 13:32, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@NotABlanker: see WP:NSCHOOL Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 13:38, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed you have a discord but couldn't find the link to it on it's dedicated page. Any help? Frittle (talk) 13:44, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Frittle: https://discord.com/invite/wikipedia Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 13:45, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

tnx Frittle (talk) 13:45, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Frittle: Welcome to the Teahouse! On Wikipedia:Discord, the link provided above is also available in the blue "Join Server" near the top of the page. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 16:57, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings!

how to add a citation in infobox? Youknowwhoistheman (talk) 14:26, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Youknowwhoistheman: are you using visual editor? I usually switch to source editor when I need to insert a citation somewhere. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 14:31, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

yeah, actually i used both, but still i don't know how to add a citation in infobox. Youknowwhoistheman (talk) 14:41, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Youknowwhoistheman: Have you tried putting "<ref>the citation</ref>" after the content in the infobox while in source editor? Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 14:54, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

thanks you so much, i'll try. Youknowwhoistheman (talk) 14:56, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, so I'm new to this Teahouse thing (and talk pages in general), and I finished making major changes to a certain (but unknowing) article. I noticed on its talk page that the article was part of the WikiProject Awards group, and that its content assessment and importance scales are set to Stub and unassessed, respectively. I know that higher ranks (eg. Featured, A-Class and Good Articles) need to be assessed and discussed by multiple people, but for the lower ranks, if the article meets the requirements, can I promote these ranks on my own (e.g. Stub → Start; unassessed → Low), or do I need someone's permission? If so, to what extent can I independently promote these articles ranks to?

I'm asking this here because this feed seems welcoming, and there's no activity on the talk page of the article I worked on. - Alex26337 (talk) 14:30, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Guessing this is about August-Graf-von-Platen-Preis, and yes, clearly no longer a Stub. Personally, I have felt comfortable upgrading Stub to Start and Start to C-class, but hesitant about doing C-class to B-class based on my own contributions. See Wikipedia:Content assessment for some guidance. David notMD (talk) 15:22, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Alright based on your advise and how I reviewed the article as it currently stands, I promoted it to Start class (I still felt it needs more info) and Low scale. Thanks for the feedback. - Alex26337 (talk) 15:40, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I remember in the past seeing a page where it had many soruces and they were color coded, and it said whether or not they were good to use but I do not remember what it was called.  Casper king (talk) 14:47, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Casper king: Are you thinking of WP:RSP? Victor Schmidt (talk) 14:48, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes thanks. Casper king (talk) 14:50, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There should be a policy which states that admins have to reapply for adminship after a period of inactivity. What is the link for this? Logoshimpo (talk) 14:47, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Logoshimpo: Its part of Wikipedia:Administrators, see Wikipedia:Administrators#Restoration of admin tools. Victor Schmidt (talk) 14:51, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can I add information to my website from Wikipedia if I mention the source?

I want to make a website where there will be information from defferent egyclopedias like Wikipedia...

Constantin Psyllas Jounior Evidouvi (talk) 15:13, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Evidouvi: I think this would be useful WP:MIRROR Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 15:17, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Evidouvi You may of course just want to use small portions of the Wikipedia content, in which case please see WP:REUSE for the licensing requirements. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:01, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There's a company (grandparent) which had a smaller company (parent), which had 8 divisions (children).

A bigger company (great great grandparent) took control of the main company (grandparent) in 2015, and put its child (great grandparent) in charge of it and 3 other companies (so the great grandparent is now in charge of 4 grandparents)

However the main company (grandparent) still continues to use its name today as its "official company name", even though it's child (parent) is now the "trading name" of the overall brand.

There's not really any mention of the "official company name" so my question is...

Can the "official company name" aka grandparent (which doesn't have an article for some reason) be added as a Parent company of the parent, along with the great grandparent which has already been added?

Also should the great great grandparent be added as the "owner"? Danstarr69 (talk) 16:24, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Danstarr69: Welcome to the Teahouse! I believe you're asking if new articles can be added for parent companies and corporate owners. Just as WP:BIORELATED tells us that "Being related to a notable person in itself confers no degree of notability upon that person", WP:INHERITORG tells us that "A corporation is not notable merely because it owns notable subsidiaries. The organization or corporation itself must have been discussed in reliable independent sources for it to be considered notable." Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 16:52, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GoingBatty No, I'm saying there's technically 2 parent companies...

One which is the new parent, and is in charge of four separate entities.

One of which used to be the parent, but is now just the "official company name" of the company which used to be it's child.

1 - Can both be added as parents?

2 - Can the owner of the new parent, be added as the owner of the smaller company? Or should the overall owner only be listed on the new parents article? Danstarr69 (talk) 17:01, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Danstarr69: Are you asking about updating existing article(s) or adding new article(s)? What existing article(s) are you referring to? What published reliable sources have you gathered, and what information do they contain? GoingBatty (talk) 17:22, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GoingBatty Updating existing articles...

Vantiva owns Technicolor Creative Studios which is the parent of Mikros Animation which used to be under Mikros Image.

