Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1074

Archive 1070

←

Archive 1072

Archive 1073

Archive 1074

Archive 1075

Archive 1076

→

Archive 1080

My user page

Hi, are the userboxes on my user page formatted correctly? I'm having trouble figuring this out. Am I supposed to put the word "Template" in the code? 314WPlay (talk) 09:37, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

314WPlay, all good. GeraldWL ✉ 09:39, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

@Gerald Waldo Luis: So the source code is fine? OK thanks. I'm very cautious about editing despite the 'be bold' thing because I've seen loads of edit disputes and arguments, and there are also so many rules, policies, guidelines, and other stuff that I don't make a substantive edit (I wish I could though!). 314WPlay (talk) 09:43, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

314WPlay, you have the potential for being a great editor from your personalities. Welcome! GeraldWL ✉ 09:50, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

@Gerald Waldo Luis: Thank you! 314WPlay (talk) 10:04, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

314WPlay WP is like life...if you are friendly, polite and respectful of others, things should work out just fine. If you make a mistake, it can be reversed. Plenty of people have pointed out my mistakes, over the years...and I said thank you, I'm sorry, etc., just like in RL. I learned from it, and often made a wiki friend in the process. The problem, esp. for a new editor (or even an older one) is being stubborn, and unwilling to see the other person's side. Mistakes are expected and forgiven. Being an arsehole, not so much. You seem like the good sort! The talkpage of an article is the best place to work well with others if disagreements arise. So, go forth, make some edits! Gerald Waldo Luis and I believe in you. For example, the two of us, together, received some "corrective advice" recently, followed it, and emerged unscathed. :-) Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 10:14, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Tribe of Tiger Thank you, this is very reassuring. Yes it is like that in a way for those of us who have a life. I'm nervous about making a mistake (more of a personality thing) but I can admit them when they happen and I will go beyond fixing typos - if I don't, there wasn't much point creating an account was there. Can I ask another question here; when do I need to use the Reply to template or link a user's page if I want them to get notified and see it? Other editors haven't always, and yet I still see it. So why does it exist then? 314WPlay (talk) 19:54, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

@314WPlay: You've got brownie points here for correctly signing, indenting, and pinging too . —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 22:54, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

@314WPlay: Sorry, I don't understand your question per "Reply to template" etc. Perhaps User:AlanM1's compliment helps as a confirmation? Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 23:03, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

@314WPlay: I didn't see the question. Use {{Re}} or {{U}} on any discussion page (talk pages or some pages starting with "Wikipedia:" that are used for discussion, like this one) to send notification to someone with a link to that section. You don't need to use it when posting on a user's own talk page because they will receive notification anyway. If someone doesn't respond, they may have notifications turned off, or maybe they haven't seen it, or maybe have nothing to say. People don't use the template if they don't want to bother someone with a trivial response, if they expect the person will see it anyway, they know the person has notifications disabled, or maybe they just forget . —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 00:09, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

@Tribe of Tiger and AlanM1: Sorry, I didn't phrase it very well. It's a trivial point. Just wanted to know if pinging a user is always necessary in order for them to see your message. I think it's clear now, having read the talk page guidelines and template help as well. What if someone asks a question on an article's talk page - if you reply but don't ping them with reply or u, will they still get an alert about your answer? 314WPlay (talk) 19:38, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

What User:AlanM1 said is true. If you don't ping them they don't get alerted. --David Biddulph (talk) 20:04, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

@David Biddulph: OK I'll ping users in my replies to ensure they see it. Thanks to everyone who helped me out here. 314WPlay (talk) 15:49, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

How do I improve my article on Mike Siegel?

Hi all! I'm new to editing Wikipedia. I wrote a new article on Draft:Mike Siegel (politician). It has been rejected on grounds of "lack of notability." Now, Siegel is a well-known politician in his state, and has received a lot of coverage in many news outlets, so there's no shortage of material about him and I think he qualifies as notable. I'd like to get to improve my article so it can be published as soon as possible. Could I ask anyone who is interested to read it and advise me on how to improve it? Gnaanamurthy (talk) 19:50, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Gnaanamurthy Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Please read the the notability guidelines for politicians. Merely being a candidate for office does not merit someone an article, which means that he would have to meet the more general notability guidelines for people. 331dot (talk) 20:01, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

331dot Understood. I have added more national sources that demonstrate the national significance of his career and campaign. Gnaanamurthy (talk) 01:53, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

331dot For the moment I've decided to keep the article in my workspace, and we'll see what happens after the election. However, there is a reference to Mike Siegel on the page of the Congressional District where he's running: Texas's 10th congressional district. Would the editors object if I provided some information about Siegel in the relevant sections of that article? Gnaanamurthy (talk) 17:01, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Gnaanamurthy If he wins his election, he would then merit an article(even before he is sworn into office). In the article you reference, I see little more than his name mentioned, so I don't really see much of an opportunity to add to it there IMO. 331dot (talk) 17:05, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Article Hijacked - Please help

Hi fellow editors,

I used to update election data in Indian political articles years back as an IP editor. I just found the article K. Annamalai hijacked. Upon searching i found a policy for article hijacking at WP:AHIJACK.

Comparison

This is how the article used to be before on July 2019 - [1]. It was for a K. Annamalai who is a Member of a legislative assembly and the article passes WP:NPOL.

It was changed hijacked in this edit on 12 April 2020 for another K. Annamalai - [2] . The present K. Annamalai is a random police officer who was famous in his area and joined a political party recently and his is not at all notable.

Several different User accounts edited it continuously to bring it to the present state, mostly promotional and i believe they are controlled by the same person. I believe the edits are from his fans.

Problem

The main problem i found is that other election article's which links to this article's for the Member of the legislative assembly now points to a random police officer.

The article is locked now and can somebody help rectify the problem or what is the protocol here, since a lot of articles linking to this article are getting affected. 2409:4072:510:2EF6:8069:EFE4:EF63:6CB4 (talk) 14:52, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

The first attempt at usurping the article was in this edit in February which was subsequently reverted, but others have come along more recently to do the same. David Biddulph (talk) 15:26, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

I've reverted the article to its pre-hijack state. It's now a one-sentence stub, but with incoming wikilinks. Maproom (talk) 18:35, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Draft guidance

Hi. I've made several revisions to Draft:David J. Zimmerman based on your feedback, and would appreciate your comments. Thanks. VictorMooney (talk) 15:58, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

@VictorMooney: It looks like you've made a lot of good revisions. If no one here ends up reviewing, I'd just press the submit button so that it goes in the queue for review as part of the Articles for Creation process. Calliopejen1 (talk) 19:04, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

@Calliopejen1: Thank you. I don't mind letting it sit here for a bit. I hope to get it as clean as possible before submitting for review.VictorMooney (talk) 19:24, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

@VictorMooney: I took a look at the article and reviewed the sources. I did a little maintenance cleanup. It would be nice if there was more biographical coverage, but the media coverage of his work seems to meet notability requirements. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 21:19, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

@TimTempleton: Thank you. The biographical coverage I've found seems to be largely from - assorted blog posts, his own web site and commercial galleries. I'm not sure if those references would make the draft better, or rather, water it down. I've tried keeping the references I used to better recognized sources. What would you suggest? VictorMooney (talk) 21:40, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

I think it's good to go. Incidentally, I don't think you need a reliable, independent source for a claim that somebody was born in place X or got a first degree at college Y: unless the claim is outlandish -- born on South Georgia Island, first degree from the Royal University of Bhutan -- or disputed, you can take the biographee's word for it. (A doctorate is a different matter.) -- Hoary (talk) 22:23, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

@Hoary: Thank you.VictorMooney (talk) 22:47, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Use of Thesis in References

Hi, can we use a thesis as a reference for Wikipedia articles? I am currently drafting a Wikipedia article on a journalist and writer, and his work was covered and written about extensively in an Adelaide University's published thesis. Khwabeeda (talk) 22:20, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Please see WP:SCHOLARSHIP. -- Hoary (talk) 22:26, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Khwabeeda (talk) 23:01, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Question on citing

So I just added the 10 articles of impeachment for the Impeachment inquiry against Mike DeWine. Since it is a list and a large section (All coming from the same source), how do I cite it? Thanks for help in advance. Elijahandskip (talk) 22:29, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

I commented on the article talk page. If there had not been an ongoing discussion, I would have immediately nominated the article for deletion and added one sentence and a redirect to the Mike Dewine article. The impeachment is pure political grandstanding and is not going to be anything but a waste of time. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 22:52, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

I mean it is still a moment in history that will be remembered about him. It isn't often that state governors have impeachment articles drawn up against them. Even though it won't be voted on, the history part is why I am keeping it an article for now. I agree it is COVID stupidity, however, it is still a moment in history. Same as how NFL players from 30 years ago have a 2-3 sentence article about them. They are a moment in history playing on a NLF team. Not going to argue with your opinion, but I would still like to know what is the best way to cite something that large. Elijahandskip (talk) 23:01, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

How to link to specific revisions using wikilinks?

This is a really basic question, but I'm wondering if I can reference specific revisions in wikilinks, specifically so I can link other revisions in edit summaries. For example, in this revision I tried to use wikitext for an external link to the relevant previous revision, but it doesn't get "linked" in the Wikitext, so I think I need to use a wikilink. But I'm not sure if it's possible to do that. Thank you! Suriname0 (talk) 22:36, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Suriname0. Yes. You can use the template {{oldid}}. If it is the difference from the previous version you want, there is template {{diff}}. --ColinFine (talk) 23:05, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Seeing a deadlink- do I remove it?

Hi. When seeing a deadlink- (URL deleted/not working) and it ks not backed up at Wayback-Machine. Do I remove it altogether?Thhings6sz (talk) 21:53, 25 August 2020 (UTC) Thhings6sz (talk) 21:53, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

@Thhings6sz: Depends on where the link is. If it is in the external links section, then remove it. If it is a link for a reference/citation, then leave it there and mark it with {{dead link}}. See WP:LINKROT for more info. RudolfRed (talk) 22:08, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. For example, this https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=BioSLAX&diff=prev&oldid=974933528 did I do it properly?Thhings6sz (talk) 22:26, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

@Thhings6sz: You did it correctly, but the dead link was for Scribd, a commercial site, and clicking still took readers to Scribed.com. I deleted it and replaced it with the citation needed template. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 23:09, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. Great lesson.Thhings6sz (talk) 23:56, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Google search returning talk page only

When I am searching on google "Shourya Deep" why is only "talk: Shourya Deep" is popping. Prakash mesra (talk) 20:31, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

@Prakash mesra: You edited a user page User:Shourya Deep which isn't indexed. The page has just been flagged for speedy deletion - its subject doesn't seem to be notable enough. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 20:51, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Shourya Deep is now a Wikipedia article, but there is a lag before it appears via a Google search. David notMD (talk) 00:15, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

John Dehner

Hi,

Could someone add to the John Dehner page the great part he played in the Andy Griffith Show? He was Colonel Harvey in the episode March 11, 1963 "Aunt Bee's Medicine Man".

Thank you 69.207.147.158 (talk) 02:36, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but we don't normally add every guest appearance performed unless WP:reliable sources have found it notable and written about it. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 03:30, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

While I agree with you AlanM1, in principle, this is a bit of an interesting case because the infobox photo used claims its's from the Andy Griffith Show; so, it seems there should be at least some mention of this appearance somewhere in the article (obviously supported by a source) beside the infobox image caption. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:12, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: I don't know. The section is supposedly a "Selected Filmography", but appears to be exhaustive, including uncredited roles, and completely uncited. I know there's a push (or there was) among the film folks to trim down exactly this type of article. OTOH, "one more won't hurt". I guess. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 06:18, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

​I thought the same thing about that section as well. It probably started out as "selected", but got expanded more and more over time. Anyway, I was thinking that a mention would work better in first paragraph of John Dehner#Televison along with the other shows mentioned. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:21, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Citing IMDb

AlanM1 and Marchjuly, If I may branch off a bit from the original question, I found this discussion interesting because I frequently see actors' and actresses' biographies that include (either in the text or in a filmography) numerous guest appearances on TV shows. They seldom have citations, and the few that are cited usually use IMDb or ctva.com, both of which are unreliable sources. I keep thinking the appearances should be reliably cited. Similarly, my watchlist almost daily shows guest appearances added to articles, again with no citation. What (if anything) should I do in those circumstances? Eddie Blick (talk) 01:00, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

@Teblick: I wish I knew. It's one of those glaring inconsistencies between reality and apparent policy against uncited, unverifiable content, not to mention indiscriminate collection of trivial information (all due respect to the artists, but relative to the overall aim of encyclopedic notability and quality, it seems pretty wrong). I think a concerted effort by a team of editors to go out and clean it up would be necessary, but I imagine there is significant objection to wholesale deletion of uncited content. I'm not sure what should constitute the criteria for selection of works, either. I don't see anything wrong with stopping new additions to the pile if they're not cited and obviously notable, though. No doubt a discussion that should be (and likely has been) held at WT:FILM. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 01:45, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

AlanM1, I appreciate your comments. I am one who likes to have a source for everything I put in an article, so I sometimes feel frustrated seeing masses of information with not apparent support. By the way, in an interesting coincidence, not long after I joined this discussion, I found an edit to Johnny Sheffield in my watchlist. An editor removed a "citation needed" template with the edit summary "Citation request is frivilous. A glance at filmography proves the point." Thus, we have an statement in the text that is supposedly verified by an uncited entry in the article's filmography. Eddie Blick (talk) 01:59, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi Teblick. IMDb is generally considered unreliable per WP:UGC, WP:EL/P#IMDb, and WP:RS/IMDB, but in some cases it might be OK if it's discussed and the consensus seems to think it is. Where IMDb is usually helpful is that it provides the names of the TV shows or films (sometimes even the year and episode name) an actor has appeared in which means that it could lead you to other more reliable secondary sources. Even if it leads you tracking down a copy of the show/film and you watch it yourself, you could cite the actual show as a source per WP:SAYWHERE. I did this once for an article in which it was claimed that the subject was connected to the film A.I. Artificial Intelligence. I looked for secondary online sources for verification and when I couldn't find any, I watched the film (again) and looked at the credits. The subject wasn't mentioned by name at all so there was no way to verify the claim and it was removed.

It all might come down to the nature of the actual content and how IDMb is being cited. If the primary claim for Wikipedia notability is that the subject has an IMDb page or their Wikipedia notability is otherwise iffy and no other secondary sources can be found, then IMDb has pretty much zero value in my opinion. If the subject's Wikipedia notability is well-established (perhaps an actor from an era way before IMDb existed) and IMDb is just being used to cite certain entries in a filmography section, then perhaps adding a template like {{Better source needed}} or {{More citations needed section}} is sufficient to let others know of the problem without removing large blocks of content. If you follow the latter approach and someone objects and removes the content anyway, then you will need to be the one to establish a consensus to re-add it because at that point someone is saying that IMDb is clearly insufficient to support the claim. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:20, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Marchjuly, I admire your dedication to tracking down other sources. I had been going by the IMDb comments on Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources and just replacing IMDb citations with "Citation needed" templates. Now I see that I was in error, so I will let them stand in the future and look for other kinds of improvements instead.Eddie Blick (talk) 02:52, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Not really that dedicated to be honest. That movie just happened to be on cable around the same time I was trying to verify that bit of information; so, I just DVRd it and watched it again. I wouldn't say your approach is wrong; in fact, it's probably more correct than not. If someone re-adds the citations you removed, then use the talk page and explain why you removed them. I know pretty much every bit of information in an article is required to be sourced; however, if the actors appearance in a film or TV show is significant and there's sufficient sourced commentary about the role earlier in the article (or at least a sourced mention), then perhaps another source isn't needed for the table. This would be sort of a tweaked application of WP:CITELEAD. If, on the other hand, the entry is not covered earlier in the article and not sourced anywhere else, like the article about the film itself, then perhaps the WP:CSC should be that it needs a proper source to be kept. -- Marchjuly (talk) 03:03, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Thank you,Marchjuly. I appreciate your clarification and your suggestion for deleting and then, if needed, discussing the citations. I will follow through that way. Eddie Blick (talk) 00:24, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protection request suitable for vandalism.

Hello,

We are experiencing frequent vandalism to our page. We are subject to edit war. They undid our correction of their changes, moments after each revision. This person has caused disruption to other people’s pages too, including editing content without knowledge of topic, changing external links outside of WP, removing pages. I wish to lock my page with editing rights for myself and colleague. Is semi-protection suitable? How can I apply for this? Vivll (talk) 11:13, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Vivll I assume this refers to Ipsotek. No, you cannot lock a page so that only you or those you designate can edit it. All pages may be edited by all good faith users. If there is a problem with vandalism, you may request general page protection at WP:RFPP. However, I don't see the edits to that article as vandalism- a deliberate effort to deface an article. Editors have been removing efforts to add promotional language to that article. Wikipedia is actually not interested in what a company wants to say about itself; Wikipedia primarily summarizes what independent reliable sources say about an article subject. If there is information that is incorrect, we want to know what it is on the article talk page(as a formal edit request if needed, but promotional language will not be accepted.

If you work for Ipsotek, you must make the required paid editing declaration. This is a Terms of Use requirement and mandatory. 331dot (talk) 11:18, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

You and Vis470 have both been editing only this article, and the content has been reverted as blatantly promotional by two experienced editors. You were also advised to declare your paid relationship on your User page before proceeding. Going forward, do that, and do not edit the article directly. Instead, propose changes on the Talk page of the article. Any other path of action will lead to both of you being blocked. David notMD (talk) 15:27, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

@Vivll: I'm afraid much of what you've said and are experiencing is because of a mistaken impression: Ipsotek is not your page. It is an article in this encyclopedia, just as it would be if it were in Encyclopædia Britannica or some independent (non-PR) book or magazine article. It's (supposed) to be written by independent volunteer Wikipedia editors, based on what independent reliable sources have written about the company. You're not entitled to directly control what is in the page, nor who edits it. You're free to mentional factual problems and discuss changes to the article at Talk:Ipsotek, where a good-faith effort will be made by editors to make sure the article complies with Wikipedia's policies, is fairly balanced with a neutral point-of-view, and accurately reflects those reliable sources. This is all described at the various blue-links given above. I hope this helps. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 01:18, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

relationship sections of one article when there is a main article of the same name and topic

I'm new.

I noticed the article on Pernambuco was marked to require improvement especially in the History Section. I began making edits without realizing the significance of the line/link indicating that there was a History of Pernambuco article. Question: To what extent should the history section in the general article on Pernambuco be related to the "main" article about the history of Pernambuco?

P2dwight (talk) 13:31, 25 August 2020 (UTC) P2dwight (talk) 13:31, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi, P2dwight, welcome to the Teahouse. If a section has a main article on it, then the section there is just a brief summary of that article. GeraldWL ✉ 13:41, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

@P2dwight: The maintenance templates at Pernambuco#History talk about specific issues (sections out of order, missing 165 years, etc.). To me, it seems that the History of Pernambuco article is not much longer than this section, which probably should not be. It seems that the main page section should be trimmed. I'd discuss what to do about it with other involved editors at Talk:Pernambuco. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 01:45, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

How do you become a wiki controller

 Fat boi 2.9 (talk) 04:37, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi Fat boi 2.9. You added this question and then you seem to have tried to remove it but created some formatting problems instead; so, I re-added your question. I'm not sure what you mean by wiki controller. Do you mean Wikipedia administrator? If that's the case, you can find out some more about the requirements for becoming an administrator in Wikipedia:Administrators and Wikipedia:Guide to requests for adminship. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:02, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Question about Sample Page and adding photos

Hi... I'm new here.. nice to be here. Might I ask when we are editing in Sample Page & we publish, does this then is public,.. or does it first have to be reviewed. Also I can't see where to add photos, probably on a different edit engine. ? Protea1111 (talk) 04:48, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi Protea1111. By Sample Page, you seem to be referring to User:Protea1111/Sample page, and that's what Wikipedia refers to as a userspace draft for a potential Wikipedia:Article. All Wikipedia pages are public in the sense that any one can see them, but WP:ARTICLE and WP:DRAFTS are quite different. You might want to take a look at Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything for some general information about the kinds of articles Wikipedia tends to accept. Help:Your first article and Help:Referencing for beginners are two other pages many new editors trying to create an article for the first time seem to find hjelpfu. You might also want to take a look at this how-to page created by a Wikipedia administrator named Ian.thomson since it contains lots of helpful suggestions as well. I also recommend that you take the Wikipedia:Adventure because you'll learn about Wikipedia editing while actually making edits to existing articles.

Drafts can be submitted to Wikipedia:Articles for creation for review, but I wouldn't suggest doing so now because your draft is almost certain to be declined. Submitting a draft for review is not required, but newish editors are encouraged to do so because it will give them a chance to receive feedback from other more experienced editors. Writing a proper Wikipedia article is pretty hard because there's lots of policies and guidelines that need to be met. Many first time editors immediately try to create article, only to see their work fairly quickly deleted for not be suitable for the article mainspace. This can be a bit discouraging when it happens which is why working on a draft and submitting it for review is suggested for editor who have yet to create many articles.

As for adding images to article, it can be a bit tricky at first, particularly when it comes to copyrights, etc., but it's not too hard to get the hang of. However, I would suggest that you first create a viable article and then worry about uploading images. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:27, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Help with a problematic string of persistent mass removal unsupported by Wikipedia standards done by a threatening editor who refuses to discuss and claims they are absolutely correct?

Serial Number 54129 (who I do not want to ping or have anybody here ping based on threatening comments made towards me, including a request to block me after mistakenly reporting this situation to Arbcom) has repeatedly removed mass amounts of content on List of My Hero Academia characters claiming the info to be unverifiable and original research, despite the content explicitly being stated by the material, and that statement being backed up by multiple other editors on the article talk page, which SN has not commented on since the beginning of the month. I recently made a DRN thread that was recently closed due to me and SN going into an uncivil back-and-forth exchange that again resulted in SN refusing to discuss after claiming that they were absolutely right and that I had no idea what I was talking about. However, I based on patterns shown by SN, I know that they will be back to removing the same content without discussion and ignoring the article talk page in a few weeks, and I want to know if there is anything to prevent that. I’m worried that they will end up casting more aspersions on me about “bulshitting admins” or “crufting”, and I’m scared that I’ll be wrongfully blocked or have the page wrongfully fully protected based on an overzealous and threatening editor removing content in a way that does is not supported by Wikipedia standards. Do I just revert their edits every time they do the same mass removal in a few weeks? I know ANI and DRN are not the right places to report this, as ANI directed me to the article talk page (where Serial Number refused to discuss) and DRN directed me to ANI (when I had already tried ANI and it boomeranged). I’m sorry if this isn’t the right place either, but I don’t want to have to every few weeks deal with constantly reverting mass removal unsupported by Wikipedia standards from somebody who would rather threaten me and claim they are right than discuss on the article talk page, I’m scared, and I have no idea how to handle this situation. Unnamed anon (talk) 06:05, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Pinging GorrillaWarfare and DESiegel since both are admins who have previously been involved in trying to sort this out.

@Unnamed anon: You don't need to be scared, but you might want to take a step back for a bit and let things cool down. My suggestion to you would be to continue discussing things on the article talk and continue working for a consensus in favor of the edit you want to make. No matter how right you know you are, reverting each other like this is going to be seen as edit warring and the two of you are likely going to end up being blocked. You might also want to consider self-reverting your last edit and propose that the change be made on the article's talk page. If you're able to estblish a consensus for the addtion, it will be added regardless of whether the other editor likes it, and they will be expected to honor the consensus or establish a new one in its place. If they choose to not discuss things or take a WP:BATTLEGROUND approach, then it will only reflect poorly on them. You're both close to WP:3RR right now and continuing on in this manner will almost certainly lead to both of you being blocked.

Finally, I think your understanding of WP:BRD is a little off. The BOLD edit was when you added the content the first time, not when the other editor reverted you. At that point, it probably would've been better to bring things to the article talk page. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:50, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

The main issue is that multiple other editors have agreed that the mass removal was inappropriate, and even afterwards, the other editor still removed the content, claiming that the material wasn’t verifiable when the anime and manga are both considered verifiable sources, and proceeding to tell me that I have no idea what I was talking about on the now-closed DRN thread. Their refusal to discuss on the article talk page keeps leading to them still reverting weeks later and giving me a threatening remark. It’s not just the edit warring or the refusal to discuss I’m afraid of, it’s also the threatening attitude. And how many editors does it take for a consensus, because I’ve been backed up by at least two other editors. Unnamed anon (talk) 07:10, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

A "threatening attitude" can indicate a behavioral problem and that would be better off discussed at WP:ANI. If it really bothers you and you're feeling WP:HARASSed, then that would be the best place to assistance. Before you go to ANI, however, you should look at WP:AOHA and WP:BOOMERANG because your behavior will be examined as well and you will be expected to provide specific examples of the other editor's behavior. There are very few Wikipedia saints amd pretty much everyone who edits alot gets frustrated at some point in time; so, if someone points out thngs that you could've done better, acknowledge their concerns and explain that you will try to do so. Heated discussions can be unpleasent for sure, but it's repeated behavior that is considered more problematic and likely to draw a stronger response.

There's no set number or editors required to establish a consensus, but generally the more the merrier. However, a local consensus cannot supercede a community-wide policy or guideline; so, a thousand editors saying it's OK on an article talk page to add a BLP violation to an article is not going to make it OK to add a BLP violation to the article. At the same time, a single editor claiming that certain content is a BLP violation when a thousand editors are saying it isn't is also just as unlikely to carry the day. If the other editor chooses not to participate in article talk page discussion, then you cannot make them do so; the other editor, however, cannot stop you and others from discussing things and reaching a consensus. Maybe trying to get others familiar with the subject matter involved in the discussion would be a good thing. Scroll up to the top of the article's talk page and see what WikiProject's it's scope falls under and then add {{Please see}} templates to the projects' talk pages. Since you dispute seems to involve and interpretation of WP:OR, it might also be a good idea to add a "Please see" template to WP:ORN as well. You might want to even consider a WP:RFC if you feel wider community input is necessary to resolve this. If other people are getting involved and they support the changes you want to make, then the other editor will have to reconsider their position or risk being sanctioned by the community. At the same time, if it turns out the consensus favors the other editor's position, then you will then have to accept that and move on. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:04, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

PDF: delete and as valid reference

 MaySundAnd (talk) 07:57, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

How can I delete this PDF-file, and does a PDF-file without a link count as a valid ref.?

Want to delete this one: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:CV_template.pdf?markasread=25687252&markasreadwiki=commonswiki

- May — Preceding unsigned comment added by MaySundAnd (talk • contribs) 08:00, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Commons:File:CV_template.pdf is hosted at Wikimedia Commons. As you view it there, you should see the option "Nominate for deletion" (or, if you are viewing it in Norwegian, something similar in Norwegian). Nominate it for deletion there, of course with a valid deletion rationale. It's a Wikimedia Commons matter, not a Wikipedia matter. If you want to delete it and also want to use it as a reference, then one of us doesn't understand something important. -- Hoary (talk) 08:15, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

misrepresentation and biased and defaming editors especially to particular group of people doing racism

hey anyone who is reading this message i want to draw your attention on the two newly joined editors on wikipedia doing their propganda and defamotry work on the single article pageRajput ,the both editors named User:Heba Aisha and User:LukeEmily are from same team doing vandalism and spreading misinformation about a single article of an community group Rajput . both editors has done heavily edits on same page you can checklast 250 edit history last 250 edit history what they both have done till now from past month,they are adding the new references from propandas writers or paid writers just to malign the image of community . they are representing the references in such a way to spread the misinformation on page . both editors are far from neutrility and dedicating the entire time to just this single pageRajput . check the talk pages of both editors for more info ,you will see their propganda work and their contribution on this single page ,they also revert the other editors edits and they added a alot of references which can't be trusted from view of neurtility or good source ,they are also adding refernces in such a way that it looks genuine from first perspective but when you dig in deeper you will understand their racism toward a group of people . anyone who is reading this please must check the page history and both editors works and their join dates on wiki and what they are doing since day 1 to till now especially on a single page . wikipedia is a open source platform for betterment of society and providing free information to worldwide users ,few elements like these guys are maligning the image of the wikipedia platform. Loneltrussia (talk) 07:56, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

• on Rajput talk page discussion is going on you can put ur views there.Also for my contributions see my profile.Thank u very much.Heba Aisha (talk) 07:59, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

This is being discussed at WP:AN/EW; duplicating discussions is not helpful. You are welcome to add to the discussion there. -- Hoary (talk) 08:23, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Potential vandalism/wrong citation

Hi everyone I recently came across a page which https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayurveda which misquotes a source to provide a potentially vandal/non-neutral view of the practice in general. Refer to line 2 of article of citation 3 which mentions that the practice is "quackery". Since there is protection applied to the article, I was wondering if any experienced editors could review this issue.

Thanks! 117.97.242.222 (talk) 08:26, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Please make a specific request/recommendation, and post it in Talk:Ayurveda. -- Hoary (talk) 08:32, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Stated in the source "acquaint doctors regarding specific provisions and orders barring quackery by unqualified people." medicine is mentioned "4 lakh belong to practitioners of Indian Medicine (Ayurvedic, Sidha, Tibb and Unani)." The claim is correct. GeraldWL ✉ 08:35, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

When do copyvios require revision deletion, and how do you go about requesting them?

I recently encountered this edit, which appeared to be a copyvio - [3]. I reverted it and notified the editor, but since this is my first time dealing with copyvios, I don't know if there was anything else I needed to do. WP:CV101 says that "If appropriate request revision deletion of the reverted edits" but I wasn't sure what the criteria for rev deletion are or where to place the request template? Additionally, should I have placed Template:Cclean on the article's talk page? Thanks, Darth Coracle (talk) 09:09, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

@Darth Coracle: basically, to request the removal, you want to add {{copyvio-revdel}} to the page. I strongely recommend that you use User:Enterprisey/cv-revdel for this, as this allows you to select the revisions from the history page, which makes things easier than manually searching for the version ids. Victor Schmidt (talk) 09:16, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Ah thanks; good to know. Darth Coracle (talk) 09:20, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Transclude 2 or more tables from 1 article to another.

How would one transclude two or more "Series overview" tables from one article to another? I've used the onlyinclude /onlyinclude coding for both. But when I transclude the first table, the table appears with extra table coding below it. The second table simply won't appear (it still references the first table). How to I single each table out so that each can be viewed as planned? Do I have to name the "include" coding for each somehow? Are there samples I could be directed to? CYAce01 (talk) 06:24, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

@CYAce01: Yup, if I understand correctly. See WP:SELTRANS. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 07:14, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

 MaySundAnd (talk) 07:53, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

@AlanM1:That was exactly what I was looking for. Worked great. Thank you! CYAce01 (talk) 09:41, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

How to submit an article in Spanish wikipedia once I have it ready.

