Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1052

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1045

←

Archive 1050

Help to publish the page on Overleaf

As many researchers, I use LaTeX to write papers, in collaboration with other researchers in the world. In recent years, some online solutions have made this process much easier. Currently, the dominant platform to write papers online with other researchers is Overleaf. I wanted to get more information about the company, but realised there is no Wikipedia page. I have decided to finish the draft page that had been rejected previously: Draft:Overleaf.

I have made several attempts to comply with the requirements for publication of an article. I am a paying user of Overleaf. I do not have any link that would create a conflict of interest.

I have cited some of the top publishers using Overleaf, such as Web of Science Group and AIP Publishing, together with some of the top institutions in the world that are using Overleaf for collaborative scientific writing: Harvard, MIT, Princeton, Stanford, DTU, ETH Zurich and CERN. All the original links from these companies and institutions have been cited in the draft of the Overleaf page. I could continue the list and add many more of the top institutions using Overleaf. But if the list above is not enough to prove the notability of the company, I do not think that any list would convince the people who have rejected the publication of the page. So I would really appreciate some help to understand how the most widely used company for collaborative LaTeX editing in the world cannot meet the notability requirements for a Wikipedia page.

If you look at all the other companies listed on the Comparison of TeX editors page, they barely have one reference, if not zero outside from their own website. If Wikipedia editors want to be fair on this, I think they should remove all these pages from Wikipedia. I do not see why those pages meet better the requirements for publication than the extensive collection of information I have provided here. Please let me know how I can get this page published finally. I have already spent several days on it, and I do not see any way to fulfil the requirements raised by the Wikipedia reviewers. MJ1984 (talk) 14:51, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

An interesting point to add: the company ShareLaTeX was acquired by Overleaf, as detailed in the page Draft:Overleaf. So the company simply does not exist anymore, and the references in its Wikipedia page are only coming from the ShareLaTeX website or from the Overleaf website. Can someone explain to me how that page is allowed to exist while I cannot publish a page with 66 references? MJ1984 (talk) 14:57, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello and welcome MJ1984! First, we generally don't engage in arguments of the form "this page exists, so this one should too", because there are too many variables about why a page exists to make that discussion meaningful and productive. Second, to be published pages need independent reliable sources. the companies using the product you mention above are not independent, as they are clients. Can you find some more independent sources that talk about the company? This has been mentioned four times by AFC reviewers (see the templates and comments at the top of the page saying that it needs reliable sources). ThatMontrealIP (talk) 15:07, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. I really do not understand what source could be more reliable that the websites of the top research institutions in the world. If tens of the top institutions in the world are customers using this platform, is it irrelevant for the notability of the company? I can make a random search and find tens of pages talking about the best LaTeX editors. All of them will have Overleaf listed. But I feel I would be just wasting my time, as the many independent pages I have already cited are just disregarded. Even a paper published in the journal Nature [doi: 10.1038/d41586-019-01796-1] would be completely meaningless as I understand, because the company behind the journal Nature is connected to Overleaf ("Overleaf is owned by Digital Science, a firm operated by the Holtzbrinck Publishing Group, which has a share in Nature’s publisher, Springer Nature")? MJ1984 (talk) 16:01, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

Companies that are clients of an article subject are generally not reliable sources because they are engaged in a business relationship with the company. You listed a number of libraries that use Overleaf; this is a fact rather than a source. We look for sources that are generally engaged in reporting or authorship (Libraries are not for the most part) and which have a history of independent reporting. It is as simple as that. I encourage you to read WP:RS. ThatMontrealIP (talk)16:09, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

I can confirm anecdotically the new user's impression that Overleaf has become a (if not THE) major player in the LateX editor market, but there does not seem to be that many sources to go by yet. Here's a few independent sources, but none of them count much in the way of notability: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5]. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 17:00, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you Tigraan for having a look at it, and thank you ThatMontrealIP for cleaning-up the Draft:Overleaf. [I am not sure if there is a more standard thank you format that can be followed?] I have found the following paper published in a scientific journal and discussing about Overleaf: Martínez-López, J. Israel; Barrón-González, Samantha; Martínez López, Alejandro (2019). "Which Are the Tools Available for Scholars? A Review of Assisting Software for Authors during Peer Reviewing Process". Publications. 7 (3): 59. doi:10.3390/publications7030059.. It contains about half a page on "Web-based LaTeX editors", citing only two of them: "such as ShareLaTeX and Overleaf". If you realise that these companies have merged, this is quite a strong argument about notability I guess. Together with the Nature paper cited above written by "a Berlin-based reporter for Times Higher Education, covering universities, research and politics across continental Europe" [6], [7]: Matthews, David (2019). "Craft beautiful equations in Word with LaTeX". Nature. 570 (7760): 263–264. Bibcode:2019Natur.570..263M. doi:10.1038/d41586-019-01796-1. PMID 31186559. S2CID 184483820.. Would that be sufficient to meet the notability requirements? Or the mention on the Times Higher Education [8] maybe? MJ1984 (talk) 23:09, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

The best people to ask about notability are the AFC reviewers, by submitting the draft or on their talk pages. As User:Tigraan points out correctly, it's tough to establish notability for these kinds of things because there is not much to write about-- so people do not write much about it!ThatMontrealIP (talk) 01:19, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

@MJ1984: I do not think Nature's article would be discounted entirely because of the shared ownership of Nature and Overleaf. Context matters, and it seems fairly unlikely to me that this Nature piece was published under pressure from the advertising department. That is a similar situation to, say, the Washington Post and Amazon, both of which are owned by the same guy, but we still generally trust the WP's reporting on Amazon as long as it is not making extraordinary claims. The actual problem is that Overleaf is a passing mention in that piece.

The other scholarly source also only includes a passing mention of Overleaf (plus, MDPI is a dubious publisher).

The problem really is that Overleaf is a niche software. It is well-known among researchers, and if you want my opinion it's a great software, but Wikipedia does not care about that. If you look at Wikipedia:Notability_(software)#Inclusion I do not think it really passes any of the criteria. There is no real press for researcher news (I mean, Nature/Science try to have some, but it's a joke if you compare it to stuff like TechCrunch), so the field-significant sources do not exist; LateX-based software manuals usually are published online, not via editorial committees. The best chance would be to prove that Overleaf is taught at universities (Overleaf itself, not LateX via the Overleaf interface) and that seems like a long shot still. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 12:30, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

I try to summarise below what could count somehow:

The Nature's article would be barely ok to mention.
The review article published by independent researchers in a peer reviewed journal is ok to mention, but will probably not be counted at all.
An article on VentureBeat.
A news article on Society for Scholarly Publishing.
Overleaf is mentioned a fair number of times on The Scholarly Kitchen, including:
- this mention: "Like more established innovations such as Publons, Overleaf, and Figshare, these are all researcher-initiated companies, which is perhaps one key to their success." [9],
- or this one: "Scientists are utilizing workflow tools such as Tetrascience, Hivebench, Figshare, Mendeley, and Overleaf to design and manage their laboratory experiments, gather and organize data, work collaboratively, and write up their findings." [10],
- or this one: "So — if I had money to spare and were a betting woman — I would be investing in organizations like Overleaf (making collaborative authoring easier), Paperhive (ditto for reading), and Hypothes.is (open annotation)." [11].
A blog post on Gigaom.
You seem to value TechCrunch, so maybe being listed in the moderated Crunchbase list of companies would be useful? Honestly, I had removed that reference earlier from the Draft:Overleaf, as it looked quite messy, linking news articles completely unrelated.
Another citation from TechCrunch: "Elsewhere, he lists Sharelatex.com and Writelatex.com as two “well-known competitors” for disciplines like physics and mathematics, where scientists use the LaTeX scientific documentation format to author their papers." [12]. Remember that these two companies became Overleaf.
If you want to see how Overleaf (and ShareLaTeX before) are used in education, you can look at the page TeX in Education from TeX Users Group (TUG), which, according to Wikipedia, is one of the "notable entities in the TeX community". Nearly everything listed on that page is from Overleaf or the company that has merged with Overleaf, ShareLaTeX.
If you want to see it in a book, I have already cited the chapter of a book written by Jeffrey T. Leek, reproduced on his Simply Statistics blog: [13].
In an Inside Higher Ed article Catastrophe-Proof Your Dissertation: "If you’re crunched for time, I suggest trying one of the online LaTeX editors like Overleaf. These sites make writing in LaTeX similar to writing in a conventional word processor and handle all the file structure, compilation, and backups behind the scenes. Some journals have even partnered with these sites to allow submissions through them, which could be particularly handy for STEM fields."
The Head Librarian at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics wrote an article in Inside Higher Ed listing ShareLaTeX as a one of the "recommended digital tools for scholarly research" "for creating collaborative, interactive articles and notebooks". But that's the point: if you recommend it, you buy it of course. But then Wikipedia considers that the opinion of that guy becomes completely meaningless, because he becomes a customer.
CERN has tried Overleaf for a full year before deciding to commit to that platform: "Following a year-long CERN-wide trial of collaborative authoring platforms, Overleaf has been fully available to the CERN Community since 2018." [14] But again, they are a customer of Overleaf, because they have decided that it is the best tool, so their opinion is completely meaningless for Wikipedia. And by the way, that page is an Overleaf workshop, organized by CERN, so does that count as being taught?
It seems that you do not value much what is published on the journal Science. But in their guide How to write your Ph.D. thesis, they cite "Anton Goloborodko, postdoctoral fellow in theoretical biophysics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge": "I am also a big fan of cloud services. I used an online LaTeX editor called Overleaf that allowed me to easily share drafts with my supervisor. I started with a free account, and once I reached the storage limits I paid a tiny fee for 1 month of a “Pro” account."
The official LaTeX website LaTeX Project lists Overleaf and ShareLaTeX (now Overleaf) as online TeX distributions. [15]
A news article from High Tech Deck.
An article on TechRepublic.
An article on Math Vault, with sub-title "OverLeaf — The Popular Choice" in "21st-Century LaTeX".
An article on The Bookseller.
Plus the awards I have already listed on the Draft:Overleaf.

Is that sufficient to prove notability? I have tried to list mostly the sources that seem to be recognised by Wikipedia. So it starts to be quite a significant list now?

I do not understand your comment about Overleaf being a "niche software". The link to Wikipedia:Notability_(software)#Inclusion you include just next clearly states as a notability criteria: "It is discussed in reliable sources as significant in its particular field." So being a niche software cannot be used to claim it does not meet the notability criteria for Wikipedia. Your comment "Wikipedia does not care about that" is actually against the Wikipedia:Notability_(software)#Inclusion policy. MJ1984 (talk) 22:50, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

How do I post a photo

How do I put a photo on a draft with out it looking wierd or in the wrong place — Preceding unsigned comment added by 4kingly (talk • contribs) 22:47, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

4kingly: Howdy, welcome to the Teahouse. You can add an image in article by linking the file.

Get the name of the file you want to embed in your article.
Then add the following to your article:

[[File:The name of your picture, with the file extension|thumb|Size of the picture|right|caption]]

You can adjust the size of the picture by specifying it in pixels: e.g., 200px or 300px.
You can also adjust the position of the picture, where that "right" text is. You can make it "left" or "center".
There's space for captions where it says "caption". Add anything you want there.

For more information, see Help:Pictures. Thanks for editing! –eggofreason^{(talk · contribs)} 22:55, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

Thoughts on sorting discography

Resolved

Right now I'm working on a really, really big article (Melodisc Records) and I might have broken a table. How big can tables support data? --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 00:58, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

To clarify, an unnumbered list item is now popping up before my (unfinished) table in Melodisc Records#Discography. Is that normal? Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 01:02, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi Tenryuu. If there is code inside a table which doesn't belong to a table cell then the code can be rendered before the table. In this case there was missing a pipe to start a table cell after a row was started:

|-
*1104 Sidney Bechet with Humphrey Lyttelton's Band - "Who's Sorry Now" / "[[Sleepy Time Down South]]" (O.419/O.420) [Savoy 745]

PrimeHunter (talk) 01:18, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

PrimeHunter, thanks for catching that. I'll have to scrutinize for the rest of my copyedit. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 01:25, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Gary Loyd Stewart

I draw your attention to the Gary Loyd Stewart page in Wikipedia and ask you to consider: (1) There's very little information here about Gary Stewart. (2) Most of the information here is about Stewart's claim that the Zodiac Killer was his father -- which has now been disproven. He has lied, manipulated, and manufactured clues that have now been exposed. I draw your attention to a documentary (on FX and Hulu) called "The Most Dangerous Animal of All"

I hereby request that this page be reworked to reflect the truth, or taken down completely.

Thank you. ~ Carolyn Overton (redacted) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.75.138.59 (talk) 23:23, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I have removed your personal information for your own protection; it is not wise to post it in this public forum. Gary Loyd Stewart redirects to Zodiac Killer, so I assume you are talking about that article. If you have concerns about information in that article, you should bring them up on the article talk page, Talk:Zodiac Killer. 331dot (talk) 00:19, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

FYI

– A discussion was moved to its own section at #BioViva concerns. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 01:26, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Question about user page

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Scaledish is my user page, but the boxes are messed up. they are inside of each other, and I am not sure how to fix that. in the edit view it looks fine, but when I publish it is all messed up.

If it is possible I would also like the boxes next to each other, because in the edit view each one is a bit farther down than the previous. thanks so much! Scaledish (Chances are I am wrong, sorry :blush:) (talk) 01:34, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Done. Scaledish, welcome to the Teahouse. I've made it look a little nicer (they're not nested in each other now). I'm not sure if that's what you wanted, so feel free to tweak around a bit more.

Tip {{Userboxbottom}} has to be in its own line. See its documentation for more details. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 01:58, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

New article advice

I've not created an article before, but would like to for Quire Cleveland, a highly-praised early music ensemble. It is on a par with Apollo's Fire (which already has a substantial Wikipedia page) and shares many of the same singers. As for notability, a quick search shows these entries:

Would such as these qualify as "reliable sources"? Tmciver (talk) 16:44, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Tmciver, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid that, in my opinion, the answer is No. The only one that appears to be independent of QC is the CD review - but that is of the CD, and says hardly anything about the choir. The rest are all derived from what the choir says.

The question always is "where have people wholly unconnected with the choir, and unprompted by them, chosen to write at some length about the choir, and been published somewhere with a reputation for editorial control and fact checking?"

Unless you can answer that question in the affirmative, at least twice, then the choir is not notable. Sorry. --ColinFine (talk) 17:47, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for advice. What about the cited references for a group like this, then? Are they acceptable? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Trinity_Baroque Tmciver (talk) 20:47, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Would this be considered an acceptable source? https://clevelandclassical.com/ross-duffin-beverly-simmons-talk-about-quire-clevelands-10th-anniversary-season/ Tmciver (talk) 21:09, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

For a different proposed articles, what about these from Plain Dealer and NY Times?: https://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/15/arts/music/an-avant-garde-odyssey-fromles-delices-ensemble-at-columbia.html?smprod&_r=1 https://www.cleveland.com/musicdance/2015/04/clevelands_les_delices_rising.html Tmciver (talk) 21:24, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Tmciver, after you've considered what it says at WP:RS + WP:GNG and what ColinFine said above, if you still can't decide and the sources is not listed at WP:RSP, you can ask at WP:RSN. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 03:28, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Clarification: RSN is for discussing reliability, and suitability of a source in a particular article in a particular context. WT:MUSIC might be the best place to discuss the notability of a particular musician and whether any given source adds to the notability of such a musician. Usedtobecool ☎️ 03:34, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