However Mikros Image is now the "official company name" of the "trading name" Mikros Animation.

Mikros Image needs to be mentioned somewhere, but where exactly.

I'm not sure whether Vantiva should be added as the owner of Mikros Animation or not.

Once this is sorted out, I'll then mention the old and new divisions on the article. Danstarr69 (talk) 17:47, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Danstarr69: I suggest you start a discussion on Talk:Mikros Animation to discuss your questions with others editors, and provide the published reliable sources you have gathered that discuss the various ownerships and name changes. GoingBatty (talk) 17:57, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I need some help, I just started using wikipedia and does anyone have any suggestions/tips on starting as an editor? Thanks! Soup Muncher II (talk) 16:39, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please see our introduction page and The Wikipedia Aventure. These two pages will introduce you to the software and our key policies and guidlines. Once you feel up to the task, see here for instructions on how to make your first article. I will also leave more information on your talkpage. Happy editing, NW1223<Howl at me•My hunts> 16:49, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oft-repeated (oft-ignored) advice is put in time - months - working at improving existing articles before attempting to create and submit a draft for a new article. David notMD (talk) 17:41, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article Billy Woods, the faceless rapper, has a photo of him performing at a concert in 2022. Woods, a faceless person, does not wish to have his face shown. Both IP and registered editors have removed the image of Woods as for his facelessness. Though, even if they are to remove the photo from his Wikipedia article, it still exists on the internet; either that be on Wikimedia Commons, or on his article on the Indonesian Wikipedia.

I have asked for help before on here, and the consensis was to keep, as for Wikipedia:UNCENSORED. The most recent removal of his image was reverted, but the photo is still removed, which I have been reverting edits which do so myself.

Am I correct for reverting these edits, or should his face be removed from the article? Help. Roasted (talk) 17:46, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Roastedbeanz1, I think you are correct, if something is deleted from Wikipedia just because someone doesn't want something, it's always wrong (well, except for WP:UNDUE cases, but that is not a case here). Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 17:50, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the feedback. Is there a way I can stop editors from removing his face, or will I have to keep on reverting? Roasted (talk) 17:52, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Roastedbeanz1, I requested page protection. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 17:56, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and Greetings to You all, actually i’m finding some wikipedia tools which can make editing more easy and good. I may ask you to pls suggest me some of the tools. Pls. Thanks — Syed A. Hussain Quadri (talk) 17:59, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@QuadriOnMobile, hello! Have you checked Gadgets tab in the Preferences menu? There are multiple tools in the Editing section which you might find useful. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 18:03, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Deltaspace42 I know those, but i need suggestions of editors that which is the best tool. — Syed A. Hussain Quadri (talk) 18:05, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@QuadriOnMobile If you intend to edit from your mobile, you might like to read these suggestions. Mike Turnbull (talk) 18:12, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Michael D. Turnbull I went through it, it is very informational. Thanks — Syed A. Hussain Quadri (talk) 18:19, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Is the website www.thestar.com.my. considered a reliable source? I saw it used in the article Kuan Kam Hon and I was wondering whether or not it should be removed. Casper king (talk) 19:46, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Casper. The best place to ask about reliability of sources is WP:RSN. ColinFine (talk) 19:57, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Looking for sources for alumni from a university in Brazil but I was wondering if edurank.org is a reliable source. It looks like it is but I am just trying to confirm. KaedenAwesome (talk) 20:33, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@KaedenAwesome: see WP:RSN. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 20:36, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@KaedenAwesome I will just wing it. It may be a reliable source for the fact that the individuals listed are in fact alumni. However, I would not consider the brief descriptions as reliable. We have no idea about the sources they get this information from or what process they use to establish its accuracy. Fabrickator (talk) 21:20, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What is the notability guidelines for Nominated ministers in Indian states? There is a thing of Nominated Minister/Ranked minister and in hindi it is called “Darja Prapt Mantri”. And kindly let me know that being a Chairman of state-level education board is notable or not? I’m confused. — Syed A. Hussain Quadri (talk) 21:26, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@QuadriOnMobile: see WP:POLITICIAN and WP:GNG. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 21:33, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Being a Nominated minister passes WP:NPOL? — Syed A. Hussain Quadri (talk) 21:34, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My reading (of this) would be that such people do not get a WP:NPOL presumption of notability, but must show WP:GNG. They seem to be private individuals nominated to a role by a politician; the roles may or may not be notable. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:35, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am a moderately experienced editor. I am struggling however to place an image at the top left of a chapter/paragraph of an article ie the above. The chapter is Notable Former Pupils. When I look at the preview the image seem fine at the top left. However when I publish even afer many attempts, it sits in the middle. Help needed! Hjamesberglen (talk) Hjamesberglen (talk) 21:35, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Cowbridge Grammar School

It's being forced down the page by the infobox. Not sure what the solution is. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:40, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Hjamesberglen: Yeah, I've tried replacing "File" with "Image", clicked preview, seemed ok, published, and it's again in the middle. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 21:41, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]