Hi Everyone! I have recently been declined an article in the English wikipedia as it was in Spanish, they referred me to the Spanish wikipedia site, where I included the article I'd like to submit for review, but I can't seem to find the option of submit. Please advise how to proceed.

Please see below: "Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (August 25)[editar código] AFC-Logo Decline.svgYour recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by NotTheFakeJTP was: The submission appears to be written in Spanish. This is the English Language Wikipedia; we can only accept articles written in the English Language. Please provide a high-quality English Language translation of your submission. Otherwise, you may write it in the Spanish Wikipedia. Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved. If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to User:EstudioMatildeMarin/sandbox and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window. If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to User:EstudioMatildeMarin/sandbox, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit. If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted. If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors. JTP (talk • contribs) 21:38, 25 August 2020 (UTC)" EstudioMatildeMarin (talk) 09:45, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

EstudioMatildeMarin, sorry to have to do this to you again, but Spanish and English Wikipedias are two entirely different and independent projects. How things work there, only those who edit there could tell you. It is possible but unlikely that someone who edits both the Spanish Wikipedia and this one will see this post before it is archived. You could look for a help desk at the Spanish Wikipedia itself, es:Wikipedia:Café/Archivo/Ayuda/Actual looks like one to me but I can't read Spanish very well. Usedtobecool ☎️ 10:24, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Help for blocking

Hey I'm a newcomer to wiki, How to block some Vandal user from editing that article ?? Anyone help please. Abhiraam.chyren (talk) 06:33, 26 August 2020 (UTC)Abhiraam.chyren

Moved from WT:Twinkle. SD0001 (talk) 10:04, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Abhiraam.chyren, is this about Sushant Singh Rajput? WP:AIV is the place to report vandals. However, there may be other steps you need to consider before reporting someone. So, it would help to know more about the particular editor or article you want to address. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 10:38, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Did Charles Porion die in 1868 or in 1908?

Sorry if I'm in the wrong place by the way, haven't exactly been here long.

There is conflicting information about this, even between language editions on Wikipedia. French and Spanish versions claim the latter date, whereas English claims the former. There is a source on the corresponding English article, but I don't have the language know-how and source evaluation skills to check whatever sources the Spanish and French have for the date and which one is the most authoritative. --85.76.101.85 (talk) 18:40, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Museo del Prado (should be authoritative) says "after 1868".[4] The French article doesn't seem to have any references for his death date. These two books also say after 1868.[5][6] Calliopejen1 (talk) 18:59, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, that cleared up the matter significantly. I edited the article accordingly. --85.76.101.85 (talk) 19:10, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Evidence for post 1868: He was still painting in 1876, he received the Legion of Honour in 1884. Christies, which appears to be the source of the current date, seems to be misled. The 1868 date seems linked only to his time at the Salon. I am not sure they are an authoritative source for this information. An equivalent French auction house says 1908[7]. This book attributes it to 1908, and is referring to art created between 1873 and '79[8]. Anyway, would likely need someone with access to one of those books. Koncorde (talk) 19:26, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

The Musee d'Orsay book is citing an [[École du Louvre] thesis written in 2003 which apparently concluded he died in 1908.[9] If Musee d'Orsay think that's correct, I think we should go with that. It postdates a lot of other references; perhaps new research has been done. I'll edit the article with a note about this. Calliopejen1 (talk) 20:39, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

@Calliopejen1 and Koncorde: A New York Times article dated 1906 about one of his paintings says he was already dead then. The Legion of Honour was awarded in 1884. So, the citable range seems to be 1884–1906, assuming the LoH was not awarded posthumously. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 08:44, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Alan, a third date to look at! Koncorde (talk) 10:53, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

References

Review

So I have re-submitted my draft, does it usually take this long for the draft to get reviewed since the first time I submitted my draft it only took a day for it to get reviewed. Thank you. EuniceR29 (talk) 01:13, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy Draft:Universiti Teknologi MARA Sarawak. Ther review process is not a queue. Reviewers look at the list and select what they want to review next. Can be days, but can be as long as months. You can continue to work on the draft while you wait. David notMD (talk) 01:42, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

I see. Thank you for the reply.  EuniceR29 (talk) 02:40, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

@EuniceR29: Many of the references are just bare URLs, which you should improve while you wait. See WP:ERB for the correct way to cite references. Note also that refs go after punctuation, not before it, unless it's necessary to distinguish that the ref applies just to the last word and not the whole sentence or clause. Please also see MOS:CURLY. I've corrected these issues in the draft at Special:Diff/974982328. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 02:16, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello and thank you for correcting the draft. So now I just need to edit the references?  EuniceR29 (talk) 02:40, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Advice from Teahouse hosts does not necessarily mean that a reviewer will approve the draft. The groups of volunteers (hosts and reviewers) are not connected. David notMD (talk) 12:22, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

leave me alone

how do I get you off of my computer. When I open it, it has a picture from you. It is irritating. Get off of my computer!!!!!!! 2601:280:4780:240:1D4F:1157:152B:CEC6 (talk) 13:11, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello IP editor. Your question makes no sense, I'm afraid. As this is a forum for people wanting help editing Wikipedia, and not for setting up their own computer, I'm not sure we could help you anyway. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:13, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Hot House Music Schools

Hi everyone,

Would these two sources about Hot House Music Schools be credible enough to ensure notability?

https://missionlocal.org/event/community-music-center-the-hot-house-music-school-presents-the-screaming-kicks-big-band/

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5409a75ce4b0dc350dc227fa/t/5daecda02ed72b22d6f728cf/1571737057288/Orrery2.pdf PAGE 18/19^

I'm keen to hear your thoughts, --MattHHM (talk) 14:03, 26 August 2020 (UTC) MattHHM (talk) 14:03, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to The Teahouse, This [10] is a routine event listing with a passing mention of "The Hot House Music School" so not a reliable in-depth source. This[11] is an interview with the founder so not independent or reliable. Theroadislong (talk) 14:16, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Copyright question

I did not violate the copy right policy of wikipedia. You tube told me for infobox I have to copy the format from others I tried some inforbox column filled accordingly some whow it was view preview not the page in the website suggently Imy system is hanged up after that I cannot open the edit page Utpalbhadra1216 (talk) 15:41, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Your User name history shows no editing of any article in English Wikipedia. Were you editing while not logged in? Or not English? Would help if you identify by name the article you were editing. David notMD (talk) 16:34, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

why you deleted my edit its wask good not wrong but why just why this website is so lame and boring

 Zhyrnam (talk) 15:38, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Zhyrnam, Which article? GeraldWL ✉ 16:22, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy link Work It (film) user has vandalised the article three times now and been correctly reverted and warned. Theroadislong (talk) 16:31, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Zhyrnam, you kept on changing the text to "roope huolman," a clear WP:VANDALISM. Vandalism is not permitted on Wikipedia. And no-- in your case-- our website is fun and not boring. I'll help you out by giving you Wikipedia policies to read. GeraldWL ✉ 16:37, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

HOW DO I CREATE AND ARTICLE

Please, I would like to know how to create an article for some artist that i am assisting. – Nkechi36 (talk) 14:11, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

I am sorry, but you cannot write it unless you disclose something. But it doesn’t mean you have to disclose your personal information. This and this gives more information. Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nihaal The Wikipedian (talk • contribs) 14:22, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Nkechi36, and welcome to the Teahouse. Please be aware that creating a new article is one of the hardest tasks on Wikipedia, and I always advise new users to spend some months working on existing articles and learningh how Wikipedia works before they try it. Also, if you are assisting the artist, that means that you have a conflict of interest, and that makes it even harder, because it is difficult to get the required degree of neutrality. Do remember that Wikipedia is basically not interested in anything that the artist says or wants to say about themselves or that their friends or associates says about them: it is only interested in what people who have no connection with the artist, and who have not been prompted or given information by the artist, have chosen to publish about them in reliable sources. If you can find several such independent published sources, then, after declaring your COI on your user page, you can start creating a draft article using the articles for creation process: remember that you should not say what you think or know about the artist, but only what your independent sources say. If you cannot find at least three such sources (and remember that anything based on an interview with the artist, or anything from an associate of the artist, doesn't count) then the artist does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, and you should give up the idea.

In any case, as the previous answer says, it's worth reading your first article. --ColinFine (talk) 16:43, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Editing non-functioning references

Hi. I'm new at this. I'm trying to add references to a page that doesn't have enough references. Harrowsmith Country Life Unfortunately the three existing references don't seem to work. There is no reference list and clicking on the in-line reference numbers doesn't pop up any information. I don't know how to fix that and am reluctant to add new references in the same style because then they won't work either. I read that I'm not supposed to mix reference styles, so I'd like to fix the existing references before adding new ones. Kermitchemist (talk) 13:32, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse Kermitchemist. I have just added an (empty) References section for you. It will ony get populated once you've added inline citations. See Help:Referencing for beginners to get you started (or this guide I produced on the same subject). Let us know how you get on. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:50, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I've added one reference and it populated the reference list, but the three existing references still don't work. Any advice on how to get them to work?

See what Nick mentioned - Referencing for beginners. What you added was content to External links, not references. Refs follow the text being referenced - Wikipedia automatically numbers them and shows the ref content under References. David notMD (talk) 15:57, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks but those original three references weren't added by me. I don't know who added them or what they are referencing. Not sure how to figure that out from the limited information that they give. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kermitchemist (talk • contribs) 16:07, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

A big problem with those pre-existing refs is that they go to Harrowsmith Country Life. What is needed throughout the article is referencing to articles that were written ABOUT HCL, not BY HCL. David notMD (talk) 17:47, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Portal for New Pages

Hello, I am very new to the Wikimedia Foundation and I'm just bad at writing in general. Is there some kind of portal for underdeveloped articles and stubs? I don't really know where to start. If there is not, I am just asking how to find them, not specifically for a portal. Gjjixzho (talk) 17:12, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Gjjixzho, and welcome to the Teahouse and to Wikipedia. I'm not sure if it has that or not, but Community portal has a lot of suggestions for tasks that editors can do. --ColinFine (talk) 17:34, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

@Gjjixzho:, it depends on what you are interested in doing. There are many maintenance categories of articles that need help but no one place that matches your description. Stub articles are sorted into a large number of categories so maybe start there and trawl through until you find a category that catches your interest? I hope that helps. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 17:38, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Okay thank you, ColinFine and Eggishorn, This has been very helpful. Wish me luck! Gjjixzho (talk) 18:12, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

How to make my entry more encyclopedic?

Hi, I am making a collection of Puerto Rican composers and I just submitted my first draft, Draft:Ivan Enrique Rodriguez but it received some comments saying that it appeard to read as a press release. I followed the sructure of Robert Beaser Christopher Rouse (composer) and John Corigliano articles. Is there any way I can make my article better? This is my first article and I want to do it propperly as I would like to contribute with much more. MahlerLover (talk) 21:05, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Questions about requested edits

These are general questions that arose as a result of my attempt to get content added to an article, but they are not specifically about that article. I have a recognized COI and therefore am requesting edits on the article's talk page. My questions are: (1) How do edit requests that are judged by another editor to meet Wikipedia standards for neutrality, notability, and sourcing get transferred to the article? (2) Should I write my requested edits formally formatted, as I would if I was editing the article, or is it better to think of the content that I'm suggesting as pieces to be pulled together more formally in the article by someone else?; (3) I am currently thinking that expanding an article, for which I have a COI, is a collaborative effort where I offer suggestions on the talk page in the format that is directly transferable to the article, get advice from an editor who does not have a COI, revise accordingly, and iterate until we together have produced a body of new content that is worthy of adding to the article. Is this view reasonably consistent with your expectations coming into such interactions? Thanks in advance for any advice that you offer. BiostatSci (talk) 19:51, 26 August 2020 (UTC) BiostatSci (talk) 20:16, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy link to COI: Melanie Stansbury. Onto the questions by BiostatSci:

1. Depends on how the request is phrased. If the request is just a general note, I have to turn that into Wikitext and use citation templates. If it's already formatted in Wikitext, I always "recreate" the sentence so that I can check every word and source.
2. Either way is fine for me, as I rewrite everything anyways. What's more important is that you provide reliable, secondary sources to back up every claim, and that the request is written concisely and clearly. Be sure to make it clear what exactly should be changed, eg. change X to Y, as it saves editors time from digging through the article to find the problem.
3. Yes. Ideally that's how we want edit requests to go, but it hardly happens so smoothly. It helps if you notify users with {{re}} every time you make a reply.

Glancing over the request so far, you've generally been respectful. That's good, so keep that up! Hope this helps. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 21:25, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello, BiostatSci, and welcome to the Teahouse. I think these questions are answered on Edit requests, but to summarise: make your request on the talk page of the article, as specifically as you can (eg 'In paragraph starting ... add "...." before "..."') and use the {{edit request}} template, which will add your request to a list that some editors regularly look at. There is no reason why you can't open a more general discussion first if appropriate: just be open about your COI. --ColinFine (talk) 21:25, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

911 conspiracy theories template

{{911ct}} 108.185.107.201 (talk) 21:19, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello, IP user. I've added a header, and converted the template you included into a link to that template. What is your question about editing Wikipedia? --ColinFine (talk) 21:43, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Colin Higgins -- correction of resting place

Colin Higgins Resting Place.

The page/article name: Colin Higgins

I am the lawyer for the Colin Higgins Trust and Estate. The Trustee has informed me that the article on Colin Higgins in two places incorrectly states: "... was buried in Valhalla Memorial Park Cemetery." The correct information is: "Per the wishes of Colin Higgins, he was cremated and his ashes were scattered by family members around the small islands of Moku Nui and Moko Iki, which are near his former vacation home in Oahu, Hawaii." 98.148.1.143 (talk) 23:21, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

(ec)The addition of the contested info was cited to "Find a Grave", which is not usually accepted as a reliable source, and probably should not have been added in the first place, sorry. I have removed both mentions, on this account. In order to add the information as stated above, WP needs a reliable source. I hope the removal of the incorrect info will be satisfactory. Thanks for bringing this to our attention. Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 23:52, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You should make a formal edit request(click those words for instructions) on the article talk page, Talk:Colin Higgins, and provide a published reliable source for the information. While I believe what you say, we need a published publicly available source for verification purposes. 331dot (talk) 23:50, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

You should also read the paid editing policy and make the required declaration. 331dot (talk) 00:00, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Moved comments here, from wrong section below

If you are same person who was writing per Colin Higgins, please see my note above. In order to add the correct info, we need a source, such as a newspaper obituary. If you can provide such a source, please add it on the talkpage for the Colin Higgins article. I will be watching, and will format the citation, and add the information. Thanks! Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 00:04, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: was I wrong to remove "contested info", which was based solely on Find A Grave? I have seen such info removed before, but I may have been mistaken, as to the reason for the removal of the info. (I wish to learn, not disagree!) I understand the points you have made above. Personally, I would prefer no information, vs. incorrect information. Thanks, Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 00:51, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Introduction and Request for Support

I now understand the message I received about my first edit. Would someone like to add the reference for me?MarieYolette (talk) 23:45, 26 August 2020 (UTC) MarieYolette (talk) 23:45, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi MarieYolette. While Higgins's burial place might seem like a nice factoid, it's probably not really a relevant piece encyclopedic information per WP:NOTEVERYTHING. sometimes such information is added to Wikipedia articles because the burial site (i.e. the cemetary) is Wikipedia notable and has an article written about it. Some cemeteries are "famous" for being where famous people are buried; so, some editors think such information should be added to the Wikipedia biographies about these people, which might be the reason the bit about Valhalla Memorial Park Cemetery was added to article about Higgins. Anyway, if you can find a reliable WP:SECONDARY source which supports the claim you're trying to make, then perhaps it can be added to the article. You need to be careful of obituaries though since many are WP:PRIMARY sources (even if they appear in a newspaper) because they are often written and submitted by family or friends of the deceased. It would be better to look for something written by someone unconnected to Higgins to support such a claim. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:24, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

"If you are same person who was writing per Colin Higgins": As her list of contributions will show, she is not. Tribe of Tiger, Marchjuly: please take a look.. You may also wish to move your Higgins-related comments to the separate thread. -- Hoary (talk) 01:14, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

@Hoary: Thanks, will move as suggested, and apologize to MarieYolette Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 01:18, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Disclosures/Transparency

Hi everyone! I am hugely appreciative of folks taking time to answer questions here. There's almost TOO much information about Wikipedia available on the web so it's helpful to have humans filter through the data and provide clear direction.

My question is around disclosure/transparency. I am looking to add and update information on a Wikipedia page for someone I represent and am financially tied to. Because there is a conflict of interest, I don't want to create any issues by making edits myself. In terms of best practices, would you recommend reaching out via talk pages to past editors, disclosing my connection first, and creating a relationship before suggesting any potential updates backed by unbiased links? I don't want to jump the gun and be presumptuous. Any advice would be appreciated! GeletkaPlus (talk) 01:33, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Please read WP:PAID and WP:COI, which may help to answer your questions. Thanks for your transparency! Best, Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 04:13, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

IMDB

Is IMDB a reliable source to add as a citation in contributions? Editingwork8 (talk) 06:15, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi Editingwork8. IMDb pages tend to be user-generated content and thus are not really considered to be reliable sources for Wikipedia's purposes as explained in WP:Citing IMDB, WP:RS/P#IMDb and WP:RS/IMDB. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:24, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Is TYT a reliable source?

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

OP has been blocked for sock puppetry; so, there's no point in leaving this open. See also WP:RSN#RfC TYT for reference. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:28, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

---

Is TYT a WP:RS? I couldn't find it in Perennial sources. It is clearly opinionated, so I assume statements of opinion should be attributed. However, from the perspectives of 1. statements of fact, and 2. WP:N (e.g. when it profiles, interviews or mentions someone), is it considered reliable? Stefania0 (talk) 04:32, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I need tips.

I have been editing and updating a page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huawei_Mobile_Services). But every edit or addition I have made has been undone by some moderators saying that the content I input is not neutral. The source of the content is from Huawei itself. It is all factual and true information. Can you please give me tips on how could I edit the page more effectively so it wouldn't be undone? I'd appreciate your help. Thanks. Gian.cabs (talk) 03:47, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

First of all, please be advised that Wikipedia is mainly interested what people have written in WP:RS about the subject, not what the subjects want to say about themselfes, as humans tend to speak more in favor of things or other people they are closely affilated with, see Conflict of interest. Secondly, asking the same question over mutiple places is considered WP:FORUMSHOPPING and will not help, it yust wastes the time of the people trying to answer you. Thirdly, I have looked at this edit from you, and I must agree that is doesn't conform with WP:NPOV. A couple of notes:

• Since we want to remain neutral, Wikipedia articles should only use the third person to describe events, unless we are directely quting someone
• It contains a bunch of WP:PEACOCK words
• Please dont copy stuff from elsewhere. Texts not written for Wikipedia are in most cases either not under a siutable license or written from a siutable point of view. As copyright violations can get Wikipedia in legal trouble, i had to request that that revision is hidden from public view. Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:25, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Rules for company logos/photos?

I'm working on a new Wikipedia page for a company. I know the rules about proper information to make up the verbiage and the citations from reputable third-party sources that are required, but I'm not sure about photos. Looking at a competitive company - AGCO - there are multiple images included of the company's products, though no citations seem to be present. Is anything fair game as long as it's not promotional in nature? Is there a limitation to the number of images provided? Otherwise, it seems like logos are always fair game, correct?

Otherwise, when this page is written, is the best place to start the "Sandbox" for proper review before going live?

Thanks for your help!

---

 Jthorp72 (talk) 20:10, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Jthorp72, and welcome to the Teahouse. To answer the second question: my advice would be to use articles for creation, and create the draft in Draft space. Your sandbox is an alternative, but Draft is a newer technology, that I think is preferable.

As for images: the main issue with images is one of copyright. First, note that you cannot live-link to images elsewhere. You can link to them if your use is complies with the rather restricted rules of for external links, but readers will have to click the link to see the images. Images in articles must be uploaded to either Wikipedia or (preferably) Wikimedia Commons. All images uploaded to Commons must be free to use - either in the public domain (by reason of age, or explicit release) or licensed under a licence such as CC-BY-SA. So if you want to upload a photo that you took yourself, and does not show copyright material, then you can just do so with the Upload wizard, and license it on the fly. But for images that are somebody else's copyright, or that show material that is somebody else's copyright, that is often more difficult: the copyright holder will need either to have explicitly licensed the image (as is done for some images on sites like Pinterest, I believe, but not for all by any means), or will need to take the steps described in donating copyright materials - and they need to understand that that will permit anybody to use or alter the image for any purpose, commercial or not, as long as they attribute it.

There is an exception to this that may be relevant: because the rules of copyright so limit the available images, English Wikipedia allows non-free images in certain restrictive circumstances: see the non-free content criteria. The case that may be relevant here is that logos are often treated in this way.

Provided copyright rules are complied with, there is no particular limit on the number of images in an article; but if other editors think there are too many, they are free to remove some, just as they can make any other edit to an article. See BRD. --ColinFine (talk) 21:21, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

@Jthorp72: Generally, the number of images is limited by the vertical space of matching text. A typical article has images on the right with text on the left, and looks "ugly" if there's a bunch of empty space on the left because there are too many images. Galleries that span across the page are used sparingly, and generally only for good reason. See especially the links at WP:IMAGE#Policy and guidelines for details. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 11:40, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Editors who won't talk

How can I best address an IP editor who continues to remove sources/change information on an article, when the IP editor won't participate on the article's talk page? The article in question is Barbara Bush. Since 2020-08-10, an IP editor has changed the subject's birthplace multiple times and has ignored pleas to discuss changes on the talk page. I don't want to engage in an edit war, but I want to try to keep the information in the article accurate. —Eyer (If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message to let me know.) 21:50, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

@Eyer: If it is persistent, you can ask for semi-protection which will prevent IP editing: WP:RFPP. If it is the same IP always, you can leave warnings on the talk page and it the behavior doesnt stop you may be able to have an admin block to partially block it. RudolfRed (talk) 21:55, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Note: The /64 has been blocked for a month. Leaving messages on a user talk page will not be useful, as they get assigned a new IP address (within the /64) for each new "session" (as is typical for IPv6). —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 11:54, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Can someone please help me with this?

I want to align this template to the left on my my user page. Can someone please help me? I tried using the align template, but it didn't work. Thanks! I-82-I | TALK 01:06, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Done! Giraffer (munch) 13:17, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Removal of corrections

Removal of necessary corrections from a wikipedia page. I edited a wikipedia page by providing totally correct information but it was removed .i want to know why. (2006nishan178713) 2006nishan178713 (talk) 13:41, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

@2006nishan178713: Your edits were removed as some were total copyright violations from the college website (which is wholly unacceptable) and others where not encyclopaedic in their nature, and thus worthless to the project. Those might sound rather strong words, but just because you attend this school does not give you the right to claim ownership of it. One of your deleted edits contained the following text: Author & Editor :User:2006nishan178713 Maintained by  : User:2006nishan178713 This will be updated when we receive more reliable information. Thanks for reading. From your YouTube posts you clearly have an undeclared Conflict of Interest with this subject. Please declare your connection before attempting to make any further edits. (You can probably understand now why we declined your recent request to be added to the Teahouse list of hosts, as you still have a lot to learn about our policies and guidelines.) In future, if someone removes your edits, the sensible thing to do is first read the edit summaries to get your answer and then, if still confused, contact the deleting editor and seek an explanation. Personally, I would have left a formal notice on your talk page warning you never to try that again - I'm sorry that didn't happen in this instance. Nick Moyes (talk) 14:01, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello, 2006nishan178713 and welcome to the Teahouse.

I take it this is about Techno India Group Public School, and particularly about the recent edits by Diannaa that removed a "vission" and a "mission statement" and many details of infrastructure. The place to discuss this is the article talk page, in this case Talk:Techno India Group Public School. In general, misison statements and the like are not independnet, tend to be promotional, and are usually omitted from articles about organizations. The kind of very detailed infrastructure information listed is often not judged encyclopedic and is omitted from Wikipedia articles, and in this particular case much of it was a copyright violation.

As it happens, Diannaa is particularly experienced in dealing with copyright issues here, and well as being a generally experienced editor. Text may not be copied from other sites into Wikipediua unless it has been released under a compatible free license (or is in the public domain), unless it is short enough to form a proper quotation and then in must be marked, attributed, and cited. (Other content such as images also may not be copied, but the detailed rules are a bit different, and do not apply in this case.)

So if you really think some of this info should be re-added to the article, please explain in detail why on Talk:Techno India Group Public School. Remember that Wikipedia article are based primarily on what others have said about a topic, not what an organization says about itself, and minor details likely to change are usually not included.

Also, you seem to havbe been concentrated on this school. Do you have any connection with it? If you do, you probably have a conflict of interest and should declare that on your user page. If you are an employee or intern at the school, or have been hired or contracted to publicize the school or to write this article, you would be considered a paid editor and you must disclose this as described in the linked policy. This is a mandatory action under the Terms of Use. ~~— Preceding unsigned comment added by DESiegel (talk • contribs)

How do I create a wiki page?

 Siennar (talk) 14:03, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello Siennar! See Help:Your first article and/or the shorter version User:Ian.thomson/Howto. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:09, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Browser for mobile

Dear fellow Wikipedians, What are the browsers that are supported for editing in mobile ? For laptop / desktop, Chrome is supported, but not for mobiie. Please help..... Cheers.... Anupam Dutta (talk) 09:47, 26 August 2020 (UTC) Anupam Dutta (talk) 09:47, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Anupamdutta73, I am not entirely sure what you mean. I use Wikipedia on Chrome in my android mobile phone all the time, though I don't make many mobile edits. Could you be more specific as to the nature of the problem you are having? Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 10:29, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Anupamdutta73, I don't know if this will help, but I use the "official" Wikipedia app for Android. This allows you to edit an article in much the same way as you can when accessing Wikipedia via a browser. There is no equivalent of the "Edit source" tab at the top of the page, but each section within the article has a pencil icon next to which serves the same purpose. I don't think I would be comfortable doing any serious editing on a mobile screen with a small touch keypad, but it can be done. Mike Marchmont (talk) 12:13, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Usedtobecool and Mike Marchmont During the lockdown period, I didn't have access to my laptop.. I had to do it all on my mobile... Now every time I edit, I am reminded that I am not using a recognised browser.. so now,. looking for that elusive offical browser... By the way, my laptop is yet to have Bengali font.... So hope, you have got a hang of my problem (though not serious , but want peace of mind).... Cheers...... Anupam Dutta (talk) 12:59, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Anupamdutta73, can yo be more specific by giving us the full message that it is showing you ? —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 13:33, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

TheDJ When I click on "edit" button , the following notice pops up "You are using a browser which is not officially supported by this editor." - Anupam Dutta (talk) 15:46, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Well, I have just tried doing an edit using Firefox on my Android device. When I click the "Edit" button, I am taken to the usual editing page. I am then able to make an edit and publish it in the usual way. So your problem is probably specific to your browser or possibly your Android version. Have you tried using a different browser and/or a different device? Mike Marchmont (talk) 17:16, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Anupamdutta73, This is the Visual Editor on mobile reporting an unsupported browser. That means Chrome older than version 19 or a completely unknown browser. What browser and version are you using ? This internet page should show you the full browser information, maybe we can help if we know that. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 07:21, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Dear TheDJ,The result of your link - "Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 9; vivo 1904) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/85.0.4183.78 Mobile Safari/537.36". Hope you can help me... Cheers... Anupam Dutta (talk) 14:52, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Anupamdutta73, this indicates that you are using the Vivo browser, a device specific browser used by the Chinese brand Vivo. It's reviews include gems like: "this browser is not more than a heap of garbage". May i suggest Chrome. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 15:05, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Images in infobox showing death / suffering

While reviewing the Killing of George Floyd article I was momentarily struck by the fact we included an image at the top of perhaps the moment he died, was immediately dying, or already dead. While not graphic, it did kind of strike me as odd that maybe this is insensitive and for this article, and others that may be doing something similar, maybe a more neutral image should be selected or omitted entirely. It doesn't bother me personally, and at the same time I do wonder if the image will end up being burned into popular conscience like the Execution of Nguyễn Văn Lém but when looking for other similar events (murder of, execution of, killing of) we either focus on a relatively benign image or do not include one (even if it was broadcast on live TV such as Execution of Saddam Hussein). To be clear, I am not suggesting a scrub of the image - just that perhaps it shouldn't be the top image and we should consider how we present images in the future with some consideration. Anyway, curious as to other peoples thoughts are. Koncorde (talk) 15:06, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Koncorde, see WP:NOTCENSORED. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, an explicit source of information. We don't cover things just because it may cause PTSD. I think it would be doing a disservice if we are not showing the photo. See Wikipedia:Content disclaimer for the disclaimer. GeraldWL ✉ 15:15, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

The image has also been shared globally, so there's no need for a cover-up anyway. GeraldWL ✉ 15:18, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

There is not a question of a cover-up. I explicitly stated "I do wonder if the image will end up being burned into popular conscience". I do question how graphic we are inclined to be. Is there any threshold of sensitivity? Child sex abuse images under the Pedophilia article? Pictures of dead kids in the Columbine High School massacre? Koncorde (talk) 15:50, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Koncorde The proper place to bring this up would be Talk:Killing of George Floyd- where this has been discussed several times. 331dot (talk) 15:29, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

I am specifically not bringing it up there because I am curious as to the wider concept of such images. Koncorde (talk) 15:50, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

As noted, we don't censor images because of the potential to cause distress or offense. There are ways to suppress the display of images for those that are concerned about such things. What you propose would mean that the image of the Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki would need to be moved or removed as it depicts hundreds of thousands of people being vaporized or maimed. 331dot (talk) 15:32, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

There is a difference between "censor" and using a different lead image - bearing in mind we don't seem to follow a standard rule of depicting the most graphic image possible on each article, only on some of them suggesting some editorial censorship is already underway. Should we be actively including such pictures where they can be found? And also there is a clear difference between the dispassionate presentation of the atomic bomb, vs the relative intimacy of Floyds death. Koncorde (talk) 15:50, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

@Koncorde: I think it's more about showing an image most widely associated with the topic, which, in this case, is that one. Coverage in sources routinely use that image. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 21:30, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

I will abhor changing the lead image, as the lead image is very much the essence of the article's subjects. It makes the readers familiar and ready for what they're going to read below. GeraldWL ✉ 03:23, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

So, in that case why aren't all similar articles illustrated this way? It appears some articles are "censored" by presenting a more palatable picture? Is it the significance of the image? Is the image in and of itself notable, is that the factor? Koncorde (talk) 16:00, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Koncorde, this takes us back to the top. There are no general rules, except some guiding principles that have already been pointed out and norms that can only be understood with experience. Each article depicts images that represent a consensus of the editors who have been editing and discussing the article. If you think an image on any given article should be updated (added, removed, reorganised), the place to bring that up is the talk page of that article, if you can identify a general problem and would like to propose a general solution that ought to be binding to the whole project, the village pump is the place for it. The image guidelines at MOS:IMAGES should have most of the answers you would want before you would proceed with either of those options. (P.S. We work with what we have; the best/most-relevant images may not be freely available for all topics. I would think the biggest reason for inconsistency between articles would simply be the availability.) Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 09:28, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

I am not trying to change policy, I am just curious about the perspectives that lead to certain images being selected. And that's the interesting bit isn't it. That consensus aspect I mean. How do we get to the point where we do or don't show the most graphic imagery without being accused of censorship? Aside from the legality of showing certain images, what is the threshold? I mean, there are certainly images of decapitation available, but instead we have artistic depictions. Is that not some form of "censorship"? Is the defence of wikipedia as not being censored enough to cover presenting pretty much any photographs in articles. For instance autopsy photographs (per John F. Kennedy autopsy). Is there any argument against including such images in other articles where the "consensus" would be to say that such an image is not relevant? Is a lack of relevance to the persons life, or the events leading to death, a defence against being accused of censorship? Koncorde (talk) 10:02, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Koncorde, it's hard to tell how much of it is rhetoric and which exactly is the question that needs answering. But like I said, read MOS:IMAGES and use common sense. Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Images#Offensive_images discusses the balance between censorship and offence (;tldr, any image that causes offence has to be relevant and almost essential to the understanding of the topic such that omission would lead to an incomplete education). Editors argue their preference for or against an image on a case by case basis with support from aforementioned guideline and WP:CONSENSUS emerges eventually (if it doesn't status quo prevails). Usedtobecool ☎️ 08:15, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

I'm not being rhetorical in any sense. I am asking for points of view because there does seem to be an internal inconsistency across articles. This is not so much about the MOS, but about what people (i.e. editors) think about when selecting what might be a controversial image. For instance when referencing the MOS; it pretty much just defers to editors. Editors say we don't censor but some articles appear to, at the very least, skirt the subject to show images that may be relevant in 1786, but are archaic representations (presumably because of a sensitivity in showing certain things) but then we seem content to go for impact on other articles (i.e. holocaust, atomic bomb etc) - is that political? Just gratuitous? Is it neutral? For instance why is it the Execution of Nguyễn Văn Lém contains the exact moment the bullet is fired, but Execution of Saddam Hussein has a presentable portrait. Talk page discussion says "This issue has been SETTLED, there was a CONSENSUS to remove graphic images long ago." which seems to tie to more protracted discussions where interestingly they argued for the inclusion of the video his actual execution because of its relevance. Again, back to the beginning, I am not actually interested in changing policy or otherwise. Just curious about how people would interpret such "common sense"? This is not a challenge, I am genuinely curious because I have never really given it much thought in all my years editing individual articles. Koncorde (talk) 12:28, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Koncorde, A different set/configuration of editors edits each of those articles, each of them uses and argues their personal editorial judgement based on their view of what's right and appropriate and their understanding of policy and guidelines, and the apparent local consensus at the time the issue was raised depending largely on which editors happened to participate ultimately directs the outcome, which explains the inconsistency among different articles. Consensus evolves and is subject to change as editors change. High profile articles may reflect broader consensus than others. Highly controversial articles may reflect which side is most persistent and vocal. And so on. Teahouse isn't really the place for gathering perspectives or meta-commentary about the nature of Wikipedia processes and their outcomes or the people editing it (whether something is political, gratuitous or whatever, falls into that category); almost no page on Wikipedia is ( except user talk pages, with some limitations). All an individual editor needs to do is choose what they think is right, and try and see if they can get others to agree. Based on your personal judgement and your understanding of the guidelines, you either think these images should be removed in which case you'll have to try and convince others at the talk pages of Van Lem and Kennedy articles (and the Holocaust and Atomic bomb articles), or you think they need to be included in which case you'll have to ask at the Saddam Hussein article that the consensuses there be revisited. The reason there are no clear lines is because there are no universally correct answers. Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:58, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

why did my edit get removed

my edit got removed, in Georgina Bloomberg article, while it is the truth she can become one of the richest women in the world when inheriting all of her father's wealth Anonymous9999911 (talk) 16:04, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

You can see the reason given by the reverting editor in the article's history. If you wish, you can discuss it at Talk:Georgina Bloomberg. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:18, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

New to this but confused.