BioViva concerns

Moved from WP:TH § Gary Loyd Stewart

Dr. Kris Kooper (talk) 00:56, 11 March 2020 (UTC) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BioViva Dr. Kris Kooper (talk) 00:56, 11 March 2020 (UTC) 90% of the information on this page was written by the primary source, the CEO of BioViva. It reads like a promotion or infomercial. Once actual Wikipedia editors found the page, wrote honest material stating it’s pseudoscience, not FDA approved, etc. The page is about a Science Company run out of the primary sources home. The primary source has no scientific degrees. No M.D., No PhD, nor any advanced degree in Genetics, Biology, Chemistry, Physics or any science whatsoever. The primary source does not even have a College degree. The page reads like promotion and an infomercial that is then rebutted by Wikipedia editors. It is embarrassing with false scientific information and makes BioViva sound like an actual science company whilst Wikipedia editors quote Antonio Regalado of M.I.T., Dr. Bradley Johnson, Associate Professor of Pathology and Lab Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Timothy Caulfield, professor in the The Faculty of Law and the School of Public Health at the University of Alberta, George M Martin, professor of pathology at the University of Washington, Duncan Baird, professor of Cancer and Genetics at Cardiff University's School of Medicine whom all state BioViva and it’s unapproved FDA offshore medical tourism treatment is pseudoscience or worse. I hereby request that this page be taken down completely. It is an embarrassment to Wikipedia. Dr.KrisKooper

Please discuss this on the article's talk page and if applicable, nominate it for speedy deletion and put the {{db}} template on the article. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 01:33, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Dr.KrisKooper, do NOT put a deletion template on an article talk page. You have to wait more than a few seconds to get a response. In this case, you posted your opinion and TWO deletion notices on the article talk page at the same time. That's not how Wikipedia works.

Tenryuu, you shouldn't recommend to inexperienced editors (19 edits) that they post deletion notices when they are not familiar with how speedy deletion operates. Send them to policy pages where they can learn about the deletion process, new editors shouldn't be tagging pages for deletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:06, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Liz, my apologies. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 03:29, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Withdrawing from this discussion. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 03:32, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

@Dr. Kris Kooper:, I have tagged the article as needing expert attention. You can seek assistance at WT:WikiProject Medicine, a highly responsive talk page of the Medicine WikiProject on Wikipedia if you lose patience.

Additional tips: On talk pages, start your own section when starting a new discussion. You can create a section header by putting on a new line, at the bottom of the page, the topic of discussion between a pair of equals signs (like this: ==Title of discussion==) and pressing enter to add the content of the discussion in a new line. When you are done adding your comment (not at the beginning of your comment), end it with four tildes (like this ~~~~) to automatically generate your signature with the timestamp of your post.

Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 04:11, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

@Usedtobecool Sorry, new at this, thanks for the instructions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr. Kris Kooper (talk • contribs) 04:25, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

It's overwhelming

I've used wikipedia for years and made a few edits without an account, but finally decided to take the plunge with an account. With all the corona around I may have a lot of time to spend surfing the web as I got exposed to someone that's tested positive. So I've scanned the info that popped up and it's massive. I never thought there was so much to editing honestly because there's a lot of stuff I've seen that either I know was wrong or found out it was wrong if it was something I was interested in and did more reading. It took me a bit to find this coffee house, but I'd love if anyone can tell me what would be some of the top, maybe like 3, articles that I should read through. This is the link for where I've been reading. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Getting_started thanks. Incidentally, I clicked on the edit tab for a page and see what pretty much looks like html. I learned html in the 1980s and do sas programming, but I have to confess that I've got lost looking at the source code. Can't they come up with something easier. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GlobalWarmingIsFalse (talk • contribs) 02:18, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

GlobalWarmingIsFalse, welcome to the Teahouse and I hope you get a negative result. If you want to switch to the Visual Editor you can go to your Preferences → Editing → uncheck "Disable the visual editor while it is in beta".

Alternatively, if you want to continue to edit in source code, consider installing Cacycle's wikEd editor. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 02:36, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello GlobalWarmingIsFalse, WP:V, WP:NPOV and WP:BRD should provide you enough to start editing existing articles, but there is plenty more to creating one. I must point out that your username could get in the way of your editing experience. It would be best if you abandoned this account and registered under a more neutral username. Best! Usedtobecool ☎️ 03:12, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Note that the account wouldn't have to be abandoned - it could be renamed. Useight (talk) 04:14, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Creating a new account is easier and the recommended option for a new editor with very few edits such as in this case. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 04:27, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

@GlobalWarmingIsFalse: Please also see WP:TRUTH. Please sign your messages on talk pages by adding a space and four tildes to the end of the last line of your message, like this:

This is the last line of the message. ~~~~

The four tildes will be automatically converted to a signature that contains your linked username and a timestamp, which helps keep conversations organized. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 04:43, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Nominate for deletion

How do I nominate an image for deletion in a Talk page? Is there a format for this? Typing on mobile view

Talk:Sealing (Mormonism)

Doddyfar (talk)needhelp —Preceding undated comment added 05:08, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Doddyfar, why are you nominating it for deletion? If it's under the intent that it is "obscene," understand that Wikipedia is not censored, in particular, this excerpt:

Some organizations' rules or traditions call for secrecy with regard to certain information about them. Such restrictions do not apply to Wikipedia, because Wikipedia is not a member of those organizations; thus Wikipedia will not remove such information from articles if it is otherwise encyclopedic.

Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 05:44, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Hoping for some clarification

I've been reading all the editing materials between looking up stuff on actual pages. There are about 20 pages that I kinda of keep track. I have to be honest that I'm either confused or simply don't think editing is for me, although I know I could offer some good. On 3 of the pages I watch I overlap with another guy that has me confused about brd and this is what i'm hoping to get some kind of clarity.

On the 3 pages there's a user that no matter what someone does it is reverted. Literally everything. It's confusing because many, but not all, of the changes I think are good. A little by accident I found the talk page and boy some exchanges are scary. The guy is so intractable and two users have essentially said screw it and give up. One apparently tried to complain that the person made too many reversals and the guy got banned for awhile awhile back. But it seems all it did was educate them to wording things and it appears people just give up. To me that's a shame that one person can dominate something like that.

So having said all that, it makes me not even want to edit at all because life is too short and dealing with someone that can't see a balanced view is pretty frustrating. So is editing even worth it? I'm afraid to edit any page because if I take the time and run into someone else like that I know it'd drive me crazy. So is editing even worth it?

Thank you for any input. ILoveTVifitsgood (talk) 05:25, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello and welcome! I am not sure which page you are talking about, as your account looks to be an hour old and this is your only edit. Care to point us to the page in question? Also, seeing as there are 5 million pages, the best strategy is sometimes to move on to a page where you can edit conflict-free.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 05:29, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

ThatMontrealIP, 6 actually

-- Usedtobecool ☎️ 06:22, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

@ILoveTVifitsgood: There's some ambiguity in what you wrote, so it's not clear to me if the "serial-reverter" or the person that reported him was blocked. If it was the person whose behavior you are complaining about, and they are legitimately doing something wrong again, you would help the project by reporting it – we don't want WP:OWN or WP:UNCIVIL behavior running off potential contributions/contributors. However, it may also be that the editor in question is correctly reverting changes that are wrong per, for example, WP:V. While such changes can "look good" at first glance, if they don't comply with policy, they should not remain. If you want more experienced eyes on the problem, just tell us where to look. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 08:27, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

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

Hi I came across this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brathay_Trust and I'm somewhat confused as I understand Brathay Exploration Trust was dissolved in 2016 - https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/03315620 - is there any way to contact the individual who put content up to check the current status of Brathay Trust Many thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.253.106.218 (talk) 12:11, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Looking at their website and Twitter feed they are still active. Brathay Trust and the Brathay Exploration Group have their own pages; maybe you're thinking of the latter? Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 12:40, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Publishing a template to the template name space

Hi, I want to publish a template to the template name space, how do I do that? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vepelza26 (talk • contribs) 09:23, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Vepelza26, anyone can create a template, simply go to the template namespace and create it. I recommend reading H:TQG for more info. Bᴇʀʀᴇʟʏ • ^{Talk to me}∕_{What have I been doing} 09:57, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Vepelza26, I notice that you have been placing content warning boxes on sex-related articles. If the template you have in mind is like the one just reverted here, please understand that such a template would misrepresent Wikipedia policy, especially WP:Wikipedia is not censored detailed at WP:Content disclaimer. See also WP:CSD#T2. • Gene93k (talk) 13:42, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Review edit

My recent contribution on Ghanaian musician Draft:Vudumane was moved to the draft space for lacking verifiable sources. I had made more research and added more sources. Can any experienced Wikipedian be my guide in moving it back?? Geezygee (talk) 22:47, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

Geezygee, welcome to the Teahouse. When you're ready to put it up for review, add {{subst:submit}} to the top of the page. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 23:06, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

Geezygee, the references that I've checked are all based on interviews with Vudumame, and therefore don't qualify as independent. What is needed is several reliable independent sources with extensive discussion of him. Maproom (talk) 23:11, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Maproom and Tenryuu 🐲. I will still lookout for more independent sources. Again, can you check the validity of this draft Draft:Gifty Ayew Asare fit for Wikipedia ?? --Geezygee (talk) 14:10, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

How to add a verified source relating to death information?