Hi, I tried posting a story regarding an article i read in several national newspapers on the subjects Wiki page but twice now this has been removed. How do i ensure it remains? Thanks, W Whitney1122 (talk) 16:04, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi Whitney1122, welcome to the Teahouse. Your edit on Gillian Keegan is removed because you did not cite the sources. You must cite your claims with reliable, independent secondary sources. Saying that you read it on newspapers-- newspapers are generally reliable-- so you can just copy your edit, and cite the sources you grabbed it from. Just make sure it's not misinformation. GeraldWL 16:07, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

@Whitney1122: To understand how to add a statement and then to support it with an inline citation (essential for biographies of living people) please read: Help:Referencing for beginners. (And if you're still confused, try my alternative help page and video here). Cheers, Nick Moyes (talk) 16:41, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Translating a foreign language article and pasting into English-language Wikipedia

Hi! There's a topic that I feel would be worthy for inclusion in the English language Wikipedia. It's already in the German-language Wikipedia and it's a topic I know well. Am I allowed to translate and then paste the German article into English Wikipedia? Is that permitted or is that a violation of copyright rules or something? I'd add new references and new information as needed, but would prefer not to start from scratch. Please let me know if this is allowed. Kermitchemist (talk) 17:39, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Kermitchemist, and welcome to the Teahouse. It is certainly allowed, as long you as you attribute it: see Translation. I recommend that you still start with it as a draft, and go through the articles for creation process. --ColinFine (talk) 17:44, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

However, Kermitchemist you should be aware that the standards for notability and article inclusion are different on different language versions of Wikipedia. That an article exists on one version does not mean it will be accepted and retained on a different version. Articles on en.Wikipedia must conform to en standards on sourcing and notability, and may be deleted if they do not conform. Adding additional reliable sources (whether in German, English or any other language) to support statements not so supported in the DE version may well be a good idea. Indeed adding sources may be essential to avoid deletion here. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 18:11, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the advice.Kermitchemist (talk) 18:15, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Creating a draft question

So I have been an editor on Wikipedia for a decent amount of time. I know how to use the article wizard (for the AFC draft/submission system) and I know how to directly create a new article. Is there an easy way to create a draft without doing the article wizard or creating an article then moving it to a draft? Thanks for help in advance. Elijahandskip (talk) 18:33, 27 August 2020 (UTC) Elijahandskip (talk) 18:33, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

@Elijahandskip: Thanks for wanting to create new articles and use the drafting process. You can create the draft directly in draft space. Just goto Draft:YouNewDraftName and start editing just like you would if you were creating it in mainspace. RudolfRed (talk) 18:42, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

And when you are ready for review, place {{subst:Submit}} on the draft. RudolfRed (talk) 18:45, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

You can use "Create a new draft" at WP:DRAFT, it adds some basic code like reflist. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:12, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Need article writing help

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Danny_Kabakibo

This is the second article I have written and it has been declined. I do not understand what I have done wrong. I got the names from list of people needing an article, and had no issues finding outside links from places like the New York Times, Newsweek, etc, so I know this isn't an issue with the people I am choosing. I don't understand what it is about how I write that makes it sound wrong? I was told not to list accolades or quotes and to write about the person, which in my second article I was super careful to do, but it was declined very quickly just as my first article had been. Can someone please help me rewrite this so it will be approved? WikiJSPN (talk) 21:56, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

The draft about Kabakibo (which cites neither the NYT nor Newsweek) claims that he was a more or less precocious child and an imaginative youth (which is pleasant, but doesn't confer notability) and that he created, or runs, something called Warin. I was about to point out that this is redlinked; but no, there's an article -- uh-oh, no there isn't: the article is about "a town in the Nordwestmecklenburg district, in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, Germany." If Kabakibo's main claim to notability is his role in Warin, why is there no article about the latter? But OK, there's no law that there must be an article. The description of Warin in the draft comes from one source: this. It's obviously promotional. (Do I need to point out how?) Unsurprisingly, the cited source says: "Information contained on this page is provided by an independent third-party content provider." Most likely it has just recycled some PR puff. But Wikipedia doesn't want promotional articles.

You say "I got the names from list of people needing an article". One way to reduce the risk of promotionalism is to choose people who are long dead. (However, even this is no guarantee of freedom from promotionalism, as some people even post pages glorifying their ancestors.) -- Hoary (talk) 00:20, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Almost all of your refs were derived from the same press release (identical or highly similar wording; same photograph!). That does not qualify as reliable secondary sources. David notMD (talk) 00:22, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

OK, so do I try to fix this or was this not a good person to write about in the first place? Should I try to save it or just scrap it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiJSPN (talk • contribs) 04:14, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello, WikiJSPN. The answer to this question is entirely dependent on whether of not Kabakibo meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability. If he does (there are suitable sources), then we want an article on him, based almost exclusively on those independent sources. if he doesn't, then we won't accept an article on him, however much effort goes into writing it. Like everything on Wikipedia, notability is sometimes open to discussion and judgment; but in many cases it is clear. So if you want to continue with this draft, your first task is finding places where several people who have no connection at all with Kabakibo, and have not been prompted or fed information by him (ie. excluding anything based on interviews or press releases), have chosen to write a significant amount about him (not about his projects, but about him), and been published in reliable sources, with a reputation for editorial control and fact-checking. If you can find some (at least three, or two if they contain a lot about him), then it's worth carrying on. You want to throw away most of what's in the darft, because Wikipedia is basically not interested in anything the subject of an article says about themselves, only in what independent commentators say about them. --ColinFine (talk) 09:32, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

@WikiJSPN: If, by "list of people needing an article", you mean WP:RA, keep in mind that anyone can add to those lists – it doesn't mean they are notable. I imagine that it specifically contain subjects that have been deemed WP:TOOSOON and are just waiting around for their time.

As far as finding sources, if the existing improper sources have some identical language in them (from the original PR), a good way of filtering new sources as you look is to make sure those phrases are not present.

For future biographical article prospects, it certainly makes sense to stick with those that have died in recent years, as sources will be easier to find online. Remember to search WP first to make sure there isn't a history of an article on the person being deleted, a draft in progress, or other related material that might affect your article. You might want to look at WP:Wikipedia Library and get access to newspapers.com, which can be quite useful. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 12:17, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! Just learned from another comment that those lists are not what I thought, and do not mean these people were already vetted, so that was completely a misunderstanding on my part. I also only recently gained a better understanding on resources. Question: Would the basic search show me drafts, other related articles and such or should I be checking for that somewhere else? WikiJSPN (talk) 19:27, 27 August 2020 (UTC)WikiJSPN

Draft:IXL Learning

I wrote about a parent company, IXL Learning, submitted the draft and I was declined. I was thinking about where to start but I'm just stuck. Can someone review and give me some tips where to start? I believe this is a company that should be in the collection. If abcya has an article, I think the company that owns it and many others should ber here too. }} Le Panini (talk) 20:55, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

@Le Panini: Inclusion is based on Notability. One company owning a notable company does not make it notable. See WP:NCORP for guidelines on the notability for a company. In your case IXL Learning must be notable on its own, not just because it owns company abcya. RudolfRed (talk) 21:17, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

For others, here is the draft Draft:IXL_Learning. The issue may not be notability (I was just clarifying our policy above), but instead the wriing style. RudolfRed (talk) 21:20, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Geograph / Commons

Hi, I'm sure someone has given me advice on this before but I've forgotten how to do it properly. I want to use this image, which is on geograph.co.uk and has a CC2.0 sharealike licence - what's the best way to get it onto commons? (The upload wizard doesn't give the option to select 2.0, only 2.5, 3.0 etc.). Thanks in advance GirthSummit _(blether) 15:44, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

The stuff in the green box at the top of this Commons page has advice about transferring Geograph images to Commons. Deor (talk) 17:37, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

@Girth Summit: Sorry, forgot to ping. Deor (talk) 17:38, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Deor, hi - I think it was probably you who gave me advice on this last time I tried to do it. I'm afraid I'm still perplexed - Magnus' tool doesn't seem to be doing anything (I click run and nothing happens), and the 'basic upload' option doesn't give me a CC2.0 option - what to do? GirthSummit _(blether) 19:52, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Deor I think I cracked it, I did it manually, following the format of another file. Hope I haven't screwed it up :) Thanks GirthSummit _(blether) 10:10, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

@Girth Summit: Well done! For some reason, geograph2commons fails in that way on about 5% of pictures from Geograph. I've never managed to work out why. I've made one small change the the file, to change its name from c:File:Geograph-5942774-by-Jennifer-Petrie.jpg to c:File:Memoral to the Dunbar Soldiers taken prisoner at the Battle of Dunbar in 1650 (Geograph 5942774 by Jennifer Petrie).jpg. I did this because the original name didn't describe what's in the picture. It looks like the instructions on Geograph for transferring pictures don't work if you have the ImprovedUploadForm gadget enabled, as new Commons users do (but I didn't until recently). I'll see if I can find a way to fix this. --bjh21 (talk) 11:41, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Bjh21, thanks - I see you changed the file name at Battle of Dunbar (1650) too - very thorough, much appreciated! Did I get the coordinates right do you think? I did all that manually, copying the formatting from another image, hope it's how it's meant to be. Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 11:45, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

@Girth Summit: We filemovers on Commons have a tool that automatically tries to update pages on other projects when we rename files. This is how I have edits on Wikipedias whose language I've not even heard of. I think your co-ordinates are pretty close to right, but that suggests you may not have spotted this page linked from the word "reuse" below the picture. At the bottom it has wiki source text suitable for pasting into a file description on Commons, or into the basic version of c:Special:Upload. In any case, since the co-ordinates are properly marked source:geograph, my bot will fix them at the weekend if it thinks they can be improved. --bjh21 (talk) 17:44, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Bjh21, sounds like it's all good - thanks for the explanation, I'll know where to come next time I have difficulties! GirthSummit _(blether) 21:35, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Political endorsements

Hi teahouse hosts. After reviewing wp:endorse criteria 3 where it says in the note that "...other language which can be understood as unequivocal endorsement can be discussed on a case-by-case basis (for example, "I am campaigning for Candidate X" or "I am backing Candidate X")" I had one question: can campaigning and/or holding campaign events for the candidate be considered as an endorsement under the note of criteria 3? Thanks Davidmejoradas (talk) 08:17, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

To admins reading: I'm not an expert, so please correct me if I'm wrong.

Maybe. It depends on you definition of campaigning. Going up on stage and speaking in support or volunteering is probably an endorsment, but tweeting 'I hope user User:Example loses to User:Placeholder in the 2020 ArbCom elections' is not an endorsement, but if they continually stated that they wanted User:Placeholder to win, and that was seen in the media as an endorsement, then you could add it.

Altogether, I would play it on the safe side and if in doubt, don't add the endorsement. The key thing to remember is that endorsement is stronger than just support - if it is an endorsement, it should be easy to tell. Hope this helps, Giraffer (munch) 09:17, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, I was referring to ground campaigning, holding town halls with the candidate and helping the candidate get elected rather than just tweeting or commenting about the support. It was helpful and not sure what an admin thinks about it. Davidmejoradas (talk) 15:59, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Davidmejoradas, when a guideline is phrased like that, what it is telling you is: "Make your WP:BOLD edit. If it gets reverted, start a discussion on the article talk page." Many if not most of our guidelines are intentionally vague, so as to be flexible. The actual decision making process for article content is WP:CONSENSUS. WP:BRD explains the process. John from Idegon (talk) 23:06, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

no reliable sources available

Hi, what do I need to do if I cannot find reliable sources like website or published material but I know the information is correct because I am a fan who studied the artists life Newport2020 (talk) 00:22, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Newport2020. Sadly, if there are no published and publicly accessible, independent sources that talk about that person, then you will not be able to demonstrate that they meet our notability guidelines (see WP:NARTIST). This means that you will not be able to create a page about them, sorry. Nick Moyes (talk) 00:27, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

But the artist already has a wikipedia page without the reliable sources in a different language. The artist use to have a wikipedia page before as well so how come I cannot create it this time? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Newport2020 (talk • contribs) 00:29, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy link Draft:Habib Qaderi. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 00:32, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

(ec) @Newport2020: Each language Wikipedia is an independent project, with its own policies, procedures, etc. The existence of an article on another wiki contributes nothing at all to the notability criteria for inclusion on enwiki. If you really cannot find sources that discuss the person, there cannot be an article here about them. Sorry. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 00:38, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi Newport2020. Reliable sources don't need to be available online, but they do need to be published and somewhat available as explained in WP:PUBLISH and WP:PUBLISHED. Online availability makes things easier to verify and assess, but it's not a requirement; however, you still will need to cite reliable sources (as defined by Wikipedia) and avoid anything that might be seen as WP:OR regardless of whether it's true.

Reliable source don't need to be in English as explained in WP:NOTENG, but they still need to be reliable as defined by Wikipedia. Non-English sources, even reliable sources, can be hard to verify so you might be asked to further clarify the source by others.

Finally, each langauge Wikipedia project has it's own policies and guidelines; so, just because an article exist on one project that doesn't mean it should exist on all projects. English Wikipedia's policies and guidelines apply to English Wikipedia pages; so, if you want to create an article about this person on English Wikipedia, you're going to have establish that this person is notable by English Wikipedia standards or that content about them complies with English Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:41, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Am I following the correct procedure?

I have created a sandbox and have been working on an article, James Ewing here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mollifiednow/sandbox/James_D._Ewing

Please see the page and (talk) for more details. I'm not sure if I'm following the correct procedure, if I should have notified anyone about my work (?) i would sincerely appreciate it if someone could take a look and advise me if they see anything wrong or if I need to do anything else until I finish. Honestly, I'm not exactly sure of what to do when I'm finished.

Thanks in advance for any help/advice Mollifiednow (talk) 22:37, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi Mollifiednow. Your draft looks better than most first time efforts. Some things you might want to look at are MOS:SECTIONCAPS, WP:REFPUNC and WP:PEA, but those are minor formatting/style issues which most likely can be easily cleaned up. The main thing which will determine whether your draft is accepted is going to be Wikipedia:Notability (in particular WP:BIO); at first glance, it looks like that's not going to be much of an issue but that's how the draft will be assessed. When you think you've done all you can do and that the draft is ready for review, you can click the "Submit your draft for review" button near the top of the page. That will send the draft to WP:AFC for review where it will be assessed. An AfC reviewer will assess the draft and decide whether it's OK to upgrade to article status. If the reviewer accepts the draft, they will move it to the article namespace and take care of the "paperwork" that's needed to do that; if the reviewer declines/rejects the draft, they will leave a message at the top of the draft explaining why and offer suggestions as to how to improve it. A draft can be submitted more than once as long as it keeps being improved over the last time it was submitted.

One last suggestion if you do decide to submit the draft for AfC review is that I wouldn't do so with any empty sections (sections with section headings only); either find content to add to the section or remove it completely. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:28, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Mollifiednow I rewrote the lead sentence to be more effective. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 00:42, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

New Page

Greetings, I just created a new page for Princess Lockerooo. I am not sure if it was submitted because I did not get any notification. Can you tell me if the page was created and how long in might take to go live?DanceWaack (talk) 17:09, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: User:DanceWaack/sandbox ThatMontrealIP (talk) 17:19, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello, DanceWaack, and welcome to the Teahouse. You have not submitted your draft for review: there is a big blue button at the top to do so. (You may have been confused by the "publish changes" button when you created it: you have published it in the sense that anybody in the world can see your draft if they know where to look; but not in the sense of adding it to Wikipedia as an article). But don't submit it yet: you need to add inline citations to the specific place where the information you give was sourced from. See REFB. You also need to tone down the promotional language: it is not Wikipedia's place to talk about people "pioneering" something, or being "unique", or to say what anything "stands for", or that something is somebody's "signature brand". Please see PEACOCK. --ColinFine (talk) 17:32, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

@DanceWaack: Because of your username's relation to the subject you are writing about, I am also concerned that you might have a WP:COI, which you may need to disclose (click that link for details). If you are being compensated in any way, to comply with our terms of service, you must disclose that (see WP:PAID). Thanks. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 11:31, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

@DanceWaack:, your sandbox article must not be a cut-and-paste from copyrighted sources like this page. Wikipedia strictly adheres to copyright law. See: WP:COPY--Quisqualis (talk) 02:00, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Fictitious Wikipedia page - Need Admin Help

I manage the performance duo known as Lime. Our Wikipedia page was updated last year as two imposters took over the page and inserted their likeness and fictitious information. This has evidently been going on for years now as they unsuccessfully attempted to trademark our duo's name which is Lime. Can someone, maybe (Admin Help) an administrator contact me to assist me with resolving this matter once and for all?

Thanks,

Robb Cooper Robbcoop (talk) 22:24, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

@Robbcoop, what exactly is the issue? Is this a band by the same name causing a conflict? Or has the page been hijacked? Ed talk! 22:33, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Looks like a hijacking. The members listed as on 20 August 2019 are presumably a couple, but now they are replaced by different people. 45.251.33.201 (talk) 03:45, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

@Robbcoop You're better off asking at Talk:Lime (band). If there's vandalism, you can request page protection. I removed some unsourced content since it can't be verified. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 23:52, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

This definitely could use admin help. It's a big can of worms that may be a real-world rights dispute, and the history is littered with multiple accounts that may be related IRL. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 12:38, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

I have protected the page for the time being. I have also left a note on Robbcoop's page, and TheRealLime's page to ask for more details to try to sort this one out. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 04:02, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

All my contribution being deleted by one particular user. What can I do

Hi, I am a new user and have been contributing. Recently I left a comment in the talk section in calculus. I did not change any edits. Soon after the user 'Deacon Vorbis ' has been following my edits around reverting. Some of them I am in the process of getting the artist to contact directly etc...

However is there anything that can be done. For instance in the wikipedia section ' history of democracy', I made some edits ( as the section has been noticed to have a bias by wikipedia). The person soon reverted it. I have been polite but it's very frustrating. He has used tools ' twinkle etc...

 Imagetoimageless (talk) 14:02, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello again Imagetoimageless. Your edits to Talk:Calculus were not removed or changed by Deacon Vorbis, they were merely indented properly to help keep the discussion clear.

Your edits to the article History of democracy were reverted by Deacon Vorbis as tending to forward a particular point of view. If you disagree, they should be discussed at Talk:History of democracy and you would probably be well advised to cite reliable sources that support your edits. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 14:39, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Imagetoimageless, in your following edit, you summarized: "Based on original research, the painting was commissioned." To give a heads-up: a wide array of original researches are not permitted on Wikipedia, including your said edit. That's why it's been nominated for deletion. See WP:NOR. GeraldWL ✉ 14:43, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Gerald Waldo Luis That issue is already under discussion at Talk:Madhava of Sangamagrama#Image requirement and Imagetoimageless is participating in that discussion. Wikipedia uses the term Original research in a somewhat serialized sense, just as it does the term Notability, and I am not clear if the kind of research that Imagetoimageless was referring to is the same thing. That can be discussed on the article talk page. In any case, that is of only limited relevance to the edits on quite different pages that Imagetoimageless asked about above, althoguh it may have been what first drew the attention of Deacon Vorbis. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 14:58, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for giving your time for this. Regards to calculus, I meant he noticed I had a different opinion and has gone around targeting all my edits. Regarding the painting- I am aware and is in the process of getting the copyright, attribution validated. However ethically I find it dubious that this person, after first noticing my contribution against his opinion in calculus, has been targeting all my edits. For instance ' History of Democracy' my edits had clear citations, while some edits were just removal of bias. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Imagetoimageless (talk • contribs) 15:02, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

The user first noticed me, when I had a differing opinion for the talk section of calculus to this user. The person has been targeting all edits since

@Imagetoimageless: Quite often I, too, find one unusual edit, fix it, and then go check all the other edits made by that person -especially if they are a new editor like yourself - in case they have some fundamental misunderstanding about it. I have not looked at yours specifically, but you did the right thing by asking the editor directly and by engaging on the article's talk page. The accusation against Deacon Vorbis or 'targetting' your edits is really a bit silly and quite over the top when you only joined us seven days ago and have thus far only made eight edits in total to actual articles! It would help everyone tremendously if you would also take care to indent your reply each time (by adding one extra colon at the start of your response and then by signing your post so we can tell who is saying what, and when they said it. (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~.). Nick Moyes (talk) 15:24, 27 August 2020 (UTC)  

I second the idea of looking at all of a new editor's edits if a wrong approach to editing appears in an article I watch. At times, there is a consistency in their editing in error, in which case I post a comment on their Talk page. David notMD (talk) 19:21, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Nick Moyes, thanks for the comments. I do agree I am new to Wikipedia and do not have the experience most of you have. However I do point out that the user deacon Vorbis has infact targeted all my edits for reversion. it might be 8, but as a percentage its almost all. It so happened after I left a comment in the section of talk of calculus. I think if you look into this person's edits, The reversion for the entry in 'history of democracy' seems to hold no ground. The only comment this person hasn't reverted is a sentence I added for a scientific piece for kinesin-5. Thank you all, but I do find something ethically wrong in reverting everything by a new editor for no reason ~~~~.)

I recommend you think of each revert as a trigger to start a discussion on the Talk page of the article, inviting Deacon Vorbis to contribute. For one new editor I reverted more than 50 article edits (all fatally flawed reference additions where content had been tagged as "citation needed"), warned the editor several times to learn how to identify valid refs, and finally have them blocked. It wasn't personal. David notMD (talk) 01:46, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

I just want to add, I am a new editor too, and I had my first two articles declined almost immediately that I posted. I too felt targeted and hurt, but try not to take it personally. Ask lots of questions! I know it feels hard to do, but keep editing and being bold. You will make mistakes- but mostly people here are nice and will try and help you. You might even directly ask the user what the issue was that they reverted your edits. I just wanted to reach out there and say you are not alone in feeling this way, being new. Hang in there, keep going! WikiJSPN (talk) 02:46, 28 August 2020 (UTC)WikiJSPN

Thanks everyone. I do feel better and will take all the points aboard. It's been very constructive and I have learnt a lot :) will continue to be bold, make sure things meet wikipedias guidelines and also add every edit that might be wrong to the talk section. Also starting to intend :) ~~~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Imagetoimageless (talk • contribs) 08:12, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

How i know that

How would i know that the source i provide are enough for wikipedia confirmation to edit the article Mega flames (talk) 08:01, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Check that your sources are:

• From books (other than self-published books, and books from vanity publishers)
• From academic journals (other than those from predatory publishers)
• From magazines, newspapers, or news websites, other than those we are warned away from in the table within Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources

Check that your sources are not:

• From blogs
• From "social media"
• From the people, organizations, etc that you're writing about.

For more, see Wikipedia:Reliable sources. -- Hoary (talk) 08:14, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

(ec)Mega flames, good question, and it's not always that easy to "know", because context matters. The question is always "Is this source good for this content?" There is a noticeboard, WP:RSN, for that. Few sources fits all. If you think an edit is reasonable, do it, and be prepared to talk if other people disagree (WP:BRD).

Blogs and social media are very seldom useful as sources. Aim for reliably published books, newspapers/sites, magazines and the like. Is the topic history? Aim for historybooks. Medicine or living people? High quality is demanded. Some sources have been discussed many times, there's a list of them at WP:RSP, that may get you an idea on what is generally accepted.

And then, having a source is not always enough, see for example WP:BALANCE an WP:PROPORTION. Hope this helps some. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:19, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Article replacement/overhaul

Is there a way to create a draft copy of an existing page in order to overhaul it completely and give it new structure, then discuss/review it with others before replacing the original? Thanks for your help! Quaenuncabibis (talk) 08:26, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello Quaenincabibis, and welcome to the Teahouse! In that instance, your best option is to create the overhauled page in your sandbox, and then propose the changes on the article's talk page, and show them what you have done in your sandbox. Doing this in a sandbox as opposed to the article ensures that minimal disruption is caused, and there is still a complete, well-written article for people to read while you work on the new version. Regards, Giraffer (munch) 08:45, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Please take into consideration the editing history and length of the existing article. If it has been present for years, and edited by many people, a radical revision may be opposed. I suggest first starting a new section at the Talk page of the article to explain your intentions. If the article has few viewers, a non-current edit history, and little prior discussion on the Talk page, you may not get any comments, but at least you will have established a rationale for your major overhaul. A couple of years ago a relatively new editor proposed to completely rewrite the Grateful Dead article. This was not well received. David notMD (talk)

Hello Giraffer and David notMD! Thanks for the valuable input. I will act acodringly. Best regards, Quaenuncabibis (talk) 08:28, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

From your editing history, it appears that you have been hired by École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne to improved existing articles about faculty members and create new articles about faculty members. I suggest that your User page identify each faculty member article by name, not just the school. Also, given PAID situation, for existing articles, Wikipedia's guidelines are that you do not edit these articles directly. I, for one, am of the opinion that every faculty member of an institution does not warrant an article for doing what academics are supposed to do as part of their career. David notMD (talk) 10:21, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks David notMD! As proposed I will disclose the edited article on my user page and I shall comply with the editing rules. Kind regards Quaenuncabibis (talk) 08:28, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Suggestion for Oscar Martinez (The Office) page

Can this content be replaced with the first two paragraphs ? I've deleted the sentences mentioning GLAAD's view on 'The Office' and references associated with them. Please review this:

"Oscar Martinez is a fictional character from the US mockumentary-style television series The Office played by Cuban-American actor Oscar Nunez. Martinez is seen working as an accountant at the Scranton, Pennsylvania, in Dunder Mifflin’s office of a paper distribution company."

The character was implied to be gay in the second-season episode "The Secret", when Dwight catches him faking sickness to spend the day with his boyfriend (Dwight remains oblivious to this fakeness as he was obsessed with proving that Oscar was not ill). In earlier episodes, many co-workers erroneously attribute to him various Mexican stereotypes (e.g. being involved in drug cartels) but after his ousting, his stereotypes are more concentrated on his being gay, particularly by Michael, which may explain their conflicted relationship. Editingwork8 (talk) 07:20, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

@Editingwork8: The place to discuss it would be at the talk page of the article, Talk:The Office (U.S. TV series). I fixed your formatting above – starting a line with a space causes it to render in a non-proportional font, which can be undesirable. Also note there is a grammatical error in the last sentence ("... at the Scranton ..."). —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 09:48, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

@[AlanM1 (talk)]Thank you for guiding and correcting my work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Editingwork8 (talk • contribs) 10:33, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Can someone check my draft for problems please

Please tell me what I am doing wrong here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Cedar_Point_peninsula_(Ohio) 2600:1009:B16D:882D:21B1:E29C:4E9E:BC34 (talk) 21:39, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

@2600:1009:B16D:882D:21B1:E29C:4E9E:BC34: Please go through the comments on the draft, the reviewers have already discussed the problems for declines and rejection in details. ~ Amkgp 💬 05:04, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

It seems to me that the topic is notable. The subject was once a peninsula, and is now an island connected to the mainland by two causeways. It's now entirely covered by a large amusement park, Cedar Point – I don't know if it's inhabited overnight. The Cedar Point refers to "[t]he Cedar Point peninsula". Maproom (talk) 07:26, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Twice, you have attempted to remove the history of Declines and those editors' comments. That is contrary to Wikipedia practice, and has been restored. As you wrote, the amusement park, Cedar Point has its own article. You might consider abandoning your draft and adding content to the History section of that article instead. David notMD (talk) 10:41, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

How do I Expand Stub Articles?

Hello I am very new here. I have just joined WikiProject:Education and I am looking towards expanding some of their stub articles. However, there are many stubs that are just too short, and I have nothing to work with; nothing to expand from. Can someone give me something to read about this or give me some advice? Thank you. HelloImAStudent (talk) 23:25, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi HelloImAStudent. I think that "expand" in this sense can also mean to "improve by adding new content2. So, if you find a stub that has very little content and that you think you'd like to try and improve it, then perhaps a good way to think about it would be to treat it as a "new" article. Start from scratch looking for reliable sources that might discuss the subject matter, and then figure out it there's an encyclopedic way to incorporate that content into the article. Perhaps the editor who created the stub just (for whatever reason) created a foundation for others to build upon. You don't have to complete the article per se, but perhaps you can add a little more to that foundation for the next person who comes along to build upon. You can even rebuild the old foundation if you want if you think it would be an improvement.

Now, having said that, you should make sure your improvements are in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines; if you add lots of content to a stub that is unsourced or otherwise a problem per some Wikipedia policy or guideline, there's a good chance it will end up being removed (either completely or partially) by someone who comes along after you. In addition, there might be a reason that a stub is a stub in that the subject isn't really Wikipedia notable and the stub probably shouldn't have been created in the first place. So, if you start Googling the subject and you're not finding anything that resembles the type of WP:SIGCOV generally needed to establish Wikipedia notability, you might not be able to improve the stub no matter how hard you try and it might need to considered for deletion.

Finally, a good thing to do might be to ask for suggestions at WT:EDUCATION; some WikiProjects keep a list of articles which fall under their scope that need improvement. So, a member of that WikiProject might be able to suggest some stubs which need improving. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:13, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Okay thank you, Marchjuly. This has been very helpful. HelloImAStudent (talk) 11:23, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Please review my article

I know this isn't the right place but please someone should review this article for me, if it's good to be on Wikipedia. If yes, I would like to go ahead and create the other ones. I've done the same at WP:Football Josedimaria237 (talk) 13:39, 28 August 2020 (UTC) Josedimaria237 (talk) 13:39, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Josedimaria237, Hello, your article is on a queue & would be reviewed accordingly at the appropriate time. Celestina007 13:45, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedian is editing their own article.

Hello, as the headline suggests, I have come across a Wikipedian editing their own article. I'm aware of this essay but was not able to find out any more information on the subject. I would prefer not to name the Wikipedian. Also it is almost certainly not just someone else using the same name because they own the copyright of the image used in the article. What is the precedence & should any action be taken? Cunme (talk) 15:13, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Cunme Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Without knowing the circumstances in this case, I can say users generally should not make autobiographical edits. You could attempt to suggest that the user make edit requests on the article talk page, and see how they respond before doing anything else. 331dot (talk) 15:22, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Article Removal

How do I remove an article that I created that has already been approved? WikiJSPN (talk) 13:49, 28 August 2020 (UTC)WikiJSPN WikiJSPN (talk) 13:49, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

@WikiJSPN, hello, could you be so kind as to be specific about what article in particular? Regardless, by using the word “remove” I assume you mean 'delete' if you were the sole contributor to the article, using WP:TWINKLE you may apply a G7 or preferably you simply nominate it for deletion using WP:TWINKLE also. You might also want to see WP:AFDHOWTO. Celestina007 14:15, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Thank you!! Much appreciated!!WikiJSPN (talk) 16:45, 28 August 2020 (UTC)WikiJSPN

How do I change a user name to give it my personal name?

How do I change a user name to give it my personal name? And how do I link my page so that it shows up as part of the category African-American Country Musician? My page is not linked to that page. [[User:CWILL46461|CWILL46461]] ([[User talk:CWILL46461|talk]]) (talk) 15:38, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Not answering that question, but what you have created is an unsubmitted draft of an article (Wikipedia does not have pages) at User:CWILL46461/sandbox. IF submitted in current form it would be declined, as hyperlinks are not allowed in External links with exception of the official website. That means no Youtube. And references are done entirely differently. See WP: Your first article. David notMD (talk) 17:01, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Image next to a Table?

Please look at the second table (black and white) here: Genetic_code#RNA_codon_table. Is it technically feasible to place a small image (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:3D_Genetic_Code.jpg) directly to the right of this table? Charles Juvon (talk) 14:39, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Charles, type in the link to the right of the table and you are done . I am not a user on Commons or a person who uploads pictures but with my experience,you can rely on it. Hope this helps . Chemmy bear (Discuss in more detail?) —Preceding undated comment added 14:51, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, but

Inverse table for the standard genetic code (compressed using IUPAC notation)

Amino acid	DNA codons	Compressed		Amino acid	DNA codons	Compressed
Ala, A	GCU, GCC, GCA, GCG	GCN		Ile, I	AUU, AUC, AUA	AUH
Arg, R	CGU, CGC, CGA, CGG; AGA, AGG	CGN, AGR; or CGY, MGR		Leu, L	CUU, CUC, CUA, CUG; UUA, UUG	CUN, UUR; or CUY, YUR
Asn, N	AAU, AAC	AAY		Lys, K	AAA, AAG	AAR
Asp, D	GAU, GAC	GAY		Met, M	AUG
Asn or Asp, B	AAU, AAC; GAU, GAC	RAY		Phe, F	UUU, UUC	UUY
Cys, C	UGU, UGC	UGY		Pro, P	CCU, CCC, CCA, CCG	CCN
Gln, Q	CAA, CAG	CAR		Ser, S	UCU, UCC, UCA, UCG; AGU, AGC	UCN, AGY
Glu, E	GAA, GAG	GAR		Thr, T	ACU, ACC, ACA, ACG	ACN
Gln or Glu, Z	CAA, CAG; GAA, GAG	SAR		Trp, W	UGG
Gly, G	GGU, GGC, GGA, GGG	GGN		Tyr, Y	UAU, UAC	UAY
His, H	CAU, CAC	CAY		Val, V	GUU, GUC, GUA, GUG	GUN
START	AUG, CUG, UUG	HUG		STOP	UAA, UGA, UAG	URA, UAR

did not work. The added figure (looks like a cube) should be twice as big and directly to the right of the table. Charles Juvon (talk) 15:03, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

@Charles Juvon: Looks like the table is not just a table is actually a "template page" which locates at .https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Inverse_codon_table, and being embedded into other pages with the command {{Inverse codon table|T=U}} . So it looks like the desired change would be more complicated than inserting a column at right side to a table on a page. I'm afraid if it is impossible to do.

However image size can be increased. here are some samples.

50px cube	Source code: [[File:3D Genetic Code.jpg|50px|thumb|50px cube]]
100px cube	Source code: [[File:3D Genetic Code.jpg|100px|thumb|100px cube]]
200px cube	Source code: [[File:3D Genetic Code.jpg|200px|thumb|200px cube]]

Best wishes RIT RAJARSHI (talk) 18:08, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

@Nihaal The Wikipedian: Is this what you want? Just place the image first and invoke the table template after it, like you would with any other content that you want to flow to the left of an image:

Cube

Inverse table for the standard genetic code (compressed using IUPAC notation)

Amino acid	DNA codons	Compressed		Amino acid	DNA codons	Compressed
Ala, A	GCT, GCC, GCA, GCG	GCN		Ile, I	ATT, ATC, ATA	ATH
Arg, R	CGT, CGC, CGA, CGG; AGA, AGG	CGN, AGR; or CGY, MGR		Leu, L	CTT, CTC, CTA, CTG; TTA, TTG	CTN, TTR; or CTY, YTR
Asn, N	AAT, AAC	AAY		Lys, K	AAA, AAG	AAR
Asp, D	GAT, GAC	GAY		Met, M	ATG
Asn or Asp, B	AAT, AAC; GAT, GAC	RAY		Phe, F	TTT, TTC	TTY
Cys, C	TGT, TGC	TGY		Pro, P	CCT, CCC, CCA, CCG	CCN
Gln, Q	CAA, CAG	CAR		Ser, S	TCT, TCC, TCA, TCG; AGT, AGC	TCN, AGY
Glu, E	GAA, GAG	GAR		Thr, T	ACT, ACC, ACA, ACG	ACN
Gln or Glu, Z	CAA, CAG; GAA, GAG	SAR		Trp, W	TGG
Gly, G	GGT, GGC, GGA, GGG	GGN		Tyr, Y	TAT, TAC	TAY
His, H	CAT, CAC	CAY		Val, V	GTT, GTC, GTA, GTG	GTN
START	ATG, CTG, UTG	HTG		STOP	TAA, TGA, TAG	TRA, TAR

declaration of no conflict of interest

I would like to continue my article and declare I do not have a conflict of interest. What do I need to do next? My article has been declined but I would like to add many more sources for this article about my father, Lore Noto. Thank you, user: Notohelmers Notohelmers (talk) 19:19, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

You do have a conflict of interest as he is your father. Praxidicae (talk) 19:21, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy Draft:Lore Noto Yes, you have a COI. And the draft needs references for all of the content. David notMD (talk) 19:41, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Draft: Josh Clarke (American Football), Need a 2nd pair of eyes!

Looking for feedback or further editing on this article. I will gladly take a second, third, fourth, or tenth pair of eyes, all suggestions and edits welcome! Thank you in advance! (If you don't think he is notable enough, please do say so, but no need to get angry or be mean about it!) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Josh_Clarke_(American_football) WikiJSPN (talk) 03:27, 28 August 2020 (UTC)WikiJSPN WikiJSPN (talk) 03:27, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

@WikiJSPN: I'm told that some of the possessors of those eyes might object to being called "guys". —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 09:22, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

A) not notable, as only a college player with no national awards for football career. B) In looking at your contributions and Talk page history, no one has been angry or mean to you. In fact, deeply experienced editor DGG went to extraordinary lengths to explain the nature of reliable source referencing vis-a-vis one of your Declined drafts. David notMD (talk) 10:55, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

David notMD I was in no way at all referencing DGG who was very kind to me, and explained several aspects I didn't understand. If you had read our interaction you would see that I sincerely thanked him and asked him other questions seeing that he had significant knowledge. It has become clear, including with your message here, flat out telling me that the sarcastic message with the "uh-oh" wasn't someone being offended by my post and being rude. I didn't mean to offend anyone, I just wanted to help with a resource that I often use and thought was cool. I have removed all that I could of my drafts and am working on the removal of my article that was approved. I will try to figure out how to revert any copyediting I did. I am so sorry I could not be part of this. I have no idea what I did so wrong, I really don't- but a couple of you have mad it very clear that my creating articles was not ok, that mistakes are not ok, and asking questions to fix them is a real annoyance. WikiJSPN (talk) 13:47, 28 August 2020 (UTC)WikiJSPN

Article removed. Sorry for attempting. WikiJSPN (talk) 14:02, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

I apologize for guessing wrong about your comment. David notMD (talk) 17:04, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

David notMD Thanks for understanding. Seriously though, can you be so kind as to explain what I did in attempting to write those articles that rubbed people the wrong way? I get I made a mistake, but I am new and trying to figure it out. I am perfectly willing to correct my mistakes (to the best of my ability). Is this not the place to ask questions? What's up with the instant ill will? I would really appreciate an answer because I would like to be able to stay and work on stuff, but not if I am unwelcome. WikiJSPN (talk) 19:10, 28 August 2020 (UTC)WikiJSPN

To some degree, choice of topics for drafts and referencing for same. At Danny Kabakibo, most of the refs were derived from the same press release. In fact, I was surprised that you were not challenged as possibly being an undeclared paid editor. At some future time Kabakibo may be Wikipedia noteworthy, but right now (WP:TOOSOON). Josh Clarke just an example of a person who does not meet athlete notability. For all of us, the early end of the learning curve can be harsh. David notMD (talk) 19:22, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

David notMD Thank you, beyond words, for explaining! In fact, it would have been easier for me had someone made a direct accusation- then I would have understood at least where I went wrong and why some reactions were inappropriately harsh. I declare here and now that I am not and have not been paid. My only article published is on Katya Cengel (I had no idea who she was before I found her name!), the other two drafts, I removed. The reason I was asking about Josh Clarke was because I quickly realized I was definitely upsetting people (when I attempted to write about Kabakibo) by who I picked, and I wanted to ask before causing more upset- but then my asking caused upset. I actually felt kind of attacked and I hope in the future you guys might be a bit more direct if you think someone is doing something against your rules. An accusation can be either proven or not, but just being harsh with someone pushes people out as opposed to getting to any truth. I am not speaking here to you personally, but to all who read this. I really want to be here. I want to contribute. I haven't been around, so I was unaware that there is a major issue with undeclared paid editors or that by simply choosing to write about living people in any type of flattering light or not having correct references, that it would make me look like that is what I was trying to do. This all makes much more sense now! I will continue to write articles, but I will be much more careful considering all the things I have learned in the last day or so. WikiJSPN (talk) 20:10, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Twinkle, RedWarn not showing up

Moved to WP:VPT

 – Ed talk! 20:16, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Bunt (community)

I could see lots of deleted contents and edits in this page. Referring to today's content in the Bunt (community) page. I could see massive changes are made in the contents, many of the valid contents being deleted. There were some citing regarding the varnas classification. Few years back I remember some citing related to Jain Bunt and Hindu Bunt(Nagavamshi Kshatriya) along with some elaborated details, the details were genuinely sort of interlinked.

Let me try to explain why.

Below content is sort of void details to agree.

"Varna Classification

The traditional chaturvarna system is largely not found in South India. Bunts were classified as Sat-Shudras or Upper Shudras.[52] In Southern India, the upper Shudras were generally the landholding ruling classes of South India and occupied and controlled similar spaces of power as the Kshatriyas and Vaishyas in North India.[52]"

Let me justify why;

Well, the varna system did follow in the south however the region has gone through many spiritual transitions in-terms of acceptance of religions, local spiritual ideologies which is becoming more complex to find sources to the origin. Also the locals can't find appropriate explanation due to deteriorated knowledge as the generations passed on with so many transitions, regarding the local history, philosophies and backgrounds/foregrounds.

Majority of Indian community who have accepted Jainism are major coverts from Kshatriya community within Hindus, from many ruling kingdoms across India who accepted Ahimsa. Similarly, the Kshatriya community who hail in the region of the south western coastal Karnataka and some parts of Kerala belong to Nagavamshi Kshatriya(Hailing from the land of Nagas, of Parashuram Shrusti)

The regional community has a confusion as to which varna does the Hindu side of Bunts community belong to. The current Hindu Bunt community don't follow Upanayanam kriya based on the varna specification and the men belonging to Hindu Bunt community don't wear the holy thread which is leading to the confusion within the local community and the region.

Actual thesis of understanding history is Hindu Bunts are reconverts from Jain Bunt community, gave up Ahimsa in order to defend the region for dynasty's citizen's interest, also for defense purpose during warlike situations. While giving up Jainism, men had to remove the holy thread and follow Kshatriya(warrior class) leadership again. The same thesis applies for many communities who claim to be Kshatriyas across India but don't wear the holy thread, all are reconverts from Jain community who still carry surnames from Royal Lineages accorded under many dynasties within ancient India. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Seshat 96 (talk • contribs) 16:11, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

.

@Seshat 96, Could you be more precise as to what your question is? Celestina007 20:54, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Please check if at all there were any deletions or edits in past 3 years and try if they can be restored back. Also please help me as to how I can add more details to this page. Will try my best to come up with some detailed information.

Should I expect any feedback when editing an article

So after (somewhat) a false start in which I began to edit the History section in Pernambuco then realized I should work on History of Pernambuco first, I have been editing the latter for several days. I discovered "talk" pages and made a post to the "talk' page on both of these. I am guessing that no one is following either of these pages, which is ok. I am progressing at one or two sentences a day as I find appropriate references to insert. So I am happy. Nevertheless, I do wonder if after several months someone will look at what I've done and want to revert everything because I didn't use the magic ring decoder or something? I don't really think I need a lot of oversight, I'm just sort of wondering what to expect. Thanks. P2dwight (talk) 19:38, 28 August 2020 (UTC) P2dwight (talk) 19:38, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to The Teahouse. All your edits look very good to me. Theroadislong (talk) 19:44, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

@P2dwight, Hello, coupled with what Theroadislong already told you, generally the answer should be no, as no policy mandates any editor to police the work of any other editor. But if you have done a good job, any editor may drop a positive message on your talk page to show your efforts are appreciated, usually by a personal message or in the form of a barnstar and if the inverse is the case they may undo your edit & let you know what policy you may have contravened. However, if you want a honest feedback for specific type of edits you make, you may specifically ask any editor here to give you feedbacks. Celestina007 20:37, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, both. I'm surprised to learn I have a personal talk page! Must have missed that part. Guess I should find it.P2dwight (talk) 20:56, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

P2dwight, you’re welcome colleague. Give me a minute & I’d leave a message for you on your own talk page. Celestina007 21:10, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Adding Photo to profile

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Javicia_Leslie

I got permission and copied the email from Javicia Leslie whom owns rights to the photo. It stayed for about 3 weeks and now it is gone. what am I doing wrong? Lauralaelbart (talk) 18:23, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Lauralaelbart, does [12] help? If not you can try to ask the Commons-editor who deleted it at their talkpage. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:54, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

More to the point, Lauralaelbart, look at commons:user talk:lauralaelbart#File tagging File:JAVICIA LESLIE. 2020.jpg, where a notice explaining the issue was posted to you. You say that you "copied the mail from Javicia Leslie"; but copyright is picky stuff, and Commons requires a an email with particular information sent directly to them by the copyright holder, not somebody else posting a personal email: see donating copyright materials. (Also note that the subject of a photo typically does not hold the copyright: they may do, if it was taken in pursuance of a contract that assigns the copyright to them; but otherwise, unless it's a selfie, the photographer probably holds the copyright). --ColinFine (talk) 22:11, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

How to create a wiki page for a person

Hey. I am new to this community and have been requested to help create a wiki page for an artist friend. I have tried a few different ways, even using DJ Khalid as a reference in style for the DJ I am creating it for. Even in doing that the article/page was denied and deleted. If anyone can give me any tips to go about building his page, I would truly appreciate it. Thank you. HollywodDJ (talk) 18:40, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi HollywodDJ, creating an article about somebody you know personally, and especially creating a page at their request is strongly discouraged on Wikipedia. I suggest reading over Wikipedia:Conflict of interest for Wikipedia's policies around creating an article that you have a conflict of interest with. If you still decide that you definitely want to try to create this article, bear in mind that Wikipedia only accepts articles about people who are sufficiently notable and have multiple independent reliable sources establishing this. Help:Your first article is a guide to creating an article that you could read over. Pi (Talk to me!) 18:45, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello, HollywodDJ, and wecome to the Teahouse. If you are new to this community, then my advice would be to not even think about trying to create a new article until you have been editing for at least a few weeks, improving existing articles and learning how Wikipedia works. People who plunge in and try the extremely difficult task of creating a new article before they have understood how Wikipedia works typically have a frustrating and unhappy time. And that advice is for people who haven't got a conflict of interest: doing it with a conflict of interest makes it even harder, because once you have found the independent published sources that are required, you'll need to forget everything you know about your friend, and just write from what the independent sources say. This is because Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, and has basically no interest at all in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their friends or associates say about them: it is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and haven't been prompted or given information by the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable places. --ColinFine (talk) 22:17, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Draft Rejected - Notability & POV

Hi, my recent draft, Draft:Evo (company), was rejected. I reached out on the reviewer's Talk Page but did not receive a response. Following the advice on their Talk Page, I'm looking to get some feedback on the draft here.

One of the pieces of feedback on the draft was about notability and significant coverage. The draft has citations from several reputable independent sources including The AP, Outside Magazine, GeekWire, The Denver Post, a government website, and more - 16 sources in total. Nearly all of these articles are directly about the company or its founder/CEO in relation to the company. This coverage appears equal to or greater than similar companies in the same industry that have live pages. I am unsure if the feedback here suggesting that the sources themselves were inadequate? Or that the sum of their coverage did not meet the notability standard?

The other issue outlined was POV, "This draft is written from the viewpoint of the company, focusing on what the company says about itself. Corporate notability is based on what independent reliable sources have written about the subject." Each point of coverage was from the independent sources discussed above, only the introduction of the company's core functions (what it sells) is sourced from the company. Since I have a (disclosed) COI, I wanted to keep the draft very factual. Does this feedback mean I should try to write more about the company's impact rather than just facts and timeline? There are some published independent articles from notable sources that cover unique aspects of the company business model that could be included. How else might the POV be improved to be more neutral?

Looking forward to getting feedback. Thanks, Msklar12 (talk) 19:37, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello Msklar12. The first five references (which was as far as I looked) are not independent, being based on interviews or press releases. To enlarge on the point you quoted above: Wikipedia has basically no interested in what the subject says or wants to say about themselves, whether directly, or in interviews or press releases. Wikipedia is only interested in what people wholly unconnected with the subject, and not prompted or fed information by the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable places. If there is such stuff, then most of the artice needs to be based on it, and nearly of the citations need to be to it. If there isn't then it is not possible to write an acceptable article, because there is nothing that can go into it: that what the criteria for notability are about.

It is unfortunately likely that there are some articles about other companies which do not meet the criteria: Wikipedia used to be less careful about this, and being a volunteer operation, many things which should be done (like deleting or improving substandard articles) often don't get done. --ColinFine (talk) 22:28, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

What is the appropriate way to cite an ACM article?

What is the appropriate way to cite an article available in the ACM digital library? For example the article at https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/75277.75283 JorKadeen (talk) 11:47, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

JorKadeenThis place is onlyforWikipedia doubts. What is your question regarding Wikipedia. Is it how to cite in Wikipedia?Chemmy bear Discuss in more detail?

Hi, @JorKadeen: You have to select Cite>Journal and in the dialog box you have to paste the DOI in DOI section, click on the magnifying glass icon. It will auto fill all the details. In this case you have to just paste https://doi.org/10.1145/75277.75283 . Thanks Rocky 734 (talk) 13:57, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! Exactly what I needed. JorKadeen —Preceding undated comment added 14:05, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

@JorKadeen and Rocky 734: Actually, only the DOI itself (the part after https://doi.org/ starting with "10."), in this case just "10.1145/75277.75283" (without the quotes), should be pasted in the DOI field. The cite tool happens to work with the prefix in there, but it fails to strip the prefix out when generating the cite, which will result in a cite that generates an error. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 23:23, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Editing wikipedia pages

What are the steps or activities that happen once I make edits to a wikipedia page (improbing grammar or restructuring sentences etc.) ? Could someone explain the lifecycle of a wikipedia page across its journey of edits that people like me make to it?Shokap (talk) 13:58, 28 August 2020 (UTC) Shokap (talk) 13:58, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Shokap, and welcome to the Teahouse. For most articles, there isn't any kind of approval: you make your edits and they are published. If another editor disagrees that they are improvements, they can revert them; and if you disagree with their reversion, you can start a discussion. Please see BRD, which I think will answer your question. --ColinFine (talk) 14:24, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Also, View history shows all edits in chronological order. Clicking on prev (to left) for an entry shows what that editor did. David notMD (talk) 16:54, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

@Shokap, ColinFine, and David notMD: Here's a couple of interesting treatments of the subject I found by typing WP:Life into search and seeing the suggestions: Wikipedia:Life of an article and Wikipedia:Life cycle of the ideal article (both redirects, the first to the "outreach" wiki, which I've never heard of :) ). Not sure how current they are —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 23:41, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

How much time is taken to edit a article

Hi,I recently provide reliable sources to edit a article so how much time it take to edit Mega flames (talk) 09:25, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

I assume you are reffereing to your edit request on Talk:Banaphar. Generally, edit requests can take from a few minutes to about two weeks, as with every review process on Wikipedia. Victor Schmidt (talk) 10:57, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

No. You have not. I have gone through the 9 edits you made to the Wikipedia, and none of them has any reliable source for anything, unless you and User:Ultimate survi are the same person. Are you the same person? Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 00:54, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

"bundoora uited" is in a table (114 hits)

Can someone tell me just how to edit "bundoora uited" (114 hits) in various australian soccer teams/player articles if it is in a linked table? Thank you. 2605:E000:1301:4777:9D5E:6901:9210:E465 (talk) 06:58, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. I am assuming you are asking about Template:Football Federation Victoria. If you want to edit such a template in an article, you can click on the "V-T-E" part in the upper left corner of the template box. "E" will open the edit window for this template, just like you would edit an article or talkpage. Please make sure to double-check your changes with "Show preview" before you publish them, as changes to such templates affect all articles where they are used. If you have further questions, please feel free to ask here again anytime. GermanJoe (talk) 07:10, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Well, the answer is I dont know. All I know is that when I do a search there are 114 hits. When I go to edit the article it does not show. So I assume it is in a link. What template I do not know.2605:E000:1301:4777:9D5E:6901:9210:E465 (talk) 08:35, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

I dont follow Aussie football so the who what and where I really could not tell you. Maybe if the editing procedure was not out of the usual I just might know where to go.2605:E000:1301:4777:9D5E:6901:9210:E465 (talk) 08:38, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

I fixed the spelling in Template:Football Federation Victoria. Not sure how long it takes our search to update, but this shows no hits on that mis-spelling in articles that do not use that NavBox. Thanks for catching it. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 09:42, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

 Fixed It appears that the spelling error was confined to that one template, as this search now returns nothing. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 01:30, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Speedy delete

Is there a criteria that covers drafts that duplicate an existing article? I've happened across one that is a copy and paste of a long established article and serves no value whatsoever. – ².O.^Boxing 21:23, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

@Squared.Circle.Boxing: I am not seeing anything at WP:CSD that applies to this case. RudolfRed (talk) 21:37, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Actually, if it does not give proper attribution to the Wikipedia article as required by WP:CWW, then it may count as a copyright issue which would be subject to deletion. RudolfRed (talk) 21:38, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

WP:A10, but if the new copy's title is a reasonable redirect then just redirect it to the original. Meters (talk) 03:53, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

The A series CSD only applies to articles. Usedtobecool ☎️ 08:23, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Copying within Wikipedia without attribution is easily solved however late it is discovered, so I don't think any page would be deleted for just that. CSD G12 specifically says that lack of attribution for otherwise non-infringing content doesn't qualify for it. Usedtobecool ☎️ 08:34, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Someone may have intended to use it as a sandbox in which case it should be in their userspace, so it should be discussed with that editor. Abandoned drafts will have to wait for CSD WP:G13, maybe blank it in the meantime. Drafts that are submitted at AFC are declined as duplicates of existing articles. If it's not submitted and it's not been abandoned, I'd leave a note on the draft, its talk page or the talk page of whoever is working on it. There is always WP:MFD if it serves no purpose and has no future. Usedtobecool ☎️ 08:34, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

It began in their sandbox (still there) and they subsequently created a draft. The draft in question is Draft:Manny pacquiao. -- ².O.^Boxing 14:45, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Squared.Circle.Boxing, WP:G2 worked. Usedtobecool ☎️ 04:42, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Guideline on categorization of transcontinental countries in lists in "Foreign relations of" articles

I am looking for a Wikipedia guideline on the following situation: In "Foreign relations of" articles (For example Foreign relations of North Korea or Foreign relations of Syria), often, there are lists for each "continent", which means that Europe and Asia are seperate categories.
Turkey and Russia are two examples for countries that span multiple continents. Often, but not always, one finds Turkey in the "Asia" category in such articles, and Russia in either the "Asia" or "Europe" category. Depending on the viewpoint, you could either argue that the majority of the landmass is located in one continent, for example Asia for Turkey and Russia, Africa for Egypt; or you could argue that the country has historically been located on and is culturally linked to one continent but at some point in time extended into another, for example Asia for Turkey (ex. East Thrace), Europe for Russia (ex. Siberia), Europe for France (ex. French Guiana), Spain (ex. Canary Islands) or the UK (ex. Falklands).
I have tried to find a guideline and looked in the Manual of Style, however, I did not find one.
My question is: Does Wikipedia have a guideline that lists criteria on how to categorize countries in lists that are seperated into "continents"?
I am very thankful for any experienced Wikipedia user who could tell me whether such a guideline exists. 2003:F6:271B:400:DD7E:4C4E:3BD9:D568 (talk) 19:11, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

I can't think of any, but you could try Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Categories. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:19, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

First, since the article is about relations between country x and countries 1 through n, how those countries are grouped is really of secondary importance unless we are trying to show a pattern of relations with countries on continent y, in which case we should use the grouping used by the cite for the pattern claim. Otherwise, pick one of the sources if they specify a grouping, or maybe one of the groupings used in the continent articles and cite it. Having an RS to lean on for the definition of the groups should provide content for a statement in an edit notice and talk page notice regarding the grouping to prevent (or at least shorten) the edit-warring over whether Turkey is Asian or European. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 19:40, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your answers. It certainly is of secondary importance, but in almost all of these "Foreign relations of" articles with enough countries listed, there is a categorization into continents. While I personally would even be fine with the removal of these categories in these articles, instead listing all countries in a single list, I assume these categories are probably made to make the article clearer and more well ordered. The contents of the individual country entries are often pieced together from multiple references which do not necessarily specify countries into continents. I was looking for a guideline to prevent such possible edit warring and to make all "Foreign relations of" Wikipedia articles appear more uniform. Since it doesn't seem to exist and I think that it should exist (because, in my opinion, there should be a uniform standard across Wikipedia -- whether Turkey is classified as "Europe", "Asia", "Eurasian", "Asia and Europe" or something else—interestingly, I just noticed that North and South America are usually grouped together as "Americas" in these articles, so why not for example Europe and Asia as Eurasia, too?), where can I propose it? Would that be the above-mentioned Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Categories? --2003:F6:271B:400:DD7E:4C4E:3BD9:D568 (talk) 01:42, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Yes, that would be a good place to start. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 04:55, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Adding link to German Wikipedia

I just created a new article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Classics_of_Western_Spirituality and would like to link to the German wiki entry (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classics_of_Western_Spirituality) which I have modified. But I don't know how to add the link under "Languages" on the left of the screen. Can someone help? BikrBoy (talk) 23:50, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello BikrBoy, I think that's because it's a draft. When it becomes an article, the two should be linked together through Wikidata. There are bots and dedicated editors who take care of that stuff. Wikidata item, this one, seems to be the one. Whoever does it, the article on the English Wikipedia will have to be listed alongside the German one in that item page, then both will show up on each other's sidebar. See Wikipedia:Wikidata#New_articles. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 05:29, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Question about Wikipedia entry "Three on a Rope" not showing up in a Google search

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_on_a_Rope

I am largely responsible for this entry but I am new to writing Wikipedia entries and I'm wondering why outside search engines such as Google do not pick up this entry. If I search within Wikipedia I am taken directly to the entry but if I enter the search string "Three on a Rope" in Google's search engine, for example, it does not take me to this entry. Is there something that can be done to make this happen? Any guidance would be much appreciated. Thanks! Donna Dmbrinton (talk) 02:17, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

@Dmbrinton: Welcome to Wikipedia, and thanks for wanting to expand it. New articles are hidden from search engines until they are reviewed by the new page patrol or for 90 days whichever comes first. RudolfRed (talk) 02:29, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

@RudolfRed - Many thanks and good to know, Donna — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dmbrinton (talk • contribs) 02:35, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Dmbrinton, please do not use IMDb as a reference. It hosts user-generated content and is therefore not an acceptable source per WP:RS guidelines. If the rest of the sources are reliable and support the claims they are cited for, the article should have no problem getting approved as it seems fairly well-written. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 05:34, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

is there an index for academic or subjectwise templates?

example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Genetic_translation or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:DNA_replication ; these are subject (discipline) related template; different from "noticeboard type" or administration related templates (indexed here).