I would like to update a page related to a person who has recently deceased. What is considered an appropriate verifiable source of data in this case? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adjamali (talk • contribs) 14:23, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Adjamali, and welcome to the Teahouse! To answer your question, it can be one of many sources, as long as they are considered to be reliable and trustworthy. Basically, a reliable source would be something like the New York Times. Just one question: What page were you referring to? Hope this helps, King of Scorpions 15:12, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Getting email spam offering to write Wikipedia article about me. Not notable in any way.

I've got some spam. First line is " Hello ,We think you're eligible for a Wikipedia profile.! You have great milestones, and online publications are speaking about you. You deserve to be on Wikipedia, and we are here to deliver that for you. " It seems their business model is to charge anyone who will pay to make Wkipedia entries about them. Is there a Wikipedia abuse email address that I can send the spam to so they can get ahead of the curve of a deluge of articles about people with no notability? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.250.79.22 (talk) 10:44, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Unfortunately, this sort of thing happens frequently and there isn't much that can be done about it. Paid editing is not forbidden as long as those engaging in it comply with WP:PAID. Anyone availing themselves of such services should not hand over any money until they see the end result- and understand that the paid editor can make no guarantees (such as writing an article that will not be deleted). 331dot (talk) 10:53, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

First, you, or anyone who receives this sort of junk email, can add it to your spam blacklist (at least if you are receiving your email with an email client that has a spam blacklist - most do but some don't). Second, what might be useful would be a Wikipedia list of these sleazy operations, just for information. Is there such a list? Third, the fact that these paid editing houses are using spam to solicit customers may be a good sign in a perverse way. It may mean that they (the PR firms who do paid editing) aren't getting enough business from real small businesses, and so are having to scrape the bottom of the barrel by spamming. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:48, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Article Referencing Guidelines for Dr. George Ambartsoumian

I am new and the learning curve of wikipedia is pretty steep for me. I really appreciate if you can help me with my chosen article on Dr. George Ambartsoumian. If you can give me an example of what exactly is missing It would be helpful. I found that Dr. George Ambartsoumian had a mention on Canadian Government website as well as EY website which I put in citation but maybe I did it wrong. Please advise and welcome to modify the page for me as its my first I will be really thankful to all members. Thank you in advance for your mentorship! --Junaidbusn170/sandbox (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:39, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

Junaidbusn170, welcome to the Teahouse. Reading the comments the reviewer left behind it seems that while the subject may be notable and thus worthy of an article, other sources would be preferred and I can see why: only 1 of them (the Horizon Weekly page) gives Dr. Ambartsoumian a paragraph, but that's not really enough to be considered a good source. All the other ones mention him in passing (in fact, 4 of the sources lead to the exact same article where he is mentioned as a recipient for an award). Dr. Ambartsoumian can't just be mentioned; he has to be a prominent subject being talked about in an article rather than a passing mention. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 21:45, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

Tenryuu Thanks for you kind reply. I now understand what it meant i.e. the chosen links must be completely about Dr. George Ambartsoumian. I will try to find something about him. I chose Dr. Ambartsoumian because of Ernst & Young and the Canadian Government mentioned him, thinking it would be easy first article. But I was wrong. I would say Thanks to you again. Will look for another page about him. Do you think I need 1 or 2 or more? Should I actually try to contact them that I am writing about them and if they can give me good references? Thanks again You are my Good Great Mentor now. ~~Junaidbusn170/sandbox~~

@Junaidbusn170: I suggest 2 or 3 good sources; that's usually enough to satisfy most new article reviewers. You don't need to contact Dr. Ambartsoumian yourself, and generally that's not recommended as we would like relatively neutral sources.

Also, please sign your posts with 4 tildes (~) at the end, as not doing so prevents me from seeing notifications that you've sent me a response with the {{U}} template. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 22:02, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

I renamed the article to Draft: George Ambartsoumian. We don't need his title. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:16, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

I added two more references and actually found a good one from 2013 and Is it ok to add linkedin? I found that and included it as well for Draft: George Ambartsoumian. I hope this time I signed my reply post properly. Junaidbusn170 (talk) 18:17, 11 March 2020 (UTC) ~~Junaidbusn170/sandbox~~

Adding color to my username

How do I add color to my username when on a talk page? ApChrKey (talk) 17:39, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello, ApChrKey, and welcome to the Teahouse! As far as I know, there's no way to color your signature only on talk pages. To color it in general, however, you go to "Preferences" (at the top right of your screen) and go to "Signatures". You then uncheck the box directly below it. Then, you add the source code. (This part is difficult, my sig renders as King of Scorpions, but its coding is "[[User:King of Scorpions|King]] [[Special:Contribs/King of Scorpions|of]] [[User talk:King of Scorpions#top|Scorpions]]".) If you find this difficult, you can go to WP:Signatures for more information, or ask me (or someone else) for help. Hope this helps, King of Scorpions 17:54, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. Did you know you could do rounded corners? ApChrKey ^Talk 18:17, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Yeesh-your sig is more complex than mine now!! King of Scorpions 18:21, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Need help for creating an article

Hi there, I need help for creating an article which is about a living person, I've already added enough resources to prove the notability criteria. Anyone out there who can guide me in this regard. Jugni (talk) 18:57, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

If you are convinced that your draft at Draft:Amjad Saqib satisfies the requirements, you can submit it for review using the blue "Submit" button. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:34, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

You will, however, need to satisfy yourself and the reviewers that you have addressed the problems that caused previous attempts at Amjad Saqib to be deleted and the creation salted. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:37, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

David Biddulph Thanks for the reply. This is what I'm actually seeking guidance from some expert here to improve the health of my article specially notability criteria. I'm also working on some other articles too and want to learn how to write a perfect one. Jugni (talk) 18:46, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Jugni, try Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Pakistan. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 18:53, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

So far you need to provide sources that he wrote those books, also are you working on your phone? Several sentences are spaced out for no reason and you added some headers without any information below. Remember you can write information that you have sources off, if you don't want to write a header for example "Achievements" don't write it. Editoneer (talk) 13:05, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

Editoneer Thank you so much for your time and reviewing the draft. No I don't make edits on phone. Achievements were removed due to high promotional tone which is still there.I need to work on it. Although I have added enough sources to support the information but same were deleted last time. Could you please guide me of what sources would be acceptable for an author to support his own writing. ? Would highly appreciate your help. Jugni (talk) 17:35, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

If are news that's fine, they are need to be a neutral point of view but if they sound promotional it might not be reliable. Blog posts or other encyclopedias aren't reliable. I want you to visit Wikipedia:Reliable sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Editoneer (talk • contribs) 19:07, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi

Can you check again I made it more notableDraft:Powin Energy — Preceding unsigned comment added by 4kingly (talk • contribs) 19:14, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Afraid not, 4kingly. The sole reference there is an article which quotes somebody from Powin, so it is not independent. Wikipedia is basically not interested in anything at all said by the subject of the article, or their associates. It is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject have chosen, (unprompted by the subject) to write or say about them, and been published in a reliable place.