Now my questions are,

1. Is there an index for subject related (academic discipline related) template? I have seaarched a lot but I didn't found any. Such as all Cell-related templates, all Biochemistry related templates etc.

2. Is there a term for these purple-coloured, subject-related templates (those are usually inserted at bottom of pages)?

PS. These templates are very useful, informative and good for comparative study. I am trying to make a few PDF books with collection of subjectwise templates, but its difficult to track existing templates due to lack of an index. Thanks in advance. RIT RAJARSHI (talk) 14:22, 28 August 2020 (UTC) RIT RAJARSHI (talk) 14:22, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello, RIT RAJARSHI. Those are navigation templates. Please see that link for more information. --ColinFine (talk) 14:26, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

@ColinFine: Thank you I am searching if there is an index for navigation templates. If it does not exist, I will be glad to participate making it. With all the best wishes.

It's worth looking at which categories the templates are in. The first you mention is in Category:Protein biosynthesis templates, and the second is in Category:Biochemistry templates. You can then see which categories those categories are in. --David Biddulph (talk) 14:52, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

@David Biddulph:Thank you so muchRIT RAJARSHI (talk) 18:13, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

@RIT RAJARSHI: How about Category:Navigational boxes by topic. (Please also check out the article on indenting, especially example 4.) —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 23:55, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

@AlanM1:Thank you so much it is very helpful. RIT RAJARSHI (talk) 05:09, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Next time I will try to follow indentation guidelines RIT RAJARSHI (talk) 05:36, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello everyone, I have an important question to ask

Well, I always wanted to be semi-auto-confirmed users which I need at least 500 contributions/edits to reach the level. However, I can't seem to figure out how to find the quantities of edits. Also, I always check my edit quantities on mobile, but the numbers never changed, even when I edit more. Can anyone please help me. Hypersonic man11^Talk Hypersonic man 11 (talk) 03:31, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

morning Hypersonic, at the top of the page, click on "preferences", it should show user profile tab, showing no of edits fourth line down. Hope that helps, Cheers. IdreamofJeanie (talk) 03:37, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Hypersonic man 11. Using a computer you can click on "contribuitions" on the top of the page and then on "edit count" on the bottom. It will show you how many edits you have. As I can see here, you have 354 edits on En.WP.--SirEdimon ^Dimmi!!! 03:44, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Look at it, it is always 354 edits... but thanks. can someone resolve it... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hypersonic man 11 (talk • contribs) 03:50, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Hypersonic man 11, you're at 356, and I see from you contributions that you made two edits after posting this section, so it would seem to be working just fine. Please bookmark this and recheck after making additional edits. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 05:43, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Guys, i am thinking...

I am thinking if i can nominate Chengdu J-20 fifth-generation stealth fighter to the Wikipedia good article nomination. I've checked, it has no issues and additional problems. Also, all the information available are there, as you know the fighter is still somehow very secretive as of now. JF-17 can be nominated, so does the J-20 right. If you guy give the green light, let me put it in nomination box, because I like to try... Hypersonic man11^Talk Hypersonic man 11 (talk) 03:43, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Hypersonic man 11, you are not one of the principal contributors to that article. This page gives all the statistics on it. You'd have to reach out the editors who have made significant contributions to the article and convince them that it is ready. Have you checked to see if the problems highlighted in the last good article review have been addressed? Usedtobecool ☎️ 05:50, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Why i didn't get any response from wikipedia team

Hi, recently I search about something and i saw that there is many wrong information so i go to the talk page and participate there with articles (reliable sources) but i didn't see any correction and didn't get any response from wikipedia team. Why? Mega flames (talk) 04:08, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi, recently I have search about something and I saw many wrong information so I go the talk page and participate their with articles(reliable sources) but i didn't get any response from wikipedia team. Why? Mega flames (talk) 04:17, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

First, in this attempt of yours, for example, you provide no evidence, and therefore nobody reading has any reason to believe what you say. People could ask you to provide evidence, but it's at least as likely that they'll ignore you. Secondly, you haven't waited long. Wait a week or so. -- Hoary (talk) 05:32, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

"Many wrong information" seems like a bit of overstatement, as you complained about just one - Alha and Udal are not Ahir, according to you. Also there is no "Wikipedia team" it's just 270,000 volunteers, who edits the Wikipedia because they want to, and not because they have to. If they see something they don't want to address, they will not, and not one can tell them to that they have have to address it.

A good way to get a response on Wikipedia is not removing other people's edit request (if you can't respect others, others will not respect you), writing in a more easy to understand way (the question you posted here is pretty difficult to understand, like "so i go to the talk page and participate there with articles (reliable sources) but i didn't see any correction"), and make a request that's credible (like not proposing that your personal knowledge is better than reliable sources). I hope this helps. Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 06:30, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy ping: @Mega flames: GeraldWL 06:11, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

hacking.

how do i become a hacker?!?!?!?!?! Anonymous1357908 Anonymous1357908 (talk) 04:28, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Anonymous1357908 Welcome to Wikipedia. We are here to help regarding Wikipedia editing and usage. Thank you ~ Amkgp 💬 04:59, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

@Anonymous1357908: Just wanted to check if you were asking about Wikipedia Hackathon events? Nick Moyes (talk) 08:36, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Launghing at this question. GeraldWL 06:14, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Is there a host that would be willing to monitor a rewrite?

Hello

I'm trying to learn my craft as a Wikipedian. As part of this I'm undertaking a rewrite of the Door handle page, which needed some love. I've posted my rewrite aims on the Door handle talk page. This is certain to be a piecemeal project for me. So far I've added a History section and started rearranging some other material. Is there a host/editor that would be willing to keep an occasional eye on what I am doing? I've done some editing elsewhere and added a page on Pistol duelling but this is the largest project I've attempted so far.

I'm not looking for hand-holding. Just the knowledge that an experienced editor is aware of what I'm doing. Also, if the Pistol duelling page flags any "don'ts" that I'm doing, it would be good to know now so I don't replicate them on the Door handle page or any others.

Thank you all as always for your constructive help. Universal Kakistocrat (talk) 12:13, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Universal Kakistocrat, added it in my watchlist. I'll see what I can do too. GeraldWL 12:33, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

You might reach out to User talk:Larry Hockett, as he has been an editing presence at the article for a while, and has reverted a few of your edits. David notMD (talk) 13:02, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

I don't see an indication of him reverting my edits, assuming you're replying to me. GeraldWL 06:17, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Thank you Gerald Waldo Luis. I appreciate it. Thank you too for the good suggestion David notMD. I had a conversation about this with Larry Hockett. His interest looks to be infection control. He was very helpful on the importance of sources in that section. The history, for example, wasn't his interest when I asked. So I'm especially grateful to Gerald Waldo Luis for picking this up.Universal Kakistocrat (talk) 13:24, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Resubmit an article by adding more content, to keep it as an independent page

Hello, my article about Draft:National Management Programme (NMP) was rejected with this reason: "The proposed article does not have sufficient content to require an article of its own, but it could be merged into the existing article at Management Development Institute." I feel that NMP has a distinctive significance in the Education community due to its history and thus, I would want to keep the page independent of the Management Development Institute page. I seek your advice on this: If I add more content to the Draft:National Management Programme (NMP) page (more details) and resubmit, is there a possibility of it getting published? SanyaDuggal (talk) 08:02, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

SanyaDuggal Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. If there is more significant coverage in independent reliable sources to be had, you certainly can try. Any history of this program needs to be told by independent sources, not anyone associated with the program. I would note that if you are associated with this program or the Institute that offers it, you should review conflict of interest and paid editing for declarations you could be required to make. 331dot (talk) 08:14, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

331dot Thank you very much. All history that I included on the page was from independent sources and sufficiently verified per sentence. Need your suggestion please: how long should the content length be, before I resubmit it for publishing consideration?

fixing ping to 331dot. SanyaDuggal you need to sign your posts with four tildes (~~~~) for mentions to generate notifications for intended users. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 04:51, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

I don't know about any specific length it should be; you just need to summarize what the sources say and have enough to show that it merits a standalone article instead of being part of another. 331dot (talk) 07:39, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Can I link to copyrighted sources?

Can I link to copyrighted sources, as long as I don't blatantly copy the source? K=caklin (talk) 04:03, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Kinecaklin You can, unless they are reliable and independent. This is the right place to place your question. Chemmy bear Discuss in more detail? —Preceding undated comment added 04:57, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

@Kinecaklin: Yes. Most of the sources we use as references or external links are copyrighted (newspapers and their online equivalents, books, journals, official websites, etc.). I think Chemmy bear mistakenly wrote "unless they are reliable and independent"; references must be reliable sources. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 07:51, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Please can I ask an administrator to remove User:Materialscientist?

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

OP has been blocked and there's was really nothing to resolve here to begin with; so, further discussion seems unnecessary. -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:35, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

---

Hello. I am an experienced Wikipedian and editor. However, I am trying to ask an administrator to remove one of the users. The user I would like them to remove is User:Materialscientist. This is because he/she has been vandalizing Wikipedia recently. His/her account is being used only for vandalism, so I suppose he/she needs to be reported, removed and blocked indefinitely, this is to prevent further vandalism. Thank you. AstronomerOfSpace (talk) 06:55, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

AstronomerOfSpace, don't think this is the right platform tho. I don't see any signs of vandalism, their account is not solely made for vandalism as they have done several contructive reverts/edits. Courtesy ping: @Materialscientist: GeraldWL 07:09, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

And here, your tone seems questionable: "I have a very important mission for you to complete," " I have heard that one of the users." It seems like you're just hearing a person saying that... mind clarifying? GeraldWL 07:12, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

You also haven't edited any articles, so your words "experienced" is concerning. GeraldWL 07:13, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Plus, Materialscientist is an Admin, editing since 2008, with well over 1 million edits. Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 07:18, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

The topicon you put at User:AstronomerOfSpace, that you're a recent changes patroller, boggles me, since you are new here, only a day old. GeraldWL 07:16, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

I think this is a bored school kid, not a grown up police officer, as they claim on their userpage. Nick Moyes (talk) 07:25, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

User has been blocked. Theroadislong (talk) 07:27, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

I suspect User:AstronomerOfSpace is a sockpuppet of User:ThePoliceman2020, a.k.a. User:PoliceOfficer124.   Maproom (talk) 07:33, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Ah. How sweet. I wanted to be either an astronomer or a policeman when I was a child, too. Nick Moyes (talk) 07:38, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

I remember riding past an open fire station at night while intoxicated about 50 years ago, and commenting in amazement to my buddies. Now, I get to help put out fires on the world's greatest online encyclopedia. Not bad. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:47, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

@Cullen328: And we are lucky to have you here, you bicycling fool! Ah, the happy days of our youth! Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 08:13, 29 August 2020 (UTC) Good lord, why did I think you were on a bike???Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 08:16, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Sometimes I think Wikipedia needs an upvote button. Giraffer (munch) 08:08, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

They probably wanted Materialscientist blocked because they (MS) blocked all of OP's socks and ironically, the OP. Giraffer (munch) 08:08, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Speedy deletation of my account

why wikipedia host delete my artical about me? Nihal Kumar Singh (talk) 09:24, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Nihal Kumar Singh Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia is not a place for people to write about themselves. Please review the autobiography policy. While not forbidden, autobiographical articles are strongly discouraged on Wikipedia. This is because people naturally write favorably about themselves. Wikipedia is not interested in what people have to say about themselves, but in what independent reliable sources with significant coverage choose to say about them. If you just want to tell the world about yourself, you should use social media. 331dot (talk) 09:27, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Minorax has already posted the reason to your talk page. Please go theough the reason Minorax posted, click on the links in his explanation, and read the pages that open when you click the links. By the way, your account was not deleted, only that userpage you created. Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 09:31, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Nihal Kumar Singh, you are more than welcome to create a userpage, but it should reflect your personality on Wikipedia (your editing topics, experience, permissions etc.) A couple fun things such as userboxes & banners describing yourself in real life are nice, but writing an autobiography about yourself is not. That is using Wikipedia to write about yourself, instead of explaining what you do here. Take a look at some of the userpages of people who have replied here for inspiration. My userpage can be found here → Giraffer (munch) 10:42, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

An editor with POV and deletion issues

Hi. Tried to resolve the issues at Karmapa Controversy without calling in the administrators. There's an editor that won't build consensus, hasn't responded to attempts to build consensus, and meanwhile has rewritten the article with heavy POV while deleting, it appears, almost all previous work. I re-edited the opening after efforts at communicating didn't work. The editor responded with a threat of a block... Worse, I just scanned the entire article and it's full of POV, unbalanced, and is an editing mess. Yes, the editor writes well so their work is deceptively coherent; and they cite books as RS, which are typically one sided ( they agree) and unverifiable as RS. I've asked them to stop and build consensus before continuing, but they apparently refuse. I think a block is past due - so they understand the situation. Is there another option? Advise? Thanks! Pasdecomplot (talk) 13:19, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

@Pasdecomplot, from what I can observe this began about a month ago. Why didn’t you report this earlier? It’s easier to curtail this at the initial stage. I have however left a warning on their talk page & would be also monitoring their activities. I am not so sure but I may have to undo most of their edits on that article & take it to back to how it was on the 24th of July which was(I stand to be corrected) the most neutral version.Celestina007 13:42, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

ThanksCelestina007 for looking into the matter. I wasn't editing for a couple of months, so didn't see the issue. So, is it best to wait until their edits are reverted instead of trying to re-edit? The POV is so dense, maybe too thick to just repair with reedits.

Pasdecomplot 11:19, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

daKAH

The article title spells it as DaKAH, while the proper spelling is "daKAH". How can I get the title to spell right? Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 05:32, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi, on the rare occasions where the title should start with a lower-case letter, you can place a tag {{lowercase title}} at the top of the article, and it will display in lower case. Pi (Talk to me!) 06:05, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

@Aditya Kabir: Now that you've got the title sorted, could you find and add some Reliable Sources that show this group meets our notability criteria? I am rather minded to put it forward for a deletion discussion, as I am not convinced at first sight that it merits a page here (see WP:MUSICBIO). Thanks Nick Moyes (talk) 09:29, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

The "Sources" need to become references if this is to survive. David notMD (talk) 11:01, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: Thanks. That's the first thing I checked. And, since there are not too many people interested, I believe WP:BOP is now upon me. Give me a couple of days, if you can, as my internet connect for next three days will remain sketchy at the best. If I fail to establish notability, I would support your WP:AFD. By the way, I am working on this as a tribute to User:Intrigue who last edited in June, 2006. I want to do this because, she/he started the article that I have been busy with for two months now, and I am an emotional fool.

@David notMD: Thanks. I know. I have rescued random articles from deletion before. Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 11:14, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, Aditya Kabir. By default, I am always in favour of retention rather than deletion, so I, for one, would not want to rush for a deletion discussion if there's a chance something can be improved, as this probably can. Thank you so much. Nick Moyes (talk) 11:56, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

 Done Please, check. Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 14:09, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Problem with the citation template when there is an = sign in the url

I have entered an url in a citation template that has an equal sign in it. This causes the template to produce the error message 'Unknown parameter'. There is a 'help' link next to the error message, but when I click on it the 'Leave' window pops-up as if I have been logged out. Is there a solution to this problem? — Preceding unsigned comment added by BiostatSci (talk • contribs) 05:50, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Throw your friends a line. Which article?Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 07:04, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

... and more importantly, which URL? URLs used in cites very commonly have un-encoded '=' in them, which works fine. My guess is that you have un-encoded quotes ("), which you can solve by changing them to %22. Spaces should be changed to %20. For example, this Google Books URL:

• https://books.google.com/books?id=_NNmFiUnSmUC&vq="dark side of the moon"

becomes:

• https://books.google.com/books?id=_NNmFiUnSmUC&vq=%22dark%20side%20of%20the%20moon%22

Yes, it would be nice if the RefToolBar took care of this for you. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 08:00, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Pinging BiostatSci. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 08:12, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

 Fixed @BiostatSci: This appears to be about Talk:Melanie Stansbury. Cite #3 to followthemoney.org was:

• url=https://www.followthemoney.org/show-me?dt=1&c-t-eid=44581391&c-t-id=240407#[{1|gro=y,d-ins

I changed it to:

• url=https://www.followthemoney.org/show-me?dt=1&c-t-eid=44581391&c-t-id=240407#%5B{1%7Cgro=y,d-ins

That is, the '[' needed to be changed to %5B and the '|' needed to be changed to %7C. I've corrected it and the other ref to that site with a problem. I'll hunt for the table that tells you what needs to be encoded, and hopefully a tool that does it for you (unless someone beats me to it; please ). —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 08:27, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Well, that was easy: Help:Citation Style 1#Special characters has the list. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 08:32, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

• Thanks @AlanM1:! Greatly appreciated. 73.242.164.128 (talk) 14:26, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Mobile networks could be used to vandalize Wikipedia

When I turn airplane mode on and off momentarily on my phone, my IP changes. Could vandals abuse this to vandalize Wikipedia without getting blocked?   ApChrKey   ^Talk 15:46, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

@ApChrKey: We block all vandals! Nick Moyes (talk) 15:53, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

I think if you poke around, a lot of such IP switching techniques have been blocked for a long time, such as large blocks of IPs used by the larger VPNs. Although there were many who pointed out this would block dissidents in some countries from editing, so I don't know what the current status is. -- Kendrick7^talk 15:59, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Undoing of justified things with (in this case 5) sources, ?Vandalism?

Hi! My question is how to deal with frequent (in this case ideologically based) unjustified undoings/removings of facts with (in this case !5!) reliable sources. In my particular case "Croatian" and the 5 sources referring to it have been removed as a common language in the Bosnian Kingdom It was later replaced by the same user (MckenzieBosanac21) with "Serbian", having no sources. I undid this by changing it to the older version with the sources, but I fear this scenario might repeat itself in the future. The URL is:https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kingdom_of_Bosnia&action=history Gretings, Stjepan StjepanGr. (talk) 16:09, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello, StjepanGr. and welcome to the Teahouse. A good-faith content dispute is not vandalism. However, removing valid sources is not usually well thought of, unless thjere is a good reason.

I would advise you to post on the article talk page, Talk:Kingdom of Bosnia, describing what changes you made and why, and what changes other have made that you disagree with, and why. List the sources you feel support these changes clearly, please, and mention whether they are already cited in the article or not. Please do not make accusations of improper behavior, confine yourself to discussion what should or should not be in the article, in accordance with the reliable sources and with Wikipedia policies and guidelines. I see that there have been several disputes over that article in the past. Articles about that area of the world are often quite controversial, and it is best to attempt to avoid conflict here by sticking strictly to questions of what should be in the article and why. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 16:37, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Oh in future, please use wiki-links to refer to articles here when possible. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 16:37, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

How do I publish a draft?

Hello, I am trying to publish my draft on Michael K. Hole: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Michael_K._Hole

I'm wondering how I do that. Thanks! Victoria7yu (talk) 18:25, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Victoria7yu Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I have added the appropriate information to allow you to submit the draft for review. If you have been paid to make your contributions or represent Dr. Hole, you must make the required paid editing declaration. 331dot (talk) 18:48, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Per notes on your Talk page, you must either declare paid or state not paid on your User page before submitting the draft. And answer question about you taking the photo that is with the draft. David notMD (talk) 18:51, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

My edit has been undone by ClueBot NG

Please suggest how the editing done by me was wrong that the bot reverted my edit. Please check the original content and the edited first two paragraphs as given below and decide which one to keep. I made an edit recently on Oscar Martinez (The Office) page as follows:

"Oscar Martinez is a fictional character from the US mockumentary-style television series The Office played by Cuban-American actor Oscar Nunez. Martinez is seen working as an accountant at the Scranton, Pennsylvania, in Dunder Mifflin’s office of a paper distribution company."

The character was implied to be gay in the second-season episode "The Secret", when Dwight catches him faking sickness to spend the day with his boyfriend (Dwight remains oblivious to this fakeness as he was obsessed with proving that Oscar was not ill). In earlier episodes, many co-workers erroneously attribute to him various Mexican stereotypes (e.g. being involved in drug cartels) but after his ousting, his stereotypes are more concentrated on his being gay, particularly by Michael, which may explain their conflicted relationship. Editingwork8 (talk) 10:20, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

You removed referenced content and replaced it with unreferenced content. David notMD (talk) 11:08, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

I sense this was part of fancruft deletion, so might well have been quite justified, and certainly not a bad faith edit, even if the automated tool sensed it as such. (Will add some more thoughts later when im back on my PC.) Nick Moyes (talk) 12:00, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

@Editingwork8: (back again) ...because Wikipedia attracts an inordinate amount of vandalism by silly schoolkids and other bored individuals, we have various automated tools to revert to most obvious bad faith edits. Content deletion is one such common form of it. The 'bots' aren't always 100% correct (just as humans aren't either) and I think in this instance the bot was wrong. It left an automated edit on your talk page, with a link to enable you to report this as an inappropriate revert, with instructions to then repeat the edit. I would support you doing that, as it's clear there are ongoing and sensible attempts to remove 'fancruft' (trivia) from the article. You did the right thing asking here; when it comes to another human doing something you don't understand, it's often best to directly approach them {politely) on their talk page and ask for clarification of what you did wrong. Not possible with software, of course.

On a different note, it's great to see you as a qualified librarian wanting to contribute to Wikipedia. Are you aware of this project bringing museums, libraries and Wikipedia together for the greater good? Or the #1lib#1ref hashtag - a worldwide event encouraging librarians to add references to articles (see here for more). Finally, I note your talk page says you're interesting in adding content to start and C-class articles, but don't forget the 'STUB' articles which are even shorter and need more TLC, but reward you with easy improvements You can find them via so-called 'wiki-projects' which are simply editors with common interests working to improve that one topic area. Each Wikiproject usually has a table showing the number of articles relating to it, both by importance (low to top) and also by quality assessment (Stub to Featured Article). So, at that Projects's first section (Article quality assessment) I see there are currently 2,525 stub articles, of which 763 have been assessed for their 'importance' to that project. I then note there are 69 stub articles deemed as 'High Importance' which could be worked on first to greatest effect. Just click on the number to see a list of those articles ((example). Browsing through them reveals pages like the Ailefroide which have no inline sources, and just one external link. These are the things that some editors get real motivation from when they find topics that interest them and appreciate that they can easily improve the encyclopaedia. That's a really empowering feeling. Good luck in all you do. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:53, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

A question on the draft article 'Pomogailo Anatoliy"

My draft article Pomogailo Anatoliy unfortunately has been declined. I have a question - why are the references not enough for Wikipedia? They do show the texts of publications concerning the subject of the article. In addition, the reference to the web-site "math-net.ru", the reference to the web-site of the Russian Foundation for Basic Research, the reference to the web-site "lifelib.ru" and the reference to the "Intellectual system of the thematic research of the scientometric data" - all of them are the independant and publidhed sources of information in Russia concerning the subject of the article. All these web-sites are the international data bases of the articles and details about their authors. The subject matter of the article is the Soviet and Russian scientist - so, the information about his articles are the main part of the references. I do not understand - why are they not reliable and not enough for Wikipedia? Could ypu please clarify it? So that I could fix the draft of the article. Looking forward to your reply. Thank you! Kind regards, Rhodium66 (talk) 20:29, 29 August 2020 (UTC)Rhodium66 Rhodium66 (talk) 20:29, 29 August 2020 (UTC)Rhodium66

Courtesy, it is at Draft:Pomogailo Anatoliy. David notMD (talk) 20:37, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Rhodium66. English Wikipedia requires (especially for a biography of a living person) that each statement in the article be cited to the particular source that supports it; and that nearly all the sources be independent of the subject. Wikipedia is basically not interested in what the subject has said, done, or published except insofar as people wholly unconnected with the subject have chosen to publish about the subject and their activities. Please see REFB and CSMN. --ColinFine (talk) 20:50, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Aziz Karimov

Hi there, I'm Aziz. I added an article about myself. After a few hours, my article was rejected. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Aziz_Karimov Why my article was rejected? Thank you for your attention. Ezop2676 (talk) 20:42, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Ezop2676, and welcome to the Teahouse.

• First of all, your draft was not "rejected", but rather "declined". This is a subtle but important difference. "Declined" means "this isn't ready yet, please improve it and we will look at it again". "Rejected" means "This will never be a valid article. Don't waste your own time by working on it, or our time by submitting it for review."
• Secondly, the decline message told you what the problem is: 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. Please read the linked guideline and policy pages, and also notability, Wikipedia's Golden Rule, WP:NBIO, and our guideline on autobiography.
• Lets take a quick look at the sources now cited in the article:
  • The flickr page simply shows that you have posted a photo to the web. Anyone can do that. It does not show that other people have taken note of you in any way.
  • The .yarat.az page does not appear to say anything about you at all. (source links should go directly to the place where supporting info may be found.) But if your name is somewhere further down the list of those short bios of participants, those appear to be written by the participants themselves, and so do not count at all for notability.
  • The contact.az page shows that Aziz Karimov won an award from the Photographers Association of Azerbaijan in 2013. But how significant was that award? The accompanying text is not at all significant coverage.
  • The /frittord.no page shows another award, and is of soemwhat greater value, but is still not really significant coverage.

You should include at least three independent reliable sources that show significant coverage for this to be approved. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 21:47, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Your Use of My Scholarship

Why do you have extensive citations to my four articles on Governor Ronald Reagan, Speaker Bob Moretti, Jeese "Big Daddy" Unruh and CA Politics and welfare reform in the 1970's, and also numerous citations to my book and articles on the Oklahoma Socialist Party, its leaders, and the Green Corn Rebellion, but DO NOT give me an article. One was proposed once by one of my students, but your reviewer was so slipshod that they did not see any of the prominent articles on Governor Reagan, a world-historical figure. How Come? 65.93.200.230 (talk) 16:40, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello, unregistered user. Many authors of reliable sources cited here on Wikipedia do not have Articles about them. For a Wikipedia article it is usually more important what others have written about a subject than what the subjet has personally written and published. See WP:NACADEMIC, notability, and Wikipedia's golden rule.

Also it is helpful if you provide links to the specific articles you mention here, and state the specific citation(s) you have in mind.

Moreover, use of terms such as "slipshod " does not encourage others to help you. Wikipedia is created by volunteers, the vast majority of whom are doing their best without pay and with limited recognition to improve the project. They may well make errors. Some misunderstand guidelines and policies. But please assume good faith. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 16:54, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Is there sustained coverage of you as an individual in independent secondary sources? Many writers are widely used as sources but do not have their own article because while they themselves write, what we require is independent sources writing about them as a person. GMG^talk 16:57, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Seconding the statement that what a person publishes can be a reliable source for a Wikipedia article without the person themselves qualifying as Wikipedia-notable. David notMD (talk) 18:42, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Two more things: First, as an encyclopedia, Wikipedia is a tertiary source; we primarily summarize what reliable secondary sources have written about a subject, with very limited info (some basic biographical, etc.) allowed to come from primary sources (in this case, like the works written by the subject themself). Consequently, if (as I suspect) there are few or no such secondary sources with significant qualifying (i.e., reliable and independent) material, we have nothing on which to base an article.

Second, an article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 22:50, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Lost all editing progress

• Link: Daniel Algrant

Hello,

I am editing a page for an artist. All of the information is directly from them. How can i retrieve my progress and continue editing? Anesiasaun (talk) 01:45, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

• Anesiasaun, did you read the messages left at your page? I'd add the importance of reading WP:COI, too. 2601:188:180:B8E0:51C4:A213:DDE6:49FA (talk) 01:47, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

I plan to include all of the appropriate links and I can neutralize the tone further.. Is there any way I can retrieve my inital edits so I can go from there rather than start over? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anesiasaun (talk • contribs) 01:54, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Is there any way I can retrieve my progress so I can go back and further neutralize the tone and add further sources? Anesiasaun (talk) 02:00, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

• This was one of the edits you made [13]. Please understand that I'm not being glib when I say it's not salvageable. Read Wikipedia's guidelines, especially those that I referred to here and at your talk page. 2601:188:180:B8E0:51C4:A213:DDE6:49FA (talk) 02:02, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

All is not lost. The content may be true, but you provided no references. The article Daniel Algrant exists, and all of the deleted content can be seen at View history, and then for each edit you made, click on prev (for previous), on the left. A suggestion - copy the content into your own Sandbox, then work on achieving neutral point of view and appropriate referencing there before pasting the revised content back into the article. David notMD (talk) 02:28, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

On your Talk page you were left mention of COI and PAID. Comply with that before doing any editing to the article. David notMD (talk) 02:30, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

@Anesiasaun: Well, the edit needs sources, of course. But otherwise, it seems decent. Not unsalvageable, IMO! Please observe User:David notMD's good advice. Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 02:34, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

I'm curious, Tribe of Tiger, how was that content decent? [14]; [15]; [16]; [17]; [18]; [19]. 2601:188:180:B8E0:51C4:A213:DDE6:49FA (talk) 03:08, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

I do beg your pardon, but my comment was made in reference to the only edit you mentioned, [20], which obviously needed to be sourced. It was not in reference to the additional six edits now noted above. I don't wish to argue, but I don't understand what is so problematic about this one edit. So, I am curious about what was "in-decent" or unsalvageable about this one edit. If I do not ask questions, I cannot learn. Thanks,Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 04:22, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi Tribe of Tiger, the single diff I started with wasn't a comprehensive listing of the edits--as I noted, it was just one, and my presumption was that editors would read the others before commenting. My mistake. From that edit alone, here's what's not acceptable:

• The cast includes Eric Stolz, Mary-Louise Parker, Ralph Macchio, along with Tony Curtis, Kathleen Turner, Tim Dalton and Whoopi Goldberg. It won the Critic’s Prize at the Deauville International Film Festival and went on to compete at the Tokyo International Film Festival. The New York Times called the film “as knowing and clever as it is charming”. We don't need a cast listing, which is the first tip-off of promotional intent here. Went on to compete is just a copy edit eyeroll. NYT blurb is promotional.
• Following the success of Naked in New York (1993), Algrant went on to direct episodes of the popular sitcom Sex and The City (1999-2000). Promotional and WP:PEACOCK, with another "went on to"; again, it's a standard phrase used by public relations minded-editors.
• Algrant went on to do People I Know (2002) starring Al Pacino. A film about a veteran publicist battling addiction and alcoholism. The piece was eventually ensnared in controversy before its premiere as it depicted the World Trade Center as a metaphor for cultural corruption prior to the tragic attack that took place during editing. The film also includes a scene where a woman is forced to flee a man named Harvey in a limousine - which was intended as a reference to Weinstein’s abusive behavior in the film industry. Weinstein would purchase the film, request that scene to be removed, and eventually stall it’s global release. Reads like there may be some WP:OR. "Ensnared in controversy" really needs a source, as does the reference to Weinstein, both for WP:BLP reasons and to support its significance in the plot. Overall, reads like an effort to pump up the movie's controversy, omitting a mixed critical reception.
• Greetings from Tim Buckley (2012) is a film co-written and directed by Algrant, depicting rockstar Jeff Buckley (Penn Badgley), making his debut performance honoring his estranged and late father Tim Buckley. The film premiered at the Toronto Film Festival and was bought by Focus World and Tribeca Pictures. It was described by Peter Travers in Rolling Stone as a “heartfelt and deeply moving film.” The Hollywood Reporter said it was a "sensitive, well-cast film about father-son musicians Tim and Jeff Buckley” and “gets the emotions and music just right". Young also praised lead actor Badgley for his "vibrant break-out performance" noting his "seductive energy" and Poots pointing out her "strong screen presence". Same as above, primarily promotional blurbs. And this isn't the most egregious of the edits. 2601:188:180:B8E0:51C4:A213:DDE6:49FA (talk) 15:12, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

My sincere thanks for producing this analysis. I find it to be very helpful, indeed. Now that I have "learned", I with agree with and understand your assessments. I rarely copyedit in this topic area, and will steer well clear. Thanks again, Sincerely,Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 20:39, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

You're welcome. I'm in no way intending to discourage you from participating, especially if you're interested in reading up more at WP:BLP. But I did not want to give a new WP:SPA undue encouragement, especially if they came here solely to add promotional content. Cheers 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 21:52, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Just left a note at your talk, before I saw this. Honestly, I have worked more with removing detrimental info from BLPs versus the over-the-top peacock type. Nonetheless, I have seen/removed "peacock" because it was unsourced. "Greatest XYZ in the world!", easy decision, as it is unsourced. Your lesson provided good info per PR-type statements that may be sourced, but are still unacceptable, etc. Sincerely, Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 22:48, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Additional cmts at your talk....Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 22:51, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Listing cinemas on city webpages

A suggestion, it would help people to know if the city they are viewing has a cinema or not. Yes, I know, I can go to Google Maps and search, but just listing the fact, not the name, of a cinema in the city would be helpful.

Thank you, Ron 173.243.77.145 (talk) 22:26, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Perhaps, but Wikipedia is not a directory of such things – that's the purpose and specialty of Google Maps and various topic-specific directory sites. One good reason is that it is really not maintainable. The current crisis is a perfect object lesson. Many theaters (and theatres) have closed and will not re-open. Based on experience, it's not terribly likely that editors will go around and remove the ones that are no more or mark them closed. In general, people are in a big hurry to add things to Wikipedia, and largely dis-interested in maintaining that information through their life cycle. Over time, that's a recipe for a big pile of poor-quality information. Instead, Wikipedia wants to take a longer-term view, with durable, maintainable information. Places that have historical significance, like the Globe Theatre, are a good example of information that is suitable. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 23:08, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Confusion about governments of Australia

In Wikipedia, Bob Hawke's fourth ministry is named as the 57th government of Australia and we are told that the next government is Paul Keating's first ministry. Yet Keating's first ministry is named as the 59th government of Australia. Surely Keating's first ministry should be number 58, and all the rest of the governments, up to Morrison's second ministry, are therefore currently named in Wikipedia with the wrong number. Morrison's second ministry should, taking a line through Hawke's fourth ministry, be number 72, not number 73. What happened to number 59, or is this simply an error which needs to be corrected?  CarinaBoy (talk) 22:55, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

@CarinaBoy: Please try to provide a link to the article you refer to when posting here. Hawke Government does not have 57 in it and you have no other contributions for me to be able to figure out which article you are discussing. Also, the talk page of an article is generally the best place to discuss a particular article with editors who are knowledgeable and interested in the subject. For example, in the case of Hawke Government, that would be Talk:Hawke Government. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 23:14, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Unable to send e-mail to permission-commons

I have recently received an e-mail requesting that I send authorisation and confirmation for two photographs placed on the page Caroline Freeman College, Otago. I sent the necessary information to the requested e-mail address but it bounced back to me as undeliverable. Any advice? CFCWarden (talk) 01:18, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

@CFCWarden: To what address did you send the email? Please copy and paste the address from the copy in your sent items folder. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 01:38, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

@CFCWarden: Note that, according to c:Commons:Email templates, the address is permissions-commons@wikimedia.org . —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 01:44, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Layout problems

File:Screenshot of the current Bengali language page.png

A lot of whitespace between two sections

When I visited the Bengali language article a couple of days backs, I found that all the images in the first sections were getting pushed down, no matter where they are being placed, left or right. And it was leaving a lot of white space between two sections.

After a discussion here and some attempts to fix it by AlanM1, the whitespace and the pushing down of images remained. So I tried to do something about it. Removed one video, placed all the images in the top sections to left. Now the whitespace is gone. But all the images in the top section are still pushed down, and they are now in a bunch near the end of the top sections. None of them are showing in the position where they were placed.

Because of that, it is currently not possible to put any image in the history section to show beside the relevant text. BTW, I tried to put another image in another article and that got pushed downwards as well.

What is the problem? And how can it be fixed? Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 01:39, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Aditya Kabir, Wikipedia:Extended_image_syntax#The_many-floating-objects_problem may be relevant. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 02:14, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Could very well be that. I tried removing all images, leaving only one in the top section, set to left. But that was pushed down too, like what happened at the other article. The same happened when I removed one or two infoboxes. Can one or two floating objects create the problem? Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 02:30, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Templates

How can I add templates on my user page, e.g. Template: Babel? Thy Pyrometer (talk) 22:20, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello Thy Pyrometer, Template:Babel gives examples and instructions of usage. Please go through it, try it, and come back with any questions you might have then. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 08:42, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello Usedtobecool,I know what Template: Babel does, but how do I add it? Thy Pyrometer (talk) 22:22, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Thy Pyrometer, by clicking "edit source" at the top of your userpage and typing in {{Babel|en|es-1|fr-1}}, for example. More info is at the template page linked in my previous reply. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 13:33, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello Usedtobecool, Thanks a lot! Thy Pyrometer (talk) 03:56, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

How do we deal with BLP pages dominated by the living person and related parties?

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Closing this because (1) the discussion has been started about this on the article's talk page at Talk:Peter Hitchens#Article sanitisation? and (2) the OP has been indefinitely blocked by a checkuser; so, there's nothing further going to be resolved by continuing to discuss this here. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:02, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

---

I did my first score of edits today, and in one case ran up against parties related to the living person (in this case, an account seemingly set up for the purpose of sanitising the Peter Hitchens page, with a careful measure of other pages edited to conceal the vested interest). The account in question simply removed a criticism of the living person (which cited a notable source and was sourced from a world famous academic), then gave a flimsy pretext (that rationalised moving this criticism, not removing it) when I brought this to his/her/their attention. What does one do about pages overridden with vested interests? Looking at the page in question, the living person is a tabloid journalist who has written about fighting to change his Wikipedia page, and looking at the talk page it is clear a lot of information is being hidden/suppressed from the page. Anti-Anti-Vaxxer2 (talk) 16:39, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

@Anti-Anti-Vaxxer2, I haven’t taken a look at anything yet but generally if there is a content dispute, the best place to resolve the issue would be at the talk page of that article & if that doesn’t work out well then seeking a third opinion is the next best option. Furthermore if you feel a COI is present then you should report the editor/incident appropriately at the WP:COIBOARD. I hope I have been helpful.Celestina007 20:52, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

thank-you Anti-Anti-Vaxxer2 (talk) 02:42, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

@Anti-Anti-Vaxxer2: Having spent the last hour or so wading through that page's history, I agree with your general concerns. But I think it is a bit more nuanced. One editor has been revamping and adding content (eg the subject's views on gun control and on his Wikipedia article), but another editor has been removing it on the flawed belief that it's a primary source. I have expressed my concerns on the talk page. That said, please avoid accusing other editors of a WP:COI or of bias if that isn't clearly the case. (I'm not totally convinced that's the issue here). Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 00:58, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

thanks a lot, your talk page contribution is spot-on. User:Gd123lbp looks like clear COI. lives on PH page (deleting Cambridge prof's criticism of book is recent example) but not on days when IP address 194.207.191.9 adds non-public infos on children (eg. Aug 4th, Aug 6th). also responded emotively when asked on own talk page. User:RichardWeiss is a less clear case but has been sanitising quite tirelessly. Anti-Anti-Vaxxer2 (talk) 02:42, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

FYI the OP has now been blocked. MarnetteD|Talk 02:55, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article rejected

Why my article is rejected? Pon Maa Kishan A 06:00, 30 August 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ponmaakishan (talk • contribs)

I suppose that you mean Draft:WINGS OF AERO. It wasn't rejected; it was declined. You have to base the draft on sources that are independent of Wings of Aero. You haven't done this. Indeed, you haven't mentioned a single independent source. -- Hoary (talk) 06:06, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Bad code in navbox?

The Bengali language article has a serious formatting disaster. Take a look.

I think it's because of one or more navboxes/infoboxes used have bad coding that is interfering with all other images and templates around it. Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 09:25, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

 Fixed @Aditya Kabir: The size of the image was not being set at all in that template, and the file on Commons was updated in July to be much bigger than it was before, so that's how it appeared in the Navbox. I set the size to a reasonable 100px, but then commented it out, since only one other navbox in the Category:Indo-Iranian languages templates has an image ({{Sinhala language}}), probably because of something related to MOS:NOINDICSCRIPT. I'd suggest discussing it somewhere before uncommenting it. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 10:49, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, but the mess remained.

You can't put any image in the first section without them being pushed between the first and second sections. Also there remained a very wide empty space between the sections.

Right now the only way to ammend that is remove "all images" or remove navobxes from the first and second sections. But "remove all images" to makes way for coding that interfere with page layout may not be the best solution.

I hope this is fixable, because most navboxes and infoboxes don't interfere with page layouts. Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 11:15, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

@Aditya Kabir: By "NavBox", I mean the navigation template displayed at the bottom of the article with other related articles, in this case, {{Bengali language}}, in which I removed the huge Bangla on the right side.

(For the following, I narrowed my browser to about 1024px width, much smaller than the 1600px or so that I normally use, to exaggerate any placement problems). If, by "can't put any image in the first section", you mean the lead section (above the table of contents), it is not typical to put images there because the infobox already takes up a significant part of the screen, it would be ugly to have images to the left of it (right of the text), and we also try not to "sandwich" text (especially the lead) by putting an image on the left there. There just isn't room at all at 1K screen width.

The "Part of a series on Bengalis" box ends near the bottom of the ToC, where a media player then spans down into the History section, which could be cleared up, since it starts with an image on the left. The Geographical distribution section does have a "sandwich" that could be fixed.

Other than those little adjustments, I don't see much else to do here, certainly not "a big mess" and I see very little whitespace. There's not room for much more imagery in the top sections, but that's just the nature of it – they already have plenty.

If you're seeing something different, perhaps you can post a screen shot at the article's talk page for discussion. You might also find a version of the page in history (if necessary, at archive.org if the problem is in templates, so all the templates are contemporaneous with the page). I urge you to skip the hyperbole ("mess" and "disaster" and "bad coding"), which does nothing but put people on the defensive and provoke arguments about the hyperbole instead of the issue.

Anyone with more layout issue experience is welcome to chime in here or there, of course. Thanks. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 14:57, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

File:Screenshot of the current Bengali language page.png

I am seeing this

Hmmm. That's interesting. I am posting a screenshot of what I am seeing (I use Chrome on an Asus ZenBook running Win10). As you can see it does looks like a big mess from here, and a whole lot of whitespace. Also I tried placing the images of the coins and monuments in various ways, and nothing worked. Could it be {{Bengalis}}? I am sure it is not {{Infobox language}}. But, who knows. Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 15:34, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

@AlanM1: Whitespace problem solved. There was a {{clear}} template hiding in the article. Removing it removed the whitespace. But now I have the images in the top part bunched in one place. :( Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 06:46, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Becoming an admin

Can I become admin in Wikipedia? 182.75.63.86 (talk) 00:38, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

I added a header to your question. If you create an account, and work hard, make a large number of good contributing edits over an extended period of time, and build a good reputation, and show that you need the admin tools, then you can apply at WP:RFA. Almost everything at Wikipedia can be done without being an admin, and you should consider it more of a cleanup job than anything else. RudolfRed (talk) 01:06, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello, unregistered editor. Eventually, yes, if you work at it and have the needed skills. Anytime soon, no.

One must be a registered editor with over 500 edits even to apply. But I don't think i have ever seen a person approved with less than several thousand edits and 2-3 years of active editing, and more than that is more common. An admin should have practical experience in several different areas of Wikipedia, and be recognized by many as doing work that improves the project. A person thought of as doing work in order to become an admin is not nearly as likely to be approved. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 01:10, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

IP: Why do you want to be an admin? You'll be asked to answer that question (and many more) and come up with a good reason the community should grant and trust you with tools than can easily be mis-used. You may be mistaken as to the nature of Wikipedia. Please see WP:NOT – being an admin here is nothing like being one on social media or forums. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 01:36, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

I could so put an upvote or like or something to "being an admin here is nothing like being one on social media or forums". From what I have seen, it's way more painful to be an admin than a regular editor. Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 02:39, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

No, Aditya, it isn't. What's painful is remaining polite while dealing with the most tiresome questions during the process of becoming (or not becoming) an administrator. This is an extraordinary waste of time, or so it seems. But imaginably it's a kind of personality test: somebody who can manage not to tell people who ask tiresome questions what they should do with themselves is on balance more likely to manage not to tell vandals and trolls what they should do with themselves. And an administrator must stay cool. -- Hoary (talk) 06:24, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

On WP, being an Admin is referred to as "wielding the mop". A job of service and hard work. Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 05:36, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

An hour or two ago, Tribe of Tiger, I was wielding an actual mop, in an unattractive area (related to body functions) of an apartment. Working as an admin is different, and preferable. OTOH it is a sedentary occupation, and arguably "sitting is the new smoking". -- Hoary (talk) 06:24, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

@Hoary: Well, yes, I can see why the WP mop is less messy and disgusting. Unless we acquire smell-o-rama, the WP mop is a more sanitary sort of job, despite the fact that I suspect some edits "stink to high heaven"! Seriously, take care, recently read something about Covid being carried along on feces fumes! Perhaps sitting on your "arse" might be safer, in that case! Outsiders don't understand what our WP Admins do. Hard, dangerous work, lots of complaints, and no pay. Bless you! Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 06:58, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

re: edit to claire adams today

Hello I saw a message for my edit to claire adams on wikipedia- saying "not constructive'...my edit was factual, claire adams was not only a wealthy actress but also an animal rescue advocate; there is archive film from channel 31 on the 'yappy hour' showing the history and life of claire adams and her enormous contribution to dogs/animals. So my edit is very constructive and accurate/informative of this person- also I have been over the last few years making small financial contributions to wikipedia so I am quite offended by your message Whoever you are. ***This edited/additional information I provided should remain on this page, you can check out my information source*** 49.184.36.206 (talk) 05:23, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

If you are talking about this edit, then, I am afraid, your "information source" is not included in there. It will be very difficult to check the information source, if the source is not provided anywhere. Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 05:43, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

I have located some sources to support edits along the lines of the one you made. Please do not be offended because we are obligated to cite sources, this is what makes our articles reliable, and not unverifiable "junk".

I can certainly add info regarding her love of horses and dogs, now that I have a source. Thanks so much for bringing the article to our/my attention, I hope to add other info to it, not just about the animals. Will probably take a few days, I am slow. Best wishes, Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 07:29, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Foundation that solicits and accepts donations is an entirely separate entity from Wikipedia, which is maintained by volunteers. What you got on your Talk page was a standard-worded answer when content is added without a reference, hence deleted. "Not constuctive" refers to the lack of a reference, not the validity of the content. David notMD (talk) 08:15, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Getting permanent link for any previous revision

I know for the year 2020 article, the latest permanent link revision up to this point in time that I'm writing this is https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2020&oldid=975505928

But how do I get a "permanent link" for the revision, for example, from 21:46 on 25 August 2020? The only thing I got is this https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2020&diff=974933481&oldid=974932175

That however, isn't exactly a permanent link as it is just "comparing revisions". How can I get a permanent link of that exact revision? I was only able to find a permanent link for the latest one by going to page information on the left hand side.

Please help me, and THANK YOU! 47.150.227.254 (talk) 22:55, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello IP editor. Welcome! I'm not sure if I'm missing something, but the answer seems quite simple. By going to the 'View History' tab and clicking the actual date of that edit, you get taken to this page. To me, that suffices as a perma-link as to how the page looked after that edit, on that date and that exact time (see Help:Permanent link for more details) Is that what you wanted, or have I misunderstood your question? Nick Moyes (talk) 23:35, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

I just want to point out a small wrinkle in that. Most pages transclude templates (other pages that perform various functions common to multiple pages), and what you may get is an old version of the page you're looking for, but with the current version of any transcluded content (I don't seem to know at this tired point of my day if this depends on page-rendering on the Wiki or what the exact details are). Mostly, if you're looking at a reasonably recent date, or if you really just care about the article text and not things like navboxes and other bells and whistles, it shouldn't matter. However, there is an alternative, which is to look for the page at archive.org, which would guarantee that you are seeing the page as it was at the time it was archived, complete with the old versions of any transcluded material. I think. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 11:17, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

How to use Prove It

I have searched through help files and question archives and while I find much information on Help:Gadget-ProveIt (which I have enabled on my preferences), I can not find anywhere what to do to use it, how to invoke it. The two "demos" linked on the Widgets page don't explain it either. deisenbe (talk) 10:19, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

@Deisenbe: One thing is that it doesn't work on Wikipedia namespace, or any talk namespace, pages, so you have to edit a mainspace article. You'll see a black square with yellow brackets at the lower-left lower-right (beneath the Cat-a-lot if you have that too). Click on the black square to bring up the Prove-It window. Click it again in that window to minimize it again. Does that help? —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 11:26, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Sakura School Akademi

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Closing this since the OP has been blocked per WP:SOCK. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:27, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

---

Sakura School Akademi JaidenMama (talk) 13:59, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi JaidenMama. Do you have a question about Wikipedia or Wikipedia editing? Perhaps you're trying to find the page Sakura School Akademi? It was draftified by another Wikipedia editor and can be nw found at Draft:Sakura School Akademi. -- Marchjuly (talk) 14:05, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

How to move pages?

 Blockman9000 (talk) 12:55, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Blockman9000 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You may request a page move at Requested Moves. 331dot (talk) 13:02, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Censorship and Badgering

An editor has been removing 2 quotes from a biographical article, see link below without good reasons. The quotes are from the subject of the biography. The quotes are very relevant and absolutely necessary in proper understanding of the view point of the subject. This editor is citing WP:QUOTEFARM in a shoddy attempt to justify this blatant censorship and has now resorted to badgering me with multiple messages written in ominous tone on my talk page see [21] [22]. Please advice how to proceed in this case. *Talk:Swami_Karpatri#Censorship_of_2_Quotes_of_Karpatri_by_Srijanx22 Guy Foxx (talk) 13:15, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Guy Foxx, and welcome to the Teahouse. This is a content dispute, and the Teahouse is not the place to take it: see dispute resolution for how to proceed if you cannot reach consensus on the article's talk page. Please remember to assume good faith: Wikipedia is created by many people with different views, and works by editors seeking consensus in good faith. Removing something you think important is not necessarily censorship. (I am not expressing any view on the rights or wrongs of the dispute: just talking about the way to pursue it). --ColinFine (talk) 13:39, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Help with nomination for deletion in Marathi language

I am trying to nominate this page for deletion "https://mr.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E0%A4%95%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4%82%E0%A4%A5%E0%A5%80_%E0%A4%A6%E0%A4%A4%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%A4" but I am unable to do so because the English tag doesn't work. This page has been deleted from the English wiki due to the lack of notability, so the subject tried on a different language. Please help! Iamstupidaflol (talk) 13:44, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

I cannot read the non-English article, but because the English Wikipedia has different standards from other languages, it is possible that the article can exist elsewhere although deleted in English. David notMD (talk) 13:49, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Iamstupidaflol, different language Wikipedias are different and independent projects altogether. You are better off seeking help within the Marathi Wikipedia for how things work over there. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 16:28, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

my wikipedia article got declined. Help!

my wikipedia article declined due to this reason: they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. now what should i do? link of my article is below. Draft:Sanjeev K. Mishra. – Sanjeevkumarmishra2001 (talk) 16:06, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

@Sanjeevkumarmishra2001, Hello and welcome. Wikipedia isn’t synonymous to a WP:LINKEDIN site hence isn’t a free for all entry or an indiscriminate collection of biographical articles as we possess rules on which articles are notable enough to be retained on Wikipedia & which to decline, reject, delete & speedy delete. For starters, any biographical article must be notable and in most cases should satisfy either WP:GNG(Please read that immediately) or WP:BASIC. Wikipedia also isn’t a platform for promotion see WP:PROMO & WP:CSD#G11. Furthermore creating an article for yourself isn’t a good idea, please read WP:AUTO as it explains why it isn’t. My advise for you would be to understand how things work around here before proceeding to create other pages as article creation can be quite tricky. If you have further questions do let me know.Celestina007 16:28, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Declined, and then Speedy Deletion. A reason for why the SD is on your Talk page. David notMD (talk) 17:31, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Resolving disputes

How are disuptes over content resolved? Monty330 (talk) 19:00, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Monty330, and welcome to the Teahouse. You start by trying to reach a consensus by discussion on the article's talk page. If that isn't successful, WP:dispute resolution explains where to go next. --ColinFine (talk) 19:14, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Question from SA Lives Matter

What do I do here and how can I contribute?

Regards,

}} SALivesMatter (talk) 09:30, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello, SALivesMatter. The main thing people do here is to edit articles, and creater new ones, to improve the Encyclopedia. A list of useful tasks may be found at Wikipedia:Community portal. Many people find The Wikipedia adventure a useful starting place also. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 16:38, 30 August 2020 (UTC) @SALivesMatter: DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 20:12, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Polyhead

 2605:6000:1520:8EB5:E134:34AF:E348:44AB (talk) 19:55, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Did you have a question about editing Wikipedia? RudolfRed (talk) 20:12, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Removing my previous edits to redo them in a single post

I made a couple of minor edits too hastily. I would like to remove the edits and the history of the edits in order to re-edit the article in a single go. Is that possible? "Sorry about the mess" sums up my feelings about being such a newbie here. Soonzuh (talk) 09:52, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Soonzuh Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Edits are not typically removed from the edit history in these circumstances. Edits done in error are not uncommon and article histories are full of them. You may simply note in the edit summary that you are correcting an error with your prior edits. 331dot (talk) 10:02, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

@Soonzuh: Don't sweat it. Newbies (and even us old folks) make mistakes. What distinguishes an editor is realizing a mistake they made and fixing it, instead of ignoring it or waiting for others to do it. That is appreciated by your colleagues here. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 21:41, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Katpana Lake

I tried to create an article on Katpana Lake. I couldn't figure out how to add one of the many pictures of this little lake in Pakistan that are in Wiki Commons. But worse than that, the software said one of my references was blacklisted and that I should go back and remove it. But it didn't say how to 'go back.' I tried various things and finally got back to the editing page, but I didn't know which reference was unacceptable. So someone else can write this article. 213.109.220.236 (talk) 11:32, 30 August 2020 (UTC) 213.109.220.236 (talk) 11:32, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Which reference? GeraldWL 13:57, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

@Gerald Waldo Luis: that was a pointless question to ask! -the OP already said they didn't know which reference was causing the problem. That said, the IP editor has not used that address to edit any such article, not can I find any draft or sandbox page contaiing that name. So unless the IP can link to the page they were working on, we are not going to be able to assist much. Nick Moyes (talk) 14:16, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

yeah. GeraldWL 14:22, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

There IS no draft because the Wikipedia software would not allow it to be created as long as the offending citation was present, and I was not about to go back and go through the process of eliminating each reference one at a time and then trying to get it published as a draft until finally one version without the blacklisted citation got through. That's why I'm hoping someone else will write about this lake. 213.109.220.236 (talk) 14:29, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the note, IP editor. I do have an interest in Gilgit-Baltistan-related articles, so I'll try to write one when I have time. Feel free to shoot me a note at my talk page if I forget, or if you need any other assistance. Best, M Imtiaz (talk · contribs) 17:10, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

IP: Assuming you have it offline, you can email me (←click that link) the article on Katpana Lake and I'll figure out what the problem is. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 21:48, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

How can I be a good Wikipedian?

Hey, I am new in Wikipedia. How can I be good like others? Do I need to add sources for every sentences? Userths (talk) 14:44, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

@Userths, Hello and welcome, generally, you’d be a good Wikipedian by abiding by our policies and guidelines starting with WP:5P but I presume you are speaking particularly about article creation so for that I’d say reading WP:GNG, WP:YFA & WP:RS would be a great start. Finally, No, not every sentence requires a source(citation).Celestina007 14:51, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

@Userths: ... but many statements do. Basically anything that is not common knowledge should be cited so it can be verified by any reader. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 22:00, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Campaign / Bad Joke ?

In reading many different articles on a variety of different subjects, I keep seeing a particular person's name referenced. It strikes me as either a campaign or some sort of bad joke on Wikipedia. It would be interesting to perform a search of all Wikipedia articles for this name. Can that be done? Can I confidentially hand the name over to an experienced editor to look into this? Charles Juvon (talk) 07:29, 30 August 2020 (UTC) Charles Juvon (talk) 07:29, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

@Charles Juvon: If it's just a name (and not like, someone's email, social security number, home address, phone number), you can just tell us the name here (it'd also be helpful if you told us the names of a few of the articles you saw the name in). Ian.thomson (talk) 07:40, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

I'm afraid that could be taken by said person as defamatory. I do know IRC. Charles Juvon (talk) 07:52, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

@Charles Juvon: Yes, anyone can use the toolbar to search mainspace articles for certain words. Pew Die Pie is often randomly added by his fans as an ongoing competition for hits against some other social media nonentity. There is no risk whatsoever in you purely mentioning a name you've seen. But you can email it to Ian, me or any other admin if you really feel the need. Nick Moyes (talk) 08:45, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

@Charles Juvon: If there is a campaign to insert a name improperly, it would be useful for others to know it, so we can look out for it. It would also help identify accounts that are potentially not here to improve Wikipedia but instead to damage it, so we can prevent it. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 21:35, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

 Implemented Charles Juvon (talk) 22:10, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

living in a socialist country

I was looking for information of what it is like living in a socialist country Is there an Article on it? if so, what key words do I need to use.

If not, it would be a real interesting for me. I assume others are interested as well. I come from Iran, the country is not officially socialist. It is a Islamic Theocracy ... but they there were socialist things there, such as nationalizing factories ... shortage of food, standing in line to get bread, milk or such 47.219.251.10 (talk) 21:47, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

The Reference Desk might be a better place to ask. I'd start with our article on Socialism, which has some of what you might be looking for, as well as links to other articles on individual countries and events that are relevant. I don't know if there is an article specifically about the narrow topic of what life is like. You might try Special:Search.— Preceding unsigned comment added by AlanM1 (talk • contribs) 22:13, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Editing

how do you add a picture to a article Alisha rains (talk) 21:38, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

As described in Help:Pictures. -- Hoary (talk) 22:33, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

AfD nomination help

I just nominated an article for deletion, am trying to follow the steps in WP:AFDHOW but the formatting on [23] doesn't seem to be working per step 3. What did I do wrong? Retswerb (talk) 00:11, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

More specifically, the AfD log only shows my nomination text but has not created a title, a table of contents entry, or supplied any of the other template links that should have been included. Retswerb (talk) 00:23, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Ok, I now see that my deletion discussion page Wikipedia: Articles for deletion/Don K. Preston (2nd nomination) is what is messed up, the AfD log is just transcluding the info there. Still not sure how to fix it. Retswerb (talk) 00:26, 31 August 2020 (UTC) (Edited to correct wikilink)

Never mind, I fixed it. The directions at WP:AFDHOW step 2 confused me. Retswerb (talk) 00:39, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

You might have a look at WP:TWINKLE for future AfDs. With Twinkle, it only takes a couple of clicks to process the actual AfD. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 00:43, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I've got the page open already checking it out. Thanks for the tip! Retswerb (talk) 01:52, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

@Retswerb: My pleasure. Once you get it installed, there will be a menu item called "TW", for Twinkle, at the top, next to the usual edit and history tabs. Click that, then XFD. Select AFD from the list that pops up and you are almost done. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 01:57, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Radio Channel site for references?