Notice that Sulfurboy has not just declined the draft, but rejected it, stating that in their opinion, the company is not notable. Since No amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability, you should not continue to spend any time on this unless you can start by finding at least three reliably published sources which talk at some length about Powin, but have no direct input at all from Powin. --ColinFine (talk) 19:25, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello

Plz how Can i help — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.137.6.172 (talk) 19:23, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

there are a lot of things that you can help on but they require to create an account. (most of them not all) ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSA^talk 20:43, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Too many sub-pages for the coronavirus outbreak in Croatia

User AustroHungarian1897 has created several subpages for the aformentioned topic, and I really believe they aren't necessary. The articles have copy-pasted content from the main article, and even if it was original, the amount of data doesn't justify an entire page and would easily fit into the existing article. Would it be okay to mark them for deletion?

These are the articles in question.

Impact of the 2020 coronavirus_pandemic in Croatia

Timeline of the 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Croatia

Template:2020 coronavirus_pandemic in Croatia

TheRealDario04 (talk) 19:41, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

TheRealDario04, welcome to the Teahouse. I suggest going onto the talk pages of the articles in question and propose a merge/deletion request (the former if new content was added). I'd say that once the article becomes big enough the proposal to split them like the other articles can be revisited. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 21:26, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

meaning of (talk) following editor's signature

On talk and view history tabs of articles I find (talk), sometimes in red. What does (talk) mean, and how use it to communicate with editors? Thanks.TBR-qed (talk) 21:30, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

TBR-qed, If a link is in red it means there's nothing on that page. The talk pages for articles are used to discuss issues with the article's formatting or content, not the subject itself. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 22:02, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi TBR-qed. "(talk)" in parentheses is a link to the talk page of a user where you can write a post to that user and often read a reply. You have done this many times.[16] See more at Help:Talk pages. There is no feature to speak to users. Communication is written. A red link means the page does not currently exist because nobody has posted to it yet. You are welcome to create the page by making the first post. Some users add color to links in their signature on signed discussion posts, e.g. Tenryuu above. In this case the color is just their choice and doesn't mean anything, and there may be no "(talk)" link if the user chooses it. The user links in page histories are made automatically and cannot be personalized. They are not called signatures. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:10, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Question on a citation

So I am a student at a school that is responding to the coronavirus. I received a mass phone call and email (From the school) on a cancelation/information about the coronavirus (related with the school) and the school assembles a team for the virus. I know the information is correct and notable enough to mention on the school's Wikipedia page, but I would like to know how to cite it (or at least disclose that the information is correct). Thanks for the help. Elijahandskip (talk) 00:18, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Elijahandskip. I'm sure that seems like notable information about the school right now, but on a larger scale (of either place or time) is it really noteworthy? Within a few weeks all the schools in many parts of the world - maybe all the schools everywhere - will have to take action about the virus. Is there something special about your school that will make their action remarkable?

But in any case, unless you can cite a reliably published source (that any reader, anywhere, at any time, can in principle get hold of to verify) then the information should not go into a Wikipedia article. See WP:V. --ColinFine (talk) 00:39, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi Elijahandskip! A few of us at the Wikipedia project on universities recently discussed the exact issue of whether to include responses to COVID-19 in schools' articles; here is that discussion, which you are welcome to contribute to if you are inclined. The consensus so far seems to be that one Wikipedia policy, WP:NOTNEWS, which is basically what ColinFine summarized above, means that we should not include that information. Cheers, Sdkb (talk) 05:17, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

UPLOADING ARTICLES

I uploaded my first article just now. and i tried to search it on the web, why can't i View my article. is there anything i missed upon editing it? What next step should I take to take control of my uploaded article — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rodolfo B Gumban Jr II (talk • contribs) 06:31, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Rodolfo B Gumban Jr II, your "post" has been deleted as:

it was not in its own article space
that is NOT what Wikipedia is used for. If you're looking to promote yourself, consider social media sites like Facebook or LinkedIn. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 07:04, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello Rodolfo B Gumban Jr II, please see WP:Your first article. Not everyone can have an article on Wikipedia, the subjects need to be WP:Notable. And even if you are notable, WP:Writing about yourself is strongly discouraged. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 07:51, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

And even if you published an article anyway, it will not show up on google before an experienced editor reviews and approves it for indexing by search engines. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 07:53, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

newbie with COI

Hi - I made updates to a colleague's page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenneth_A._Dodge and was subsequently told that I had a conflict of interest. I added that to my talk page, per instructions. But honestly, I find all of the information and links overwhelming. So what happens now? Can someone here review what I did and decide if it's copacetic? The edits were all about updating his academic work since the last time the page was edited (by whom, I do not know). Thanks! OhSabrina (talk) 22:57, 11 March 2020 (UTC)OhSabrina

More common that COI statement goes on your User page. I do not see any problems with what you added to the article. David notMD (talk) 02:31, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

OhSabrina, please use WP:Edit requests going forward so that all your contributions are policy-compliant and the content gets quality-controlled going in. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 08:13, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Article rejected for "reliable sources"

Hi There,

I had a new article rejected for lack of "reliable sources" yet each claim I made was backed up wit NYT, Variety, and major publications and magazines. I don't understand. The article was for Gabriel Sloyer, an actor in Red Dead Redemption 2. Many of the things mentions are already on Wikipedia pages I linked to as well -- all cited. What do it do? "This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources."

Help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by BrunetteMarilyn (talk • contribs) 18:30, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

BrunetteMarilyn, IMDB is not acceptable. Perhaps, the fact that it was number 1 had something to do with it. You have already left a message on the reviewer's talk page. I would wait for their answer. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 18:37, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Second, third and fourth refs (I did not look at the others) are "in name only," meaning that Sloyer's name appears, but nothing more than the fact that he was in the cast. David notMD (talk) 19:02, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Huh. There seem to be reliable sources about Gabriel Sloyer [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22]. ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSA^talk 19:52, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

I looked at comparable pages for other cast members of Red Dead Redemption 2, as well as other actors who were in the same shows, and modeled after their pages. I cited most of those sources you mentioned CaptainMedusa at the end so I was kind of confused. Also for non RDR2 acting, I tried to cite roles referenced in NYT, Variety, etc. BrunetteMarilyn (talk) 20:57, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

notifying Usedtobecool and David notMD. ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSA^talk 21:07, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Fifth ref confirms he is/was in a play, but has no content about him. Sixth ref does not even mention him by name. The first three recommended by CAPTAIN MEDUSA are interviews, which Wikipedia does not accept as establishing notability. My advice is get rid of all these citations and see if there remain two or three that are really ABOUT him at length. Also, finding similarly written and referenced articles is not support. See Wikipedia:Other stuff exists. It is possible those should be nominated for deletion. David notMD (talk) 21:54, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you this is very helpful. Are you saying I should get rid of the interviews, with Variety entirely? What about other wikipedia pages that already reference him? As for other actors in the video game such as Alex McKenna, Rob Wiethoff, Steve J. Palmer (and actors generally) how do you confirm that they were in those movies and shows other than imdb? Do you use reviews? Link to the movie itself somehow where the actor is in the credits? Thank you! BrunetteMarilyn (talk) 06:23, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

BrunetteMarilyn, I will simply add that sources can be reliable and still not add to notability. Interviews are one such kind of sources. Drafts are evaluated for notability, so sources that do not contribute to notability are ignored in the review even when they are reliable, support claims in the draft and would be needed when it becomes an article. When there are many sources that do not add to notability, they can turn the ones that do into needles in the haystack. You can solve this by removing these sources and adding them only after the draft is accepted or by providing a list of a few (WP:THREE is usually enough) sources that you think prove notability of the subject, such as by listing them in the draft's talk page. I would not bother adding works from the subject which can be verified only from WP:Primary sources as they do not contribute to notability. You can add them after the draft is accepted. For now, list only the works that have reliable secondary sourcing. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 08:22, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Rex Al Opusunju, D. Div

I need to know how to align text and pictureSpringoflove3 (talk) 16:47, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello Springoflove3, it is unclear what you mean. Usually, when you add images to your article, the text automatically wraps around the image. Please note that your user talk page is intended for communication between you and other users. Please use your sandbox for testing and WP:DRAFT if you want to write a draft article. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 08:27, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

need admin help please for page vandal

I lost my account and tip page with a computer crash - majorly stinks. Without my cheat sheet I don't know the links for where I'm supposed to go, but Bryan Callen is being vandalized by an ip user (actually I think 2). Can admin please look and protect the page please. Thanks.Yrwefilledwithbugs (talk) 08:46, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Yrwefilledwithbugs Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. That article is being looked into. In the future, vandalism can be reported to WP:AIV. 331dot (talk) 08:51, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. Can I ask another question. On the login page it says that there's a way to recover one's password if you setup an email. I don't see any link for trying to recover. Am I just blind. Thanks again. Yrwefilledwithbugs (talk) 08:56, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

The "Forgot your password?" appears underneath the Login button. 331dot (talk) 09:06, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Help - In references no. 4 & 13

4- http://www.insaindia.res.in/nationacomm.php. Missing or empty |title= (help) 13 - http://sbcihq.in/d-p-burma-memorial-lecture-award/. Missing or empty |title= (help)

Sir/ Madam,

I want to insert these links. But it is mentioning as missing or empty title which I am not getting how to alter.