Can the information contained in the site https://www.wkms.org/ be used for referencing content? Will it be considered a valid source for confirmation? Editingwork8 (talk) 04:28, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello Editingwork8. WKMS-FM is affiliated with National Public Radio and I would consider it a generally reliable source. I have referenced other NPR stations many times without problems. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:57, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

@Cullen³²⁸ Thank you very much — Preceding unsigned comment added by Editingwork8 (talk • contribs) 05:00, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

unrelated source

The page Devendrakula Velalar has a section called called 'Devendrakula vellar nattars' which cites [this source] which is:

• not reliable as it does not seem to be mentioning the authour also it is overly glorifying the concerned caste

• The content and the source don't match up.

Admins kindly take a look and make appropriate edits as the article is not accessible to non admins.Koronerman (talk) 04:37, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello Koronerman, it is unlikely that an admin will volunteer to implement your request from only having seen it here, especially in such a controversial article. Please use Edit requests at the talk page of the article to request edits to it when you can not edit it yourself. Instructions are at the linked page. There is also the new Edit Request Wizard which I have not used myself, so feel free to try it out and tell us if it was helpful. I see that the article was protected because of disruptive editing related to a dispute; if your request has anything to do at all with that dispute, you will be required to obtain consensus at the talk page before the edit request is implemented. To obtain consensus, please start a discussion on the topic of the dispute and {{ping}} other parties to the dispute to participate. If that does not work, you would need to try other steps in Dispute Resolution. I know it does not sound ideal but no one has come up with a better (accepted) alternative to managing disputes in this encyclopedia that anyone can edit. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 05:42, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Review Draft Article

Hi Robert McClenon! Thank you for reviewing the Draft:JioTV and highlighting the concern. I would like to explain this "This draft does not show how this division of Jio Platforms is sufficiently notable to need a separate article. " Jio Platforms has many divisions and JioTV is one of those. It's a LIVE TV application that is completely different from its other applications such as JioMeet (its a video calling app) or JioSaavn (it's an online music app only). Also, I have added more independent sources that are covering JioTV. Please have a look.

Since Robert has reviewed my article that's why I tagged him here. In general, I would appreciate help from any Wikipedia editors to improve this Draft:JioTV Ritzz07 (talk) 11:27, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Do you have a question for us? Giraffer (munch) 11:53, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi Giraffer This draft Draft:JioTV has been declined because of notability concerns. So I am seeking help regarding the same. --Ritzz07 (talk) 13:21, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

User:Ritzz07 - What do you want help or advice about? I wrote that the division, JioTV, does not appear to be notable independent of its parent, Jio Platforms. You can expand the draft and resubmit it with an explanation as to how the division is independently notable. Or you can make an edit request to expand the article on the parent company. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:06, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Robert McClenon I need advice where exactly I need to share an explanation of changes I make. Here in this thread or will I get an option to write an explanation at the time of resubmission request. Also, could you please highlight which section ( or content) you feel does not appear to be independent. Any content that doesn't have a sufficient reference link. It will help me rework on this article. Thank You Ritzz07 (talk) 07:18, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

User:Ritzz07 - First, is JioTV a division of Jio Platforms? If so, JioTV is already discussed in the article on Jio Platforms. Second, it appears that you are asking me to rewrite the draft for you in order to put it into article space. No. I do not plan to rewrite the draft for you. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:57, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Robert McClenon JioTV, is a division of Jio Platforms this has been explained in the beginning before even writing the draft. See Talk:Jio_Platforms . Second, I don't want you to write a draft but since you have raised this concern, I just want you to highlight that content that you feel is not independent. Just search for JioTV in google news. I believe that's how Wikipedia works. The external world should talk about the subject of the article. I have written this draft based on the reference available. Any content which is not supported by the reference, I'll take that content part down immediately. Thank You Ritzz07 (talk) 05:57, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

User:Ritzz07 - You ask me to highlight that content that I feel is not independent. You are asking me to edit the draft for you, and I will not do that. However, the answer is that no part of the draft is independent of Jio Platforms. Since JioTV is a division of Jio Platforms, it is not independent of the parent company. You have not shown why the division should have a separate article (unless you want to put advertising in the separate article). No part of the draft is independent. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:40, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Do Not Telll a reviewer to use Google search for references. It is the responsibility of the author to include the references. An editor who tells the reviewer to use Google search is insulting the reviewer. Tell your managers to get a different employee to do their paid editing, who won't insult the reviewers. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:40, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Robert McClenon Please accept my apologies. I didn't mean to offend you. Let me take other reviewer's opinions to have clarity. All I am trying to say that I collected reference from Google Search and then written this draft. Thank you Ritzz07 (talk) 06:15, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

My request to edits have been unanswered on a few pages.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Moved to WP:Help desk § Requests to edits have not been answered on multiple talk sections of pages

Hi, I've requested edit via correct format on some pages' talk sections, they are still unanswered. What's the right way to go for this if it still persists? Talhatauqeer (talk) 06:03, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

@Talhatauqeer: Please use only one help forum for a particular issue. I've linked to your other, more detailed, request at the Help Desk above. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 07:26, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Can this site be used for referencing?

http://www.calgaryherald.com/ Editingwork8 (talk) 06:44, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

@Editingwork8: Yes, I believe so. Calgary Herald seems to be a newspaper with a long history, and I don't see any complaints about it here. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 07:13, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

@AlanM1 Thanks for bringing clarity to this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Editingwork8 (talk • contribs) 07:49, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

How To Become Wikipedia Admin?

Hello I Am New Wikipedia Editor But I Want To Become Wikipedia Administrator So Please Give Me Some Tips To Become An Admin. TheNameIsMuhammadHusayn (talk) 07:53, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Be an editor for a few years and make more than 10000 edits in that period. Note that admins are more or less wieldeling the mop here, its an sometimes unpleasent and hard job you commonly arent rewarded for. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 08:00, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

@TheNameIsMuhammadHusayn: Please see the responses above at #Becoming an admin and please don't capitalize every word in your postings. Thanks. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 08:04, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi TheNameIsMuhammadHusayn. Please take a look at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship and Wikipedia:Administrators#Becoming an administrator for more details. However, there are lots of ways that a person can contribute to Wikipedia that doesn't require them becoming an administrator. When a new editor such as yourself inquires about becoming an administrator after making only eleven edits, it generally indicates a lack of familiarity with Wikipedia and a misundertanding of the kinds of things an adminstrator typically does. So, often the best tip that can be given to such people is suggest that they focus on improving articles and learning about Wikipedia for awhile instead of trying to become an administrator. Once you establish a track record for making positive contributions and show the Wikipedia community that you're here for the right reasons; others will notice and may even starting asking if you want to become an administrator. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:11, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Title

I am collecting a list of Wikipedia reading for new editors. I am aware that I should not be doing this right now, which I am not, But I am going to post the collection on our Meta-Wiki. I am making the list through Wikilinks. Can Wikilinks redirect through Wikis? HelloImAStudent (talk) 19:22, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

HelloImAStudent, does this help? M Imtiaz (talk · contribs) 19:24, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

this HelloImAStudent (talk) 19:31, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello, HelloImAStudent The "this" link in M Imtiaz's first post is relevant; I'm not sure why they posted the second link. --ColinFine (talk) 21:17, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Check those signatures again, ColinFine. M Imtiaz (talk · contribs) 21:42, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, M Imtiaz, misread. In that case, I have no idea what HelloImAStudent's reply was about. --ColinFine (talk) 08:14, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

I wanted to let you know that one of your recent contributions —specifically this edit to Montserrat— has been undone because it appeared to be promotional. Advertising

MY QUESTION IS ABOUT: "recent contributions —specifically this edit to Montserrat— has been undone because it appeared to be promotional".

Hello, as i'm new to this i have no idea about many things on editing. The fact remains, the edit on the sport of "Surfing" on the island of Montserrat is in fact correct. I happen to know because I lived on the island during and knew about the two brothers.I do not know where to go with this from here. I don't see how my edit is promotional. Please specify. Yoleen Valai (talk) 18:08, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

@Yoleen Valai: Welcome to Wikipedia. Your addition included the URL for the company's website which would be seen as trying to promote it and you did not include any references. Material in articles must be cited to a reliable source so that it can be verified, you can't use your own memory as a source. RudolfRed (talk) 18:13, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Please delete the URL, as I can't seem to be able to navigate Wikipedia to find this! As for the source, I understand they are not from memories, that a bit ridicules to even fathom. The website would be a source like it or not. Just as any website would be a source...such as wikipedia. I've read a lot of wrong information on wikipedia. It's not a Bible as you may think. Do with it as you please. I don't have the time to continue with such issues. Yoleen Valai (talk) 20:28, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Yoleen Valai, and welcome to the Teahouse and to Wikipedia. I'm sorry you've had a frustrating experience right at the beginning of your Wikipedia editing: Wikipedia is such a big and complicated beast that that can easily happen.

As you point out, Wikipedia is not itself reliable. What gives it some value nonetheless is that ideally articles are supported by citing reliable published sources, so that a reader doesn't have to rely on the accuracy of what is stated in Wikipedia, but can get referred to a reliable source. (I say "ideally", because Wikipedia grew so quickly in its early days that we have tens of thousands of substandard articles; but we tend to be more careful with material that gets added now). Wikipedia itself is not acceptable as a source, and nor are most wikis, blogs, forums, iMDB, social media, and many other well-known sources. See reliability of Wikipedia for more.

In a similar way, to preserve Wikipedia's neutrality, we strongly limit links to commercial websites. An article about the company Surfing Montserrat could certainly have a link to their website; and might also cite the website for certain uncontroversial factual information such as dates and places. But in general citations should references should cite sources such as scholarly journals, major newspapers and magazines, and books from reputable publishers. A company whose business is promoting surfing in Montserrat is not regarded as a reliable independent source for information about surfing in Montserrat. Does that make sense? --ColinFine (talk) 21:55, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

I restored the Surfers at Montserrat reference (in the right place), as I considered it informational rather than promotional. David notMD (talk) 22:41, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Separate issue: You added an image Surfing Montserrat.jpg to the article and claimed it was your own work dated 28 August 2020. Did you take this photo? If so, it should be dated when it was taken, not when it was added to Wikipedia (the brothers lived there 1980-92). David notMD (talk) 01:49, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Reply to ColinFine

reply to ColinFine

Thank you. Perhaps it’s the fact that I don’t know how to navigate Wikipedia. I do understand when it comes to selling or promotion, that was not my intention, because I know this much about Wikipedia. Where is the website tied in to my contribution? Is it the photograph? I may have added the website by accident, I clearly can’t see this! Can you be so kind as to remove whatever is making my contribution an issue? The website, as far as I can visually see, doesn’t sell anything related to surfing, or sell surfing as a business on Montserrat. There are no surfers on the island since the volcanic eruptions. Please let me know what can be done. Thank you. Yoleen Valai (talk) 23:17, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Yoleen Valai, this is a help forum. If this is in regards an earlier question, reply in that thread. If you wish to communicate with ColinFine directly, please do that at User talk:ColinFine. Thanks. John from Idegon (talk) 23:59, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

to collnfine. Sorry but I don't know how to mail anyone direct. This is too difficult. Please pass my message below on to Collnfine, thank you.

Thank you. Perhaps it’s the fact that I don’t know how to navigate Wikipedia. I do understand when it comes to selling or promotion, that was not my intention, because I know this much about Wikipedia. Where is the website tied in to my contribution? Is it the photograph? I may have added the website by accident, I clearly can’t see this! Can you be so kind as to remove whatever is making my contribution an issue? The website, as far as I can visually see, doesn’t sell anything related to surfing, or sell surfing as a business on Montserrat. There are no surfers on the island since the volcanic eruptions. Please let me know what can be done. Thank you. Yoleen Valai (talk) 23:17, 30 August 2020 (UTC) Yoleen Valai (talk) 01:27, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy ping @ColinFine:, in case there's more needing saying or fixing. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 05:49, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Yoleen Valai. Thank you for your replies. As I said, Wikipedia is a complex system, and there is a lot to learn: nobody will hold honest mistakes against you. I see that David notMD has restored your edit to the article, in a different place.

To communicate with a particular editor, you can start a new section on their user talk page (mine is User talk:ColinFine), or you can continue an existing discussion by editing the section where the discussion began, and WP:pinging the user. That's what I've done here: I went "edit" on the section you began in the Teahouse, I added my reply at the end (using a colon ':' at the beginning of each paragraph to indent it), and I pinged you by putting {{U|Yoleen Valai}} at the start - as long I sign my message (which I see you know how to do) the software will notify you that i have replied. We tend not to use email, as discussions towards improving Wikipedia should be public. --ColinFine (talk) 08:32, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

How to create an article?

I Had Created Several Articles But All The Time My Articles Has Been Deleted. Please Give Me Some Tips To Make A Good Articles. I Wanna Create A Article Which Won't Be Delete. Sorry For Bad English But Reply If You Understand. ☺ TheNameIsMuhammadHusayn (talk) 08:01, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

@TheNameIsMuhammadHusayn: I've left some information on your talk page at User talk:TheNameIsMuhammadHusayn. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 08:07, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Please do not capitalize every word. Your edit history shows that you became an editor on 28 August and have not created any articles. Were your previous edits made before you registered an account, or as a different account? Regardless, the information left on your Talk page can help. David notMD (talk) 10:32, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Why do some categories have "Category:" prefixed and others don't?

This isn't very important, but it bothers me that I can't figure it out.

Copied from User:Deisenbe:

• Abolitionism in the United States
• Category:African-American college graduates before 1865
• Category:African-American expatriates
• African-American monuments and memorials
• Category:African-American politicians during the Reconstruction Era
• Category:American Fire-Eaters
• Category:Amistad
• Benjamin Tillman
• Category:Black slave owners in the United States
• Capitals of Kansas
• Confederate expatriates
• Category:Donald Trump-related lists
• Category:Enslaved workers at the University of Virginia
• Category:Expansion of slavery in the United States
• Category:Florida's black junior colleges
• Former municipalities in New York (city)
• George Floyd protests
• Historically segregated African-American schools in Florida
• History of slavery in the District of Columbia

etc, Thanks for enlightening me. deisenbe (talk) 09:30, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Because, if you look at the source, there are piped links for those that don't show "Category:", e.g. [[:Category:History of slavery in the District of Columbia|History of slavery in the District of Columbia]]. Peter coxhead (talk) 09:34, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

I have taken the liberty of adding a colon before the first entry on your list, as without it you had included this Teahouse page in Category:Abolitionism in the United States. David Biddulph (talk) 11:03, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Add image to article

Hi and good morning. I've uploaded an image to WP Commons which I would like to post to the article David J. Zimmerman. I haven't yet posted images to WP, and, as a new editor, would hate to make a mess of an article that I need someone else to fix! I edited the original article in Visual Editor. Can you direct me to "help" pages which might help me do this? Thanks. VictorMooney (talk) 13:27, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello, VictorMooney. If you go to the file's page in Commons commons:File:Picture_of_David_J._Zimmerman_in_the_Indian_Himalayas.jpg, there are buttons at the top "Use this file", one of them with the Wikipedia logo,. --ColinFine (talk) 13:35, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi VictorMooney. The photo you're referring to is of David J. Zimmerman yet you also describe the photo as being sen to you by David J. Zimmerman. Generally, it's the person who take a photo, not the the subject of the photo that is considered the copyright holder. Do you know whether Zimmerman took this photo himself or whether it was taken by another person? Since you don't seem to have taken the photo, the person who did is probably going to have to email their WP:CONSENT to WP:Contact OTRS#Wikimedia OTRS to verify the file's licensing and the copyright holder's intention to release it under said license.. -- Marchjuly (talk) 14:01, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

@ColinFine and @Marchjuly: Thank you. Will do some more research...VictorMooney (talk) 11:58, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Wrong information about Ayurveda

Ayurveda (/ˌɑːjʊərˈveɪdə, -ˈviː-/)[1] is an alternative medicine system with historical roots in the Indian subcontinent.[2] The theory and practice of Ayurveda is pseudoscientific.[3][4] The Indian Medical Association (IMA) characterises the practice of modern medicine by Ayurvedic practitioners as quackery.[5]

This is absolutely wrong. Ayurveda is a centuries old science that has been developed and practised in Bharatha (India) for eons. Kindly remove this false description of Ayurveda. Please allow editing of the page so that it can be changed. 103.5.132.28 (talk) 12:45, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources say about topics. The passage you mention is well cited. You are free to discuss your concerns on the article talk page (Talk:Ayurveda) and even make edit requests detailing changes you feel are needed. However, you will need independent reliable sources to support your proposed changes, and even if they are valid, that will not make the views of the Indian Medical Association go away. 331dot (talk) 12:54, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Referring to a person on their own article

Do we always have to refer to a person by their surname, or can forenames be used occasionally?

I'm wondering this because I'm trying to tidy up, and slightly expand an article for an actress I remember watching on TV as a kid, but don't know much about.

All I know is that:

• She's been married at least 3 times, possibly 4 or more times.
• She's a part time actress, and former Police woman. She owns an acting school which is named after her 2nd or 3rd married name, and is an acting agent under a different company name.
• She's used at least 4 different surnames - 1 of which is her birth name, and 2 of which were different to her husbands surname at the time for some reason.
• She has 3 children - 1 of which is an actress and her sister, both of which have the surname of their father who was also an actor. And an older child who has a different surname altogether.

It gets a bit confusing referring to her by her current married surname, especially in the personal life section. Danstarr69 (talk) 08:37, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

I am a fairly new Wikipedia editor, so don't take this as a definitive answer. But my own view is that you would normally refer to an adult by the full name the first time you mention them, and after that by their surname. But you would refer to children by their first name. An obvious exception would be when the article refers to more than one person who has the same surname. That's my general rule. But the case that you describe is obviously more unusual. The best I can suggest is that you refer to your sources to see how other writers have handled the situation. Mike Marchmont (talk) 08:53, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy link: this appears to be about Tonicha Jeronimo.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:16, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Please refer to MOS:SURNAME and MOS:SAMESURNAME for more specific details, but generally MOS:MOS advises us to use the surname only for subsequent mentions unless doing so creates unnecessary confusion. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:35, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello Danstarr69, and welcome to the Teahouse! Generally, we refer to someone by their full name the first time, and from then on by their surname. There are some exceptions, such as when someone is primarily known by a mononym, such as Beyoncé. For more info on using names in articles, see MOS:NAME. Hope this helps! Regards, Giraffer (munch) 11:34, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Giraffer I think I'm going to use Tonicha Jeronimo's birth and maiden name Jeronimo, which she's currently using on social media and LinkedIn, but not on her acting school and acting agency website where she's using her recently married name. I started editing her IMDB profile around a month ago, but put it on hold when I realised she uses multiple names. She seems to go back to her maiden name every time she gets divorced, and doesn't seem to have used her newly married name for any acting roles yet. I've just found out that her first born child, and her other children all have the same father, even though the eldest uses a different surname altogether. I suspect he uses his middle name to dissociate himself from his parents, as he wants to be an actor, so he can't be accused of nepotism if he does become an actor.

Danstarr69 (talk) 11:58, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Despite being married eight times, Elizabeth Taylor (her birth name), continued to use Taylor because her movie career started before her first marriage. Her four children (one adopted) went by the names of their fathers (Wilding, Wilding, Todd, Burton). David notMD (talk) 13:00, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

if i found a page on wiki with errors or intentionally edited by some persons what i can do ?

i feels even though i am a qualified person from a registered health university in india. I tried to edit an article which is of my speciality some senior editors are deleting the edit. and the fun fact is that they believe they are only true. What i can do in this situation ? Drnisamudheen (talk) 09:15, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Drnisamudheen Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Please see this guidance for expert editors. Wikipedia does not deal in truth, as truth is in the eye of the beholder, but we do deal in what is verifiable in independent reliable sources. If you have published independent reliable source to support edits you wish to make, please discuss this with the other editors involved on the article talk page. 331dot (talk) 09:21, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

• Looking at your recent contributions I suppose this is about this edit. A small problem with it is that it is marked as "minor" even though it significantly changes the article ("minor" is only for correcting typos, improving image layout, etc.). A more significant problem is the content: you unlinked "quackery" for no good reason, and you broke up a paragraph to insert borderline-promotional material in broken English.

Note that Unani_medicine#Education_and_recognition already includes a few paragraphs about recognition from AYUSH (which I feel strongly tempted to nickname "ministry of quackery"). Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 15:58, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Stinger

I do not know where to post this. User:DHHeadrick has changed (1, 2) uses of the word "stinger" to "sting" and added "The term "stinger" is incorrectly used when referring to the piercing organ of venomous arthropods, the correct term is sting" at the top of the article, which does not seem appropriate. Another user has agreed on DHHeadrick's talk page that "stinger" is incorrect. Should the edits be reverted? J3133 (talk) 14:12, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Common usage seems to disagree with these two editors. 8.40.149.206 (talk) 14:17, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

My common usage would agree with those two editors. J3133: if editors disagree, then the proper course is to discuss it on the talk page, and if consensus can't be reached, to follow dispute resolution. --ColinFine (talk) 14:22, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

One problem with the dispute is that DHHHeadrick is providing his own published content (ref #1) as the reference for "sting" over "stinger". My personal opinion is that when an insect stings me, it is with its stinger. David notMD (talk) 14:28, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

I reverted. 8.40.149.206 (talk) 14:54, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

The best place to discuss this is on the Talk page of the article, where you can catch up with previous discussion of this issue.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 15:52, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Yes, the article talk page is the right place to discuss this. Both terms are equally valid in the article, and should be present in the lead in my view. On the European side of the Atlantic, I can say I regard 'stinger' as more of an Americanism, and that 'sting' would make more sense colloquially. (But see this abstract in American Entologist.) Neither are real anatomical terms, so both usages really should be present, especially as the article covers a range of taxonomic groups. I note that 'Sting apparatus' is often used to describe the whole venom-injecting mechanism of various invertebrate groups. What is not acceptable is someone with one strong view posting their opinions and citation at the very top of the page. That discussion belonged in the talk page, not the article, unless there are sources which discuss the etymology of the term, in which case they should go inside a section with that sub-heading. Nick Moyes (talk) 16:10, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia Tagging guides for a newbie.

"‪File source is not properly indicated: File:Chomel...‬". I used the upload wizard and I encountered this.. Do you have any guide for editing there are lots of tags and I don't know how to use them yet. the syntax and usage of tags. I need a guide please.. 2403:6200:8840:143:4134:4685:8284:5B9C (talk) 16:11, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Retiring.

My mental health has been worsening the last few months and I am sick and tired of dealing with it. I would like to retire from Wikipedia. Is there any procedure for doing so? I wish to end everything. Screw this. ― Дрейгорич / Dreigorich Talk 13:16, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Editor has cleared User and Talk pages and place the RETIRED banner on both. David notMD (talk) 14:18, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

@Дрейгорич: Thank you for your 1,200+ contributions over the last two years. Your well-being is the most important thing to focus on, and Wikipedia will always be here for you should you ever wish to pick things up again. Your help in creating the worlds biggest online encyclopaedia is appreciated. With all our best wishes. Nick Moyes (talk) 16:18, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Site in Progress

Leniency while I construct the site I am in the progress of reconstructing the site for an elderly scientist, unable to do the work himself. Completing the site is therefore urgent. An approved draft was created by the scientist's spouse, and I am in the process of transitioning the CV-like content to an informative narrative. To my frustration, someone keeps removing the existing content, which I would must restore manually. Please, PLEASE give me a grace period to rearrange the content to a narrative. I am wasting time restoring deletions and time is something we do not have right now. VLShalin (talk) 16:19, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi @VLShalin, you should ensure you read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure before continuing. Unfortunately, we don't make exceptions, so you'll have to liaison with the editor in question who is reverting your edits. You can see who this is in the "history" tab of a page. Ed talk! 16:22, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

That editor appears to be Sumanuil. M Imtiaz (talk · contribs) 16:37, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

I have no idea how to communicate with this editor. Regarding COI, I am a former student of the scientist in question. However, I can speak on behalf of myself and the scientist (and anyone else who is likely to contribute) that we are "just the facts" historians inasmuch as this is possible. Certainly not paid, and motivated to assure that the period in question doesn't get lost. — Preceding unsigned comment added by VLShalin (talk • contribs) 17:08, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello, VLShalin, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid that, like many people, you misunderstand the purpose of Wikipedia. A Wikipedia article about a subject does not belong to the subject, is not for the benefit of the subject, and ideally should not be edited by the subject or their associates. By your description you are not a paid editor, and are not required to make that declaration; but you assuredly have a conflict of interest, and are encouraged to make this plain (you have done so here, but postings here get archived quickly). What you should do is to request the changes you want made to the article at its talk page Talk:James Greeno. You could also address the other editor on their user talk page (pick the 'Talk' link next to their name on the article history); but it's best to keep the discussion on the article talk page. Be aware that Wikipedia is basically not interested in anything said, done, or published by the subject of an article except where this has been discussed by a completely independent published source. Part of the difficulty of editing with a COI is that the editor typically knows information which cannot be corroborated from a reliable published source, but such information may not appear in a Wikipedia article. --ColinFine (talk) 17:27, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

I will communicate with the editor as you suggest, and find a way to indicate my relationship to the subject. However, I note with irony that the contents being deleted are the very sources that document corroboration! Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by VLShalin (talk • contribs) 17:36, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Adding a URL to Medical Journal Citation

Medical journals allow for a URL in the citation. Why can't I edit a reference to include a link to the actual citation, not just the DOI or PUBMED? Look at reference 144 in this article. I want to add the URL to article. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acne#Hormonal_agents like reference 93 for example?

Reference 144 Azzouni F, Zeitouni N, Mohler J (February 2013). "Role of 5α-reductase inhibitors in androgen-stimulated skin disorders". Journal of Drugs in Dermatology. 12 (2): e30-5. PMID 23377402.

Reference 93 Garner SE, Eady A, Bennett C, Newton JN, Thomas K, Popescu CM (August 2012). "Minocycline for acne vulgaris: efficacy and safety". The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (8): CD002086. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD002086.pub2. PMC 7017847. PMID 22895927. Archived from the original on 23 June 2018. Retrieved 23 June 2018. 74.111.40.41 (talk) 17:49, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

 Fixed See Special:Diff/976020101. The URL goes in the |url= parameter without brackets around it. The title (with no URL or other markup) goes in the |title= parameter. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 18:51, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

My notable friend Jerilyn Lee Brandelius is probably dying. How can I recruit editors to improve her article?

Jerilyn Lee Brandelius suffered chest pains last weekend followed by a heart operation. Her life is hanging in the balance now. She has an established article but it lacks inline references. I am too close to her to edit it. How can I recruit other editors who care about her community (rock music and the Grateful Dead), but who don't know her personally, to improve it? Gnuish (talk) 18:47, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Gnuish Hello, I'm sorry to hear about your difficult time. You may make a formal edit request(click for instructions) to detail changes you feel are needed to the article, on the article talk page(Talk:Jerilyn Lee Brandelius). 331dot (talk) 19:01, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

someone reverted my edits

Sphilbrick reverted my edits (worked really hard) in the Department of Law, University of Calcutta. how do i reverse this? there is no copyright infringement! https://www.caluniv.ac.in/academic/department/Law.html Based.brahmin (talk) 14:26, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

@Based.brahmin: welcome to the Teahouse. The administrator who reverted your edit (and then had it removed completely) made it clear to you on your user talk page that they believed you had violated copyright. The best way to deal with that is to engage with them by responding, pointing to any 'Creative Commons' licencing that permitted the deleted text to be reused elsewhere, or explaining why you feel they made an error. We are all human - these things happen, so the simplest way is to politely enquire and to explain your position. However, it looks to me like you simply lifted vast chunks of text from https://www.caluniv.ac.in/academic/department/Law.html (a copyrighted website) and pasted it into the article. We do not allow that, so please do not do that again. Instead, write using your own words and be succinct in what you say, and avoid 'close paraphrasing'. I hope this helps. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 14:57, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Based.brahmin, I noticed that you didn't try to contact me – I only stumbled across this by accident. I think Nick has already responded accurately but go ahead and provide further information if you think I missed something. S Philbrick(Talk) 19:26, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Based.brahmin, I will also add that I left a message on your talk page, although I understand you are new and might not even know that you have such a talk page, but I just want to make sure you know that I reached out to you. S Philbrick(Talk) 19:28, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Henry Danger

 Steve Stylish (talk) 17:17, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Steve Stylish. This is a help forum for those needing assistance in the processes of editing Wikipedia. Your post makes no sense, and I have removed the subsequent one as it was equally uninformative as to what help you seek. None of us are mind-=readers; if you have a question about Henry Danger, please be more explicit. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:37, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Steve Stylish, and welcome to the Teahouse. Judging by this edit, you're wanting to make some edits to Henry Danger, and you can't because it is semiprotected. (Judging by your next edit to the talk page, you got into a snit then, which is not helpful). If you want to suggest edits to that article, please post an edit request at the talk page, --ColinFine (talk) 19:50, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Reference question

I worked on a page https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Katya_Cengel Two places need a citation. I absolutely can not find a viable reference. Do I leave it as is or do I remove the information needing a citation? WikiJSPN (talk) 13:18, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

@WikiJSPN: You can leave it because there is Citation needed there.Do not worry.Nihaal The Wikipedian (talk) 13:55, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello, WikiJSPN, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid I'm going to disagree with Nihaal The Wikipedian: if you have looked for a reliable source and can't find one, then it does not belong in a Wikipedia article. Please remove it. If somebody else can find a source, they may restore it. --ColinFine (talk) 14:18, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Split the difference - take out that she teaches at UC Berkeley, but leave in (with citation needed) where she got her college degree from. David notMD (talk) 14:22, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Colin's answer is especially correct for information about living people. We need to be especially careful about not including any unsourced material of that type, in keeping with the "biographies of living persons" policy. DMacks (talk) 14:23, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

I found her on rate my professor and in an advertisement for UC Berkley, but I assume those are not reliable sources (please correct me if I am wrong). As to her degree, I found a reference to her being an alum here: https://literature.ucsd.edu/people/alumni/positions.html Is this a reliable source? It seems to that they sourced the information from her website. Am I correct in this assumption and if so, is it still a viable source on information as to where she got her degree? WikiJSPN (talk) 20:25, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

can ou find out what this creature is

Hi, I'm new to this and I can't find what I am looking for. I am trying to find out more information about a mythical creature I saw online a year ago. I am writing a book and I want to put that creature in it but I Can't remember what the creature was called. it looked like a skeleton with wings. it had rough black wings and it was definitely evil. Please help me find out what it is. Angelinatheamazing (talk) 20:54, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Angelinatheamazing, welcome to Wikipedia and the Teahouse. While this topic isn't specific to Wikipedia or editing, which is what the teahouse is for, I can give you some rough guidance. There are many images of "Skeleton Angels" online that you can look through on Google Images which may lead you to find the answer you're looking for. Given the black wings, you're probably looking for the "Angel of Death" [24]. Hope this helps :) Ed talk! 21:27, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Request page be protected

IP users keep vandalizing a page. How do I recommend that a page have a protection since I’m not an administrator myself? Thank you! Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 00:36, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello Lima Bean Farmer. The proper noticeboard is Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. The quick shortcut is WP:RFPP. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:52, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Would the company Emsi be notable enough to have a Wikipedia article?

I'm curious to know whether or not you think the company Emsi (https://www.economicmodeling.com/) would be considered notable enough to have a page to itself. They've been featured in the WSJ, Forbes, ESPN, HBR, The Atlantic, and NYT, among others. Sks5HDuPdgpkpLeEohWs4Jbkq (talk) 23:06, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Sks5HDuPdgpkpLeEohWs4Jbkq. I am a New York Times subscriber. I searched their archives and could not find a link to any significant coverage of Emsi there. I did a Google search for coverage in The Atlantic and could not find anything significant. The Wall Street Journal is behind a strict paywall. Please provide links to the best of those articles, specifically the ones that devote significant coverage to the company, and are readable without a subscription. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:47, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

@Sks5HDuPdgpkpLeEohWs4Jbkq, Hello & welcome, quite a unique username you’ve got there I must say. Now, just as Cullen328 already stated above, I myself carried out a google search & could not find anything substantial & for Wikipedia to retain an article on an organization, the organization must satisfy WP:ORG(read that immediately) thank you. Celestina007 23:57, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

I'm finding their data cited a lot, but having trouble finding coverage about them, i.e., they are all passing mentions, identifying the source of the labor market analytics used in the articles. There are a couple of articles in local media around the same time about them expanding their headquarters, but those may prove to be based on PR. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 02:08, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Checking to see if page subject is notable

I would like to write an article on a monthly observance called "ARRR-Gust:International Pirate Month" and would like to know if it would be considered notable. We are published in Chases's Calendar of Events for the past 4 or 5 years and the event is starting to gain attention nation wide. RoguesArmada (talk) 01:49, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

@RoguesArmada, Hello & welcome. Generally, events are considered notable here if they satisfy WP:EVENTCRIT. I carried out a google search & do not think that the event is notable yet. Your comment above seems to be indicative of this; and the event is starting to gain attention nation wide, if the event just began to “gain attention nation wide” it may be WP:TOOSOON for an article on it. Celestina007 03:13, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Name change

Los Angeles Museum of the Holocaust (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles_Museum_of_the_Holocaust) has changed its name to Holocaust Museum LA. It needs to be changed, but I can't find the "move" button. Help? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gsophina (talk • contribs) 00:50, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi Gsophina. Most likely the reason you cannot find the "move" has to do with the fact that your account is still not WP:AUTOCONFIRMED. If you believe the page should be moved, you can ask for help as explained in WP:RPM#TR. Be advised, however, that you might be asked to provide some links which support your claim for a name change as part of your request.

In addition, instead of simply replacing the old name each time it's used in the article, you might want also want to incorporate new content about the name change into the article if it can be supported by citations to reliable sources. Perhaps there's a reason for the name change and this reason was the discussed in newspaper articles, etc. that covered the name change. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:50, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

@Gsophina: Thanks for raising this issue. New users cannot create or move pages. I verified the name change with the official web site and moved the page to Holocaust Museum Los Angeles. I also created a redirect at Holocaust Museum LA since that name is also commonly used for this museum. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 03:34, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

World Book

Is the world book an acceptable citation? A Tree In A Box (talk) 05:14, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello A Tree In A Box. The World Book Encyclopedia is a generally reliable source. My parents purchased a set of the 1960 edition when I was a young schoolchild nearly 60 years ago, and I spent countless hours browsing and learning from it. But like Wikipedia and undergraduate college textbooks and other reference works, World Book is a tertiary source. It can be used in limited ways, but independent secondary reliable sources are really preferred in most circumstances where they are available. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:35, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Citation Suggestion

Is https://www.forbes.com/#32bf4eab2254 a reliable source for referencing? Editingwork8 (talk) 06:34, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

@Editingwork8: If you mean Fed Won’t Raise Rates Until 2025, Goldman Sachs Predicts (the other link is basically a jumble of headlines from different articles), I suppose it's reliable as stating the GS opinion and for the Fed quotes. Not much to it, really, and there should be better sources, like GS themself, if that's what you're after, or the Fed, if you're quoting them. Forbes articles tend to not be particularly "deep", but have been considered generally reliable per WP:RS/P. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 07:49, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

@AlanM1 Thank you very much! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Editingwork8 (talk • contribs) 07:56, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Suggestions/Approval required for the edit plan

Please review the content given below and let me know if I can replace it with the current content on the Richard Haskayne page.

Richard (Dick) Francis Haskayne is a Canadian businessman and Philanthropist. He was born on December 18, 1934 to Robert and Bertha Haskayne. He was raised in Gleichen, Alberta by his parents who were English immigrants and ran butcher shops in Gleichen and Bassano. He did Bachelor of Commerce from the University of Alberta in 1956. Then, he moved to Calgary and married Lee Murray in 1958. In 1959, he became Chartered Accountant. He became President at Hudson's Bay Oil and Gas in 1980. He served as president and chief executive officer of Interhome Energy, Home Oil Company and Interprovincial Pipe Line Limited. He also remained member of 18 company boards. He worked as a chairman of board of Trans Alta Utilities, MacMillian Bloedell and Nova. Dick lost his wife due to ALS in 1993. His second marriage with Lois Heard in 1995, combining childre from the previous marriage, together gave him five children and eleven grandchildren. In 2001, the University of Calgary acknowledged Dick's leadership by creating the Richard F. Haskay]yne Chair in Accounting. The following year, the school's Faculty of Management was renamed as Haskayne School of Business. He was also honored with Woodrow Wilson Award for corporate citizenship in 2004.

Instead of the paragraph featuring his career, I'm planning a table with three categories- Designation, location & work duration. Rest of the content that I find suitable will not be modified. Editingwork8 (talk) 04:25, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

@Editingwork8: the Teahouse is for general questions on how to edit Wikipedia. What you have above is an edit request, which belongs on the talk page of the article you want to request an edit for.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 04:29, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

@ThatMontrealIP Thanks for the guidance. I'll keep that in mind. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Editingwork8 (talk • contribs) 06:38, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

I was also about to suggest that you post your intent on the Talk page of Richard Haskayne, but you already did that, and given that the article itself only gets a few visitors a day, very unlikely that anyone ever gets to the Talk page. Both the article as it exists and your proposed change sorely lack references. Also, biographical articles have sections (Early life, Education, Career, Personal life...) Creating those would help. David notMD (talk) 08:41, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Teahouse is shaking

Teahouse is shakingNihaal The Wikipedian (talk) 05:01, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

? Please explain what you mean. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 05:58, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

@Nihaal The Wikipedian: Yes, please do. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 07:10, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

When I open the Teahousethe objects moves.Nihaal The Wikipedian (talk) 08:42, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Teahouse is experiencing an earthquake. Please return later. The Management. David notMD (talk) 08:44, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Can someone help me get a page published faster?

Hi, I received an invite to the teahouse and wanted to say thank you and hello! Also, I submitted a page "The Current Occupant" that has not been reviewed. I was curious if you knew any way or were able to speed up the review process, since I would love to get it up sooner. If you have any suggestions, they would be very appreciated! Here is the draft: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:The_Current_Occupant

Thank you very much for you help! I really appreciate it. Best wishes! Horror99fan (talk) 06:19, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

No there is no such way by intention. Why do you need to get that draft reviewed so fast? Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 06:28, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Your draft is about film by the person the above query is about, and you are both asking for expedited review. What is the connection? David notMD (talk) 09:00, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

More to the point, you and Bluejay1984 each have joined within the last 48 hours, each immediately created a very professional looking draft, and each asked for expedited review, using remarkably similar wording. Is this undeclared paid article creation? David notMD (talk) 09:09, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

ClueBot

Why isn't cluebot archiving my talk page sections? I inserted the template for cluebot to automatically archive sections in all sections I don't need any more, and enabled the necessary parameter (archivenow). I-82-I | TALK 07:03, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, I-82-I! There is often a delay from when you add the archive template to when it starts archiving. I think it is typically a couple days. You added the template on August 27th, so it may be a day or so before it starts archiving. There was a parameter that was done incorrectly which I fixed, so it should work soon. Giraffer (munch) 09:14, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Suggestions for Artificial Intelligence page required

How can I create a page related to AI companies and refrain from being visibly promotional? Editingwork8 (talk) 03:55, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

@Editingwork8: You may want to first look around to see if the article already exists. Have a look at some other "lists of... companies" for inspiration and for ideas on how to present things neutrally. Is there something in particular you are worried about? ThatMontrealIP (talk) 04:06, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

@ThatMontrealIP Yes, I'm particularly worried about getting my content listed as promotional or advertising because I know that its not acceptable here. Then, how can I write about the subject of my interest? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Editingwork8 (talk • contribs) 04:42, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Try starting it out in draft space. That way you can ask others to look at it, and also run it throuth AFC if desired. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 05:11, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

@ThatMontrealIP Thank you. I'll try this way! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Editingwork8 (talk • contribs) 06:39, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Editingwork8. Another part of it is by ignoring anything said or published by the company or its employees or associates - including in interviews and press releases - and basing your article strictly on material published in reliable places by people who have no connection with the company. The company's own material is - quite properly - going to be promotional; independent sources generally won't be - and if they do contain evaluative language, it is permissible to quote them directly, as long as you make it clear whose opinion you are reproducing. --ColinFine (talk) 09:25, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

@ColinFine Ok. I'll take care of that. Thank you for guiding me right.

Programs for formatting Wikipedia

Is there a program for formatting Wikipedia? I wrote my first article with 24 footnotes in WORD 2019. However when I looked at other web sites on the "editing" page, my eyes glaze over with all the arcane formatting. It is almost like code - it is way over my head. So I'm wondering is there some sort of program or web site that will do that for me?...or a service? I did finally figure out that I needed to put those little equal signs == in to ask this question... but that is as far as I got. :)  AndreaSG50 (talk) 04:00, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

@AndreaSG50, Hello & welcome. Perhaps I may not be reading this correctly but I don’t think you are yet to create any article, at least not with this account. But nonetheless, for article creation and formatting you might want to see WP:YFA,WP:MOS, & WP:CITE. Celestina007 04:25, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

 Celestina007 How do I obtain the correct account? I have a WORD article that I would like to publish in Wikipedia. It looks like that I simply copy and paste it as a draft page in the wizard....and then if it looks right, I then "publish"?

@AndreaSG50: Not exactly, but pretty close. But before you do that, please have a look at WP:YFA. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 06:00, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

But pasting from Word will not preserve your footnotes, and I'm not sure it will preserve your character formatting either, AndreaSG50. WP:Editing_tools#From_Microsoft_Word links some tools that are supposed to help - I've no idea how well they work, though. --ColinFine (talk) 09:37, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

--ColinFine (talk) Thanks for your help. I tried to copy and paste for a test and it came up with the footnotes. I enabled "VisualEditor" (albeit I'm not sure what it is), went through the "wizard" > "practice in the community sandbox", "edit page visually"> and then I "published" the sandbox. It looked fine ..but how do I then submit it?

The Microsoft Office Word Add-in For MediaWiki didn't work with 2019 Office. A Google search brought no programs or add ins that might covert the WORD document to a Wikipedia formatting. Pandoc seems to use DOS cmd to work, which is over my head. Any suggestions?

Company name with references added to AI companies of India page. Removed.

My edit on the page AI companies of India has been removed once and I've edited it again for now. What can be the reason for deleting it? Here is the reference I've added:

1. https://www.forbesindia.com/article/brand-connect/expanding-the-scope-of-artificial-intelligence-to-healthcare/50905/1 Editingwork8 (talk) 10:41, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

It was reverted because the company does not have an article on Wikipedia. The AI companies of India page lists companies that have been shown to be WP:notable not just to exist. If there is sufficient WP:reliable sources for it to meet WP:NCORP then create a page for the company first - see WP:WTAF. noq (talk) 10:44, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

@noq Thank you for clearing this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Editingwork8 (talk • contribs) 10:49, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Chatbot has undone my edit

How can I make improvement on the page Oscar Martinez (The Office) after bot undoing my edit? Editingwork8 (talk) 04:02, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello Editingwork8. Your edits were reverted by User:ClueBot NG, an essential anti-vandalism bot. You have the option of reporting the reversion as a false positive. My guess is that the bot responded because you removed a lot of content including references. I understand that you and at least one other editor are of the opinion that the article contained excessive detail. I suggest discussing your plans at Talk:Oscar Martinez (The Office) where the perceived problem has not been discussed. I also suggest that you remove content in smaller chunks, with clear explanations in your edit summaries. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:16, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

@Cullen³²⁸ Okay, I'll try doing that way.Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Editingwork8 (talk • contribs) 10:56, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello

 밤에 (talk) 10:55, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

@밤에: Do you have a question about editing Wikipedia? --David Biddulph (talk) 10:59, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello

To Whom It May Concern

Firstly, I would like to show my respect for your managing this valuable website.

My name is Lee ye eun. I would like to inform you that your website includes information that seriously distort image of Korea and that could develop into diplomatic problem between Korea and Japan. We Koreans were surprised to see that your website marks Korea’s island Dokdo as Liancourt Rocks. Please refer to this link of your website:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liancourt_Rocks

The name Liancourt Rocks is originated from France’s whaling vessel Le Liancourt that discovered Dokdo in 1849. Even though Korea, with sovereign control over the island, uses an official name “Dokdo,” temporary term named by French ship is used by your institution and is spreading globally. This is a big problem as people throughout the world recognize “Liancourt Rocks” as standard name.

Now, you might wonder why Korea is so sensitive about the correct name of Dokdo.

Dokdo is one of the most loved islands in Korea and is Korea’s one of major fishing grounds. In addition, Ulleungdo near Dokdo is the global tourist site. For instance, in 2010, , world famous travel magazine, announced that Korea’s Ulleungdo is one of the best recreational site chosen by world’s tourists. According to this magazine, Ulleungdo offers spectacular scenery, preserving the nature from ancient times, and has abundant source of water unlike other islands; neighboring waters, with Dokdo, is the biggest fishing ground in the East Sea. On clear days, Dokdo can be seen from Ulleungdo with naked eye. Historically, for 1500 years, Ulleungdo and Dokdo were referred to as the island of mother and son, which indicates its important close relationship.

Therefore, your institution calling this domestically and internationally crucial island “Liancourt Rocks” will confuse many foreigners and ships visiting Ulleungdo and Dokdo. In addition, your institution might be responsible for physical and mental damage done to Koreans. Above all things, negligence of the term “Liancourt Rocks” would build uncomfortable feelings from Koreans toward your institution and country, and this would become an obstacle to our countries’ friendship.

Therefore, as a member of VANK, I request that your institution use “Dokdo” instead of “Liancourt Rocks” in all publications. For more information on geographical designation of Dokdo in Korean tourist guidebook, visit this website: http://prkorea.com/tour/img/dokdo.gif

We know that your website is putting much effort in understanding other cultures, countries, and designations in this global, informational 21st century. Particularly, your website is contributing towards many people’s correct understanding of other countries’ geographical names and cultures.

We hope you listen to our request kindly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 밤에 (talk • contribs) 11:07, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Our convention at WP:COMMONNAME is that here on the English Wikipedia we use the name most commonly used in English. The place for any discussion would be Talk:Liancourt Rocks, but if you look in the box at the top of that page you will see that the naming has been discussed on a number of previous occasions. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:21, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Picture

I have a page in Hebreu - https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%98%D7%A8%D7%96_%D7%93%D7%91%D7%99%D7%A8 - that includes my photo. I tried to reproduce it in my new page but altought it is recognized I failed. What should I do? Thanks for your help. Les livres de Therese Dvir (talk) 08:37, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Oy! There is an article about you in Hebrew Wikipedia. It appears you have translated this into French and put in on your Talk page in English Wikipedia. A Speedy deletion has been proposed, because Talk is not the place for a draft. I suggest you quickly move that content to your Sandbox, where a draft is allowed. And then decide whether you want to submit a draft to French Wikipedia, or translate to English and try for English. Be aware that each language has its own definition of what makes a person notable. David notMD (talk) 09:21, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Now at Draft:Thérèse Dvir. David notMD (talk) 11:32, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

How to format a DVD?

Hello! How would I format a DVD reference, like this one? https://animationshowofshows.com/collections/dvds/products/the-animation-show-of-shows-volume-21 Thank you. Katherine311MH (talk) 00:31, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi Katherine311MH. The template {{Cite AV media}} would probably work for such a thing, but you try and be consistent with the overall citation style being used in the article per WP:CITEVAR when filling the parameters of the template. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:58, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks!Katherine311MH (talk) 11:33, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

When will my article be live?

Hi. I've finished my bio page, but I can't make it live. Is there something I'm doing wrong? Is there a wait time? Malcolm MacKinnon (talk) 11:32, 1 September 2020 (UTC) Malcolm MacKinnon (talk) 11:32, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Your question was asked and answered at WP:HD#When will my article be live?. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:39, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

n short, User:Dan Skye/sandbox not yet submitted for review, and if submitted in current form, will very likely be declined for reasons given at Help Desk. Lastly, Wikipedia frowns on attempts to write about oneself. See WP:AUTO. David notMD (talk) 11:43, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Username change

Hi All,

how do I edit my username? It seems like something simple and I feel daft for asking, but I don't find this to be the most intuitive system. Templar-T-Wales (talk) 11:43, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi Templar-T-Wales. Unfortunately Wikipedia is not like Twitter, so you can't change it, but you can under approval from an admin, if I'm not mistaken. GeraldWL 11:45, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Templar-T-Wales, and welcome to the Teahouse. See WP:Changing username; but sinec you have only a few edits on that account, it may be simpler to just abandon it and create a new one. --ColinFine (talk) 11:50, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Can someone help publishing a page?

Hi there, I received an invite to the teahouse and wanted to say thank you and hello! Also, I submitted a page "Alston Ramsay" that has not been reviewed. I was curious if you knew any way or were able to speed up the review process, since I would love to get it up sooner. If you have any suggestions, they would be very appreciated! Here is the draft: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Alston_Ramsay

Thank you very much for you help! I really appreciate it. Best wishes! Bluejay1984 (talk) 06:16, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

No, there is no such way by intention. Why do you need to get this draft reviewed so fast? Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 06:30, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Sure, but you have to explain why to the other hundreds to thousands of people with drafts older than yours waiting for review. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 07:41, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

@AlanM1:Oh my, at first I misread your comment as "hundreds OF thousands. Nearly passed out! Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 09:02, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

To be clear, the drafts for review is a pile, not a queue. Reviewers pick what they want. Means could be days to months. There is no VIP line. David notMD (talk) 08:49, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

The draft has a photo you claim to have taken in 2017. Is this true? David notMD (talk) 09:14, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I collect photos of filmmakers. This photo was taken by me in 2017. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bluejay1984 (talk • contribs) 13:31, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Sadas - Company description - Feedback request

Hello, I would like to ask for feedbacks about the company page for Sadas, an Italian multinational computer technology company. I created a trial page in my sandbox: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Giuseppe_Ardolino/sandbox . I already updated the page in the previous months in accordance with feedbacks received from some Wikipedia contributors. I want to respect all Wikipedia guidelines before the publications to avoid reworks or cancellation. Thank you for collaboration Giuseppe Ardolino (talk) 14:06, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks so much Giraffer

Thank you so much Giraffer for the help full explanation. Please I like you to also tell me, how do I get my page like yours and also I like to create personal pages for a few of my friends, how do I go about it ShimoriBrown (talk) 14:53, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

ShimoriBrown, Hello & welcome once again, I am not Giraffer but I’ve gone through your conversation with them so I pretty much can answer this for you. Your question on how to get your page to be like theirs is quite vague & open to multiple interpretations so I won’t be answering that.

Now On creating articles for your friends The same principle still applies as though you were creating one for yourself as creating for friends, yourself, family, colleagues & whatnot all constitute COI.

Now, although this act is strongly discouraged, it is however not necessarily a taboo. If you have read WP:COI & WP:AUTO thoroughly & you feel strongly that you/your friends are notable enough & fulfill all the requirements outlined in WP:GNG. You may proceed to read WP:GNG,( thoroughly this time), WP:YFA, WP:MOS, & WP:CITE then finally when you think your article is ready to be published, you are strongly advised to submit via the WP:AFC process. Non compliance with all the above mentioned may equate into your article being Speedy deleted. You may also want to read WP:NPOV, WP:PROMO, WP:PAID, & also, what Wikipedia is definitely NOT!. Finally, my advise to you would be not to take this route for now, at least until you gather enough experience & learn our basic policies and guidelines starting by reading WP:5P. You might also want to search for other topics that interest you & work on them(fixing typos, adding more citations, fixing grammatical errors...) . Let me know if you have further questions. Thank you for your time. Celestina007 15:28, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Celestina007, that was a great answer, but I think (emphasis on think) he meant my userpage... (although if I were you I would save that answer in a userspace subpage for later. :) ShimoriBrown, a good starting place for userpages is WP:UPDC. Userboxes are a fun way to tell people a little about yourself. You are welcome to tell people a little about yourself, you should keep it relevant to Wikipedia to avoid having it deleted. This means telling people what you do around here, and how you can help them. While you can have some info about yourself in real life, your userpage should not be an autobiography. Also, you should only make a userpage for yourself - not for others. For more info on designing userpages, I recommend taking a look at WP:UPDC, WP:UBX and WP:Userpages. Also, feel free to use anything on my userpage for yours, although I ask that you don't copy and paste the entire thing. If you need more help on userpages, just drop a message on my talk page. Regards, Giraffer (munch) 16:04, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Should I preserve a toollabs prefix when updating a broken link?

Hi Teahouse! This is my first post here, thank you for providing all these resources to help new editors! I joined WikiProject Children's Literature and wanted to fix the broken hyperlink for the cleanup listing in the project's infobox. I think the cleanup listing link is intended to go to https://bambots.brucemyers.com/cwb/bycat/Children's_literature.html. But the current code for the link in the infoxbox has a toollabs prefix: toollabs:bambots/cwb/bycat/Children's literature.html. Should I try to preserve the toollabs prefix? I tried putting in toollabs:bambots.brucemyers.com/cwb/bycat/Children's_literature.html, but with that link, my browser gives a "Your connection isn't private Attackers might be trying to steal your information from bambots.brucemyers.com.toolforge.org" warning instead of taking me right to the page. Is there a way I can preserve the toollabs prefix but have it go straight to the https://bambots.brucemyers.com/cwb/bycat/Children's_literature.html? Or is it fine to swap out the https link for the toollabs link, losing the toollabs prefix? I don't want to unintentionally take away a valuable function, if toollabs has a purpose I'm not aware of. I tried searching for more information about toollabs, but didn't find much clear information about what toollabs might be doing in this specific instance. Thank you so much, I appreciate your help! Merenby (talk) 13:45, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

• @Merenby: Welcome.

When I go to https://bambots.toolforge.org/cwb/bycat/Children's_literature.html, the page reads (in its entirety): The bambots tools have been moved to a new server. The new server can be found at https://bambots.brucemyers.com/cwb/bycat/Children's_literature.html. The latter link works for me and is a to a personal web domain; I assume the bot maintainer moved the code away from Toolforge, a domain hosting various bots and other scripts for Wikimedia projects. (I assume there is no difference between Tool Labs and Toolforge because wikitech:Tool Labs redirects to the Toolforge page.) Therefore, it is neither needed nor smart to keep the toollabs prefix. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 15:37, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

@Tigraan: That's really helpful. I updated it. Thank you so much! Merenby (talk) 16:29, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Greetings to anyone in the Wikipedia virtual Teahouse

Greetings to anyone in the Wikipedia virtual Teahouse. My question is: 'Has anyone read my poem? AngeloMathes (talk) 17:02, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Presumably about 27 People. Note that that number is always 24 Hours behind the real time. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:11, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

AngeloMathes. I have tagged your user page for speedy deletion for unambiguous advertising or promotion. Please don't try to use Wikipedia for that purpose again. --ColinFine (talk) 17:15, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Getting started

Please how do I get started and get my post right because I have tried and I own the copyright to all what I post. It is actually my biography I posted but it was not approved.

Please what do I do? ShimoriBrown (talk) 14:19, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello ShimoriBrown, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm guessing that this is about your sandbox. First, this has nothing to do with copyright. Second, while we encourage you to contribute, writing an autobiography about yourself is strongly discouraged. The autobiography you wrote was written in a promotional tone, and not in the style of an encyclopedia, which is why it was deleted (CSD G11). I would recommend that you don't try to write about yourself, as you will have a conflict of interest. Instead, find a topic that interests you, and write about that! We have thousands (probably even millions) of articles that need work, and every positive edit is appreciated.

On a different note, by adding information to Wikipedia, you forfeit all of the copyright to your work. If I write an article on Wikipedia, the work is in the public domain, and anyone can copy, edit, or re-use it. I am no longer the owner. If you write something in your sandbox, you have given up ownership of it, and anyone can do anything with it. For more info, see WP:C. Regards, Giraffer (munch) 14:35, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

While it might seem to have that effect, Giraffer, I think it is important to be precise in this area. When you add information to Wikipedia you neither forfeit all copyright, nor put it in the public domain. You retain the copyright, but irrevocably grant a CC-BY-SA licence to it, so that anybody may use it for any purpose as long as they comply with the conditions. One consequence is that if somebody uses the material without attributing it, they can be legally challenged; but because you retain the copyright, it is only you that can challenge them, not Wikipedia. --ColinFine (talk) 16:53, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Noted. Giraffer (munch) 17:28, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

If you still want to post your autobiography somewhere, we have a suggested list of alternative outlets here.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 14:45, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Archive and Signature Style

How do I archive my talk page and change my current "signature style"? Angus1986 (talk) 17:17, 1 September 2020 (UTC) Angus1986 (talk) 17:17, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Angus1986, you can change your signature by going to Preferences → (scroll down) Signature and then changing that. Be sure to read the note underneath explaining wikimarkup. For your second question, there are two main ways. Either you can manually archive your talk page, or get a bot to do it for you. If you want to do it manually, here are the instructions. If you want to have it done automatically, see here. Hope this helps. Regards, Giraffer (munch) 17:44, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Dear @Giraffer, I might have messed up my signature and now unable to sign normally, could you please help? Also, I pasted the code for CuebotIII but no help. Cannot sign. - Angus1986

Duplicated page?

Hi all,

A while ago, I created a draft page for the actress "Rachel Zegler". Her page was previously a redirect to "West Side Story 2020" because that is her only acting role. So I created the draft to work on until she became notable.

Recently, it looks like someone copied parts of the draft and posted a Rachel Zegler page to the main space (not converting the draft page). If you look at the history of the pages, the draft page was declined for main space transfer on August 7th (I do not know who tried to submit it?) and then someone created the page in the mainspace on August 8th. So I think maybe it was just an effort to circumvent the system.

My question is, should I nominate the draft for deletion? Should I submit it to be combined with the posted one? Should I flag the posted page for notability? Is there a way to turn it back to a redirect? Should I leave it all alone?

Please advise! Apathyash (talk) 15:36, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Apathyash and welcome to the Teahouse. It appears as if the editor who created the article Rachel Zegler, Factfanatic1, did indeed copy content from the draft. This is permitted, all posted content, including drafts, is released under the CC-BY-SA license, but the source should have been properly credited as required by that license. I have fixed this by adding {[tl|copied}} to the talk pages of the article and the draft. (See WP:CWW for details on this.) There is no rule which requires new articles to be started in draft, or for drafts to be approved via the AfC review process.

At the moment, the article appears a bit thin on notability issues. I see two options:

1. Merge any content from the draft (that is relevant) into the article, add any additional high-quality sources available into the article, and convert the draft to a redirect to the article (it can't be deleted while the article exists for attribution reasons).
2. Nominate the article for deletion as lacking notability, and WP:TOOSOON. If it is deleted, move the draft into userspace and take it out of AfC (so that G13 would cease to apply), and let it wait until Zegler has had more roles and is more clearly notable, if she becomes so.

Either course is reasonable. You could also propose on Talk:Rachel Zegler converting it back into a redirect to West Side Story (2020 film). That could be done with a simple revert to the version by Robert McClenon, but doing that without obtaining consensus is all too likely to start an edit war, which would be bad.

Please do remember that the goal here is to have a valid article of the best possible quality, not to rush to claim credit for it. What is your preference of these options? Do others here have a view? DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 16:59, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

I apologize if it seemed like I was trying to take credit for the page, I definitely am not! I'm just not sure what the best course of action is. Thank you for the thorough answer! Apathyash (talk) 18:12, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Correcting an inaccurate article.

Hi, I am writing this on behalf of my father, John Campbell. He was alerted by a friend, that someone else is being credited with writing his books. The article related to a person of the same name, John Campbell (Quebec Politician) attached to a book title named Saturday night in York Street. This is incorrect. I hope you can help with this. If you require any further information please contact me and I can provide links to any information you may need. Thanks Bigmanbelfast (talk) 18:27, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Bigmanbelfast, welcome to Wikipedia, and to the teahouse. First, you should disclose your conflict of interest, just give Wikipedia:DISCLOSE a quick read and follow the instructions for help on how to do this. To correct the issue, you can just edit the page, remove the content and note in the edit summary of the removal. It appears that your father may not have an article? If this is the case, do not hijack the article in order to add information about a different person, in this case, your father. You should follow the instructions at Help:Your first article in order to get started. If this isn't the case, feel free to edit your father's article once you have disclosed your conflict of interest. Many thanks :) Ed talk! 18:33, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

I don't see any mention of a book called Saturday Night in York Street in the John Campbell (Quebec politician) article. This appears to be a mistaken hijack. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 18:40, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Bigmanbelfast. I cannot find that the book has ever been mentioned in our article John Campbell (Quebec politician). I strongly suspect that you have encountered a common problem with Google, not Wikipedia: Google has linked to the Wikipedia article about the wrong John Campbell. I append our standard information about this below.

Are you by any chance referring to a photo or text shown to the right of a Google search? Google's Knowledge Graph uses a wide variety of sources. There may be a text paragraph ending with "Wikipedia" to indicate that particular text was copied from Wikipedia. An image and other text before or after the Wikipedia excerpt may be from sources completely unrelated to Wikipedia. We have no control over how Google presents our information, but Google's Knowledge Graph has a "Feedback" link where anyone can mark a field as wrong. The same feedback facility is also provided on Bing and some other search engines. --ColinFine (talk) 18:55, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

@ColinFine: - The mistaken hijack was reverted in this edit yesterday. --David Biddulph (talk) 18:57, 1 September 2020 (UTC)