Please advise me.

Thanks,

Shruti — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shruti Malaker (talk • contribs) 09:14, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Shruti Malaker Greetings. Believe this - Chandrima Shaha is the article. Fixed. Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~).. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 09:55, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Copyright clarification on Templates and Modules and text

I ordinarily think of templates and modules (sometimes even transcluded pages in the project namespace) as "software" that elsewhere would often use the GFDL. But almost all content in all namespaces other than the file namespace is textual.

So is such "software" under CC-BY-SA?
If I copy any into my project fork, can I remove headers that name contributers? Never figured why these were in the "software" seeing as we do have page history of contributions. At best they should be in the talk page. Any-who - pet peeve
The real question, the footer has
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License;
What exactly is meant by text? Only article space WP:CONTENT, or anything of a textual nature under the sun?

Thanks - Dpleibovitz (talk) 05:55, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

@Diannaa, Money emoji, MER-C, and Justlettersandnumbers:, can any of you help answer this? I am trying this thing where I ping editors who I think might be able to help (for certain kinds of questions). Please let me know if this is unwelcome. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 08:05, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Dpleibovitz, The "Software" would be available under CC BY SA 3.0, as should be everything "under the sun" on Wikipedia. In my understanding, text= everything (sans images), so everything is under an appropriate license; even these very words. (I mean, I'm like 95% sure that's right, other copyright wizards feel free to prove me wrong!)

I'm not really sure what you mean by If I copy any into my project fork, can I remove headers that name contributers?- what "project fork" and "headers that name contributors" are you referring to? Money emoji💵^{Talk💸Help out at CCI!} 11:30, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

dpleibovitz My mirrorish project fork (not a WikiProject), and a page I'm about to edit can be found here. The start of Module:Asbox names users with links to Wikipedia. I would prefer to delete such headers in modules, though in templates I convert Wikipedia links to use examples such as {{fullurl:w:Module:Asbox}} syntax or [[w:User:CodeHydro]] ('w' is my interwiki prefix to Wikipedia). Do note that every page in my fork has an attribution box (as a {{Top icon}}) with links back to Wikipedia. Actually, I wouldn't mind an assessment of my compliance to all licensing... I did add my wiki to WP:Mirrors_and_forks/VWXYZ#Wikimergic.

Roller coaster articles

Can I still make roller coaster articles? -- Wacky Windjammer 05:41, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

You are not the first (nor the last) editor to enter Wikipedia at high speed. Appears you created your account yesterday and have already made close to 50 edits to existing roller coaster and other amusement park ride articles. The advice you got on your Talk page was please slow down. Several (many?) of your changes may be inappropriate. Please allow time for other editors who watch those pages to respond to your edits. If it turns out that your edits are being reverted, accept that as advice on future edits. David notMD (talk) 12:29, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello All - Best Editor for Newbie

Hi All,

Thanks as I received invitation to join TeaHouse. What an excellent way to greet newbie. I am doing fair bit of self-learning. Adding to Corona Virus for Singapore and few others, as I feel this is a social responsibility for all of us. Editing chart manually and table using Visual Editor was great. May I know which editor is best recommended for newbie? Regards -PBT — Preceding unsigned comment added by PayBackThyme (talk • contribs) 04:54, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

PayBackThyme, Visual editor is intended for people unfamiliar with coding and is currently highly limited in functionality. I have been using source editing since my very first day. I am not sure any editor is tailored for a wikipedia newbie, per se. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 06:27, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your suggestion Usedtobecool. I will prefer to stick to manual editor in this case. PayBackThyme (talk) 07:00, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Shameless plug: PayBackThyme, if you're sticking to source code editing, may I suggest Cacycle's wikEd editor? It adds buttons to the top of the editing window to instantly add table and image codes. It also colourises the code to make it easier to view. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 23:28, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Tenryuu Thanks for your suggestions. I have started using it and it looks great to me.PBT 12:58, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

EKVITA question

Hi, how are you hope you're doing well... I would like to kindly ask main purpose of getting a rejection for the article we entered because it's written that there is a issue of "promoting company" but it's a consulting company as Big four members in Azerbaijan how can i edit it for becoming acceptable? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Baghirovmusa (talk • contribs) 12:29, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Hey Baghirovmusa. The short answer is that the draft is written like a commercial or official press release. Wikipedia is required to describe subjects from a neutral point of view. The short answer for how you get the draft accepted is to rewrite it in a way that is neutral, although that can be exceedingly difficult to do for some, especially those which have an outside connection with the subject. If you do have such an outside connection, you should carefully review Wikipedia's guidance on managing conflicts of interest and take care to abide by it. GMG ^talk 14:21, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Pictures are deleted and maintenances template appear need help

Uttam Neupane pages's picture has deleted and maintenances template appeared. How may i get it back in page again?

please reply.

Courtesy link: [[:{{{1}}}]] Uttam Neupane

@Petter noca: Please see this archived deletion request on Wikimedia Commons (potential copyright violation). You seem like you have a close relationship with Neupane and that would easily taint the article's NPOV. That would constitute a conflict of interest. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 14:33, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

there is message box appear on page. A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject. It may require cleanup to comply with Wikipedia's content policies, particularly neutral point of view. Please discuss further on the talk page. (March 2020) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

how can i remove this?

A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject. It may require cleanup to comply with Wikipedia's content policies, particularly neutral point of view. Please discuss further on the talk page. (March 2020) (Learn how and when to remove this template message) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Petter noca (talk • contribs) 14:55, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Petter noca, assuming you mean Uttam Neupane, your first step is to discuss it at Talk:Uttam Neupane with Melcous who added or at least restored the template. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:38, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Petter noca, you have already asked this question earlier (albeit slightly paraphrased) on here. Please discuss this on the article's talk page. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 16:17, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

"Coronavirus disease 2019" page: first line is unintelligible

Don't know if this is the correct venue to point out a mistake in a page, but... re: Wikipedia page "Coronavirus disease 2019" Beginning of first line: "40 out of 50 people how eat butt have Coronavirus disease dormant" huh? I am interested in the topic and trying to figure out what the article is trying to say. I would have contacted the author directly if i knew how. Where is the author listed in a Wiki page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scott Blair H (talk • contribs) 16:08, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Scott Blair H, thank you for taking the time. That's just a simple vandalism, an unavoidable consequence of being an encyclopedia that anyone can edit. Next time you see something that needs fixing, you can edit it yourself even. That's how we beat them. Cheers! Usedtobecool ☎️ 16:20, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy link: [[:{{{1}}}]] Coronavirus disease 2019

Scott Blair H, welcome to the Teahouse. Articles are written by multiple editors. Each article's edit history can be accessed by clicking on the history link at the top of the page. I took a look at the article and can't find any mention of what you saw; most likely it had been reverted.

You can contact editors by notifying them with a ping or leaving a message on their talk page (can be accessed by clicking on the "talk" link next to their username.

Please remember to sign your posts with ~~~~ at the end of your post. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 16:24, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

That was a vandal who has been blocked and edits reverted. See from page's history, the last editor to be blocked. Usedtobecool ☎️ 16:29, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Ah, I see it now. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 16:36, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

new article created need to update title

the title included the word "draft" how do I update the title of the page to remove this word. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FanofTylerCrumley (talk • contribs) 14:23, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

FanofTylerCrumley, you need to get it approved by a reviewer before it can be moved into the main articlespace. If you feel like it is ready to be reviewed add {{subst:submit}} to the top of the draft; I strongly suggest you check your sources are both reliable and make the subject the main focus before you do so. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 14:36, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Tyler Crumley submitted, and declined. Reasons given by reviewer. David notMD (talk) 17:14, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Recreating deleted pages

Hi,

What's the general protocol for recreating pages that were recently deleted, given that the subject is notable and the new draft meets Wikipedia policies? Thanks. FelixtheNomad (talk) 00:01, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

FelixtheNomad, hello. What is the title of the deleted article? ThatMontrealIP (talk) 02:01, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

FelixtheNomad, the general answer without an specific example is: You are free to create an article. If it is substantially similar to the one previously deleted by community discussions, it will be speedily deleted and you should not try that again if that happens. Safer would be to create a draft and submit it via WP:AFC. Still safer would be to ask the deleting admin to send you a copy or restore it to draft or your userspace so you can work on it further, and move forward depending on their answer. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 08:11, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

@ThatMontrealIP:, no specific article. Before creating an article, I usually search for any existing drafts and the deletion log. I've found a deletion log for quite a few entries.

@Usedtobecool: Thank you, this is helpful. Wanted to know just in case I want to recreate a previously deleted article. 18:36, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

What happens if i submit to review my article and then rejected

Hi,

I already repair my article based on (talk, - talk). However, what happens if I submit my article to review and then it is rejected, can I repair and resubmit again?

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Teahouse&action=edit&section=39

kind regards

Sudrajat — Preceding unsigned comment added by MISudrajat (talk • contribs) 16:11, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

MISudrajat Yes, you are able to modify and resubmit. However, in the article's current state, I would suggest it not be submitted quite yet. The referencing is probably OK, but some parts of it would need cleanup. It's a good start, it just needs a little more work before submission. Hope this helps, King of Scorpions 16:20, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

MISudrajat, there are two levels of declining drafts. When a draft is declined, it means that it isn't suitable for the encyclopedia yet, but you can still resubmit it after making changes. A draft can also be rejected, which means it can not be resubmitted, except by reviewers themselves. This generally happens when a topic is clearly unsuitable for the encyclopedia, and typically is not used for the first submission of a draft, only resubmissions. ~~ QRA: Alex Noble - talk 16:29, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

As User:Alex Noble implies, most reviewers seldom Reject a draft, and almost never Reject a draft on what looks like it might be a reasonable topic. Normally reviewers Decline a draft, which permits the submitter to improve it and resubmit it. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:52, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Nice discussion, thank you very much for this information and for reviewing my article. I will improve it again. MISudrajat (talk). —Preceding undated comment added 22:11, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi, I already made some changes and clean up my article content. Can I submit it for review now? or you can give me an advice which part that I must change/repair. King of Scorpions can you give me some advice MISudrajat MISudrajat (talk) 15:34, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

@MISudrajat: I may not be in the best position to give you advice (having been here a little less than 2 months). However, from what I've noticed, your article likely will not be accepted since a few of the references do not specifically talk about the SCENT program(me). I would suggest finding references that specifically talk about the SCENT program. On the more trivial side, the article does not quickly get to the point on what the program does; that could be reworded, although it isn't a major issue. There are also a few minor errors, but I could just copyedit those. I hope you find this advice helpful. King of Scorpions 20:30, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Article Declined

I recently have received an declined article. What I have done wrong? — Preceding unsigned comment added by RuiMoreiraViolist (talk • contribs) 18:15, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

First of all, User:RuiMoreiraViolist, you forgot to sign your post. Put four tildes after your post as a signature. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:17, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Second, you didn't identify the article, which was User:RuiMoreiraViolist/sandbox.

Third, the article doesn't specify how the subject satisfies any of the musical notability criteria. Maybe User:Sulfurboy can add to that. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:21, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

ThanksRobert McClenon, I'm happy to chime in, RuiMoreiraViolist. We need to see significant coverage of the subject by reliable, secondary sources WP:GNG or they need to pass the guidelines in WP:MUSICBIO. If you feel the subject (you) passes one of those guidelines, it needs to be clearly demonstrated with a reliable source. We also, highly discourage people from writing about subjects that have a close or financial connection to. I've posted a message to this effect on your talk page. Sulfurboy (talk) 18:27, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, User:Sulfurboy - I hadn't noticed that the draft was an autobiography. If I had noticed, I might have been more critical in my comments. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:16, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

I made a few minor formatting edits. I found a couple of items about him in the foreign press, so he may pass notability. Both publications have articles but I don't know how reliable they are.[[23]] [[24]]. I'll put them in the talk and hopefully an independent Portugeuse or Spanish speaking editor can help. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 19:20, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

"Rui Massena" Results: 303 @ google.com/search mostly video, FB, and music sales
"Rui Massena" Results: 0 @ es.wikipedia.org
"Rui Massena" Results: 15 @ pt.wikipedia.org , RuiMoreiraViolist, try writing a page there?

T3g5JZ50GLq (talk) 20:24, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

The items existing its only in portuguese and spanish but most in portuguese because we are portuguese.--RuiMoreiraViolist (talk) 20:44, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

latifah75

Disregard

– OP has been blocked. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 20:54, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Lil.Wayne/Authors — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ameka Modeste (talk • contribs) 17:33, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Ameka Modeste, welcome to the Teahouse. What exactly is your question? Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 19:33, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

How to add photo within the page

Hello, I know this is an awkward kind of question but I wanted to know how to add photos to a page while I have photos of that place. I have lots of photos of Raithuwa but failed to upload that. Thanks in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AskParvez (talk • contribs) 19:26, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

@AskParvez: Welcome to the Teahouse. You can upload photos by clicking on the "Upload file" link on the sidebar to the left. Before you do so, please read WP:UPIMAGE and double-check that you have permission to upload it, making sure specifically that you clearly [establish] that the copyright status of each intended upload is appropriate for a free-content encyclopedia and when uploading, you include with clear labeling as to its origin and copyright status. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 19:32, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

AskParvez, Please note that when you click on the"upload link" on the sidebar to the left,, you will see a very prominent "Click here to start the Upload Wizard"

That is almost certainly NOT what you want. That will upload files to Wikipedia, which may be what you think you want but it is very rarely the right option. Assuming these are files for which you are the copyright holder and you are willing to freely license, you should look on that page for "Commons wizard" to upload to Commons. S Philbrick (Talk) 21:01, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Comma(s) in article title "Greenwood, New York insurrection of 1882"

I moved a page from Greenwood, New York, insurrection of 1882 to Greenwood, New York insurrection of 1882 in this edit.

Another user is questioning this, stating that per MOS:COMMA a second comma is needed. I responded here that I don't think that MOS:COMMA is applicable in this section for a couple of reasons.

Could you help us out, please, do you think that there should be a comma after "New York" in the article title according to WP guidelines include Wikipedia:Article titles.

Thanks so very much!–CaroleHenson (talk) 01:36, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

@CaroleHenson: To me, the MOS clearly states that it is needed. From the MOS: "[...] the rest of the MoS, particularly § Punctuation, applies also to the title.". The MOS part on commas and geography applies. RudolfRed (talk) 02:03, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks so much for the quick reply, RudolfRed

I am hearing you that punctuation guidelines in the MOS apply to Article titles. (I will toss that around a bit, since there aren't phrases/sentences in article titles as in the punctuation examples. But, I can see that it applies to apostrophes, punctuation for Jr...)

Regarding this article, though, are you also saying that Greenwood, New York, insurrection of 1882, with the comma after New York, is the correct title?–CaroleHenson (talk) 02:12, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

I didn't mean to be rude about the "toss that around a bit" comment -- I am processing is what I meant to say.–CaroleHenson (talk) 02:52, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

@CaroleHenson: Yes, there is a comma after New York. Punctuation and other styles do apply to non-sentence clauses (e.g., titles and captions) as well as sentences unless otherwise specified (i.e., no trailing period). —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 04:54, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Okay, thanks so much. I still don't understand why the second comma is needed, but I'm rolling with your response. Much appreciated!–CaroleHenson (talk) 05:01, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

CaroleHenson, the meaning changes a little with the comma. Is it:

An insurrection that took place in Greenwood, New York, in the year 1882, (before move) or
The New York insurrection of 1882 that's called Greenwood? (after move) Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 05:13, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Hey! Thanks, Tenryuu, the lightbulb

went on!–CaroleHenson (talk) 05:20, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

@CaroleHenson: At the risk of "talking past the sale"

, it helps to think of the state in a "city, state," pair or year in a "month day, year," as a parenthetical, modifying the city or date. "Greenwood, New York," can be thought of as "Greenwood (New York)" using commas instead of parens to surround the parenthetical. Now that I hunted for it, I see that Comma#In dates and Comma#In geographical names confirm this. It doesn't explain, though, why no commas surround the year in DMY-format dates (e.g., 12 March 2020). Oh well. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 00:01, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

AlanM1, it absolutely does help! I appreciate it. I can use all the help I can get. I have never thought of an article title in terms of sentence structure. Thanks so much for ensuring clarity... and now I have a rule to help me remember this!–CaroleHenson (talk) 00:11, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

CEO Change For Black Hills Energy

I have been trying to merely change the CEO for Black Hills Corp. I have done the Request Edit protocal...How long before the change appears???Can someone help?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Noelsnibbor (talk • contribs)

Noelsnibbor Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. What you did was create your own request template, not use one on the article talk page. You need to go to the article talk page of the article you wish to suggest an edit to and place the template on that talk page(as you did here, though I deactivated it so it would not show up as a request to edit here).

I assume you are making an edit request because of a conflict of interest; please read WP:COI and WP:PAID for information on formal disclosures you are required to make. 331dot (talk) 10:48, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Link: Black Hills Corporation.

@Noelsnibbor: It was changed to Linden Evans over eight days ago, here. If you're not seeing it, make sure you clear your browser cache (Ctrl+F5 on most browsers). If you're talking about what appears in sites outside Wikipedia (like a Google search), Wikipedia has no control over that – it can often take time for them to update. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 00:43, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Category:Summer camps in Canada

Hi, Just wondering how we might have our camp linked to this page? www.campnutimik.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheRevEis (talk • contribs) 12:20, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

TheRevEis, ~~I'm not sure which page you're referring to~~ sorry I overlooked the title, but linking to "your" camp may be seen as WP:SPAM and is almost always a bad idea.

If there is an article on your camp, then please don't edit it - it would be seen as a Conflict of interest, and such editing is highly discouraged. Sorry about that, but thanks for visiting the Teahouse! Cheers, tLoM (The Lord of Math) (Message) 13:13, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Besides if you want it to appear in a category it must be in the form of articles. Sorry, but thanks! tLoM (The Lord of Math) (Message) 13:15, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

@TheRevEis: There does not appear to be a Wikipedia article named "Camp Nutimik" or mention of it anywhere on Wikipedia. Categories are used to categorize existing Wikipedia articles only. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 01:13, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Question

Where do I go to report a possible attempted hack on my account? Jerm (talk) 00:47, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

@Jerm:. I assume it didn't work. In most cases you can and should simply ignore it (after ensuring your password is good). Consider that someone might try and reset your password, or attempt to log in with your username, believing it's actually their account. If it's part of a mass attack, the chances are some other relevant person will have noticed. Or, if you have the IP address from someone repeatedly attempting to reset your password, you can get probably someone to block it. If you don't have a go-to admin, checkuser, or steward for this, WP:ANI might be the appropriate place. But people trying to get into the wrong account is fairly common and normally nothing more needs to be done (also consider WP:2FA). -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 01:18, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

How should you call attention to a backlogged maintenance category?

So, I sometimes do NPOV work, and I got to Category:All articles with a promotional tone to find the non-NPOV articles. However, this has a growing backlog of nearly 25,000 pages! So, I was wondering, what is the proper place to call attention to backlogged categories? Thanks, King of Scorpions 23:14, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

King of Scorpions, you could go to the WP:NPOVN for that. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 02:41, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Please specify clearly - Help - In references no. 4 & 13

Shruti Malaker Greetings. Believe this - Chandrima Shaha is the article

4- http://www.insaindia.res.in/nationacomm.php. Missing or empty |title= (help) 13 - http://sbcihq.in/d-p-burma-memorial-lecture-award/. Missing or empty |title= (help)

Sir/ Madam,

I want to insert these links. But it is mentioning as missing or empty title which I am not getting how to alter.

Thanks,

Shruti Malaker (talk) 08:18, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

@Shruti Malaker: Your issue was resolved earlier today, as mentioned at Wikipedia:Teahouse#Help - In references no. 4 & 13. I don't understand why both of you have written "believe this". —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 08:27, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Help - In references no. 4

I want to change this link page from:

web|url=http://www.insaindia.res.in/nationacomm.php%7Ctitle=INSA :: Indian National Commission for History of Science|website=www.insaindia.res.in|access-date=2020-03-12}}</ref>

to - http://www.insaindia.res.in. Retrieved 2020-03-12. Missing or empty |title= (help)

Shruti Malaker (talk) 11:36, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

@Shruti Malaker: I suppose you just need to remove the /nationacomm.php part (or, better, replace it with a single space character). --CiaPan (talk) 11:55, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

What template would I use for unplaced references?

Hi, I've come across an article which has a list of references, however its citations aren't listed in the text at all. Instead, they are all sitting about at the bottom. The article in question is the LF-58 article. Thanks!
Leiovus (talk) 12:06, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Leiovus, These are what are called general references, and are sometimes used on smaller articles. I've removed the redundant marks from the reflist.

The template you would use, which I've placed, is {{No footnotes}}. ~~ QRA: Alex Noble - talk 12:26, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Understood, thank you so much! - Leiovus (talk) 12:30, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Redirects

Hello, I would like to change https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jamie_Dean&redirect=no so that it redirects to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Dean_(disambiguation). I took a look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion, but it is a bit complicated. AE3yia1AJeQ (talk) 14:31, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Mathematics

Lil.Wayne/Keys — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ameka Modeste (talk • contribs) 13:30, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Is this about Lil Wayne and if so, is there a question? David notMD (talk) 13:46, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

@David notMD and Ameka Modeste: I suppose it has something to do with Ameka's contributions to Talk:Lil Wayne... Just guessing. --CiaPan (talk) 14:02, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Ameka Modeste, this is the third time you have posted something like this in the Teahouse, with one being rolled back. If you want to test out editing, please go to your Sandbox. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 14:39, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Dorian Holley

I put this article up for GA Review and delisted it last month; there was no user action on the page during the GA review process. I kept it on my watchlist, though. Since March 3, this article has been edited by no fewer than six new accounts, many of them on their first day of editing. This is not a particularly high-visibility page, probably even less so since GA delisting, and I am struggling to come up with a reason why it should so suddenly be subject to new editing. The editors are not vandalizing or doing anything improper; it's just... strange. A couple of the editors shortly thereafter started or began drafting seemingly well-curated new articles (see Zjhin (since deleted), Selina Thompson, Draft: Passage AI). I'm here not because of any particular concern - just wondering if anyone else regards this as remarkable and odd, and notices anything suspicious that I'm missing. Thanks. Chubbles (talk) 13:18, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Note: I guess this is probably the wrong place to ask about this, but I don't know what would be a better venue. It's not an ANI concern, and posting to the talk page isn't going to get any eyeballs on it, so I'll take suggestions as to what might be a good alternate forum. Chubbles (talk) 14:54, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

How was my edit? Didn't appear

Hi, I tried to edit the History of Nepal page by removing some obvious nonsense added there. But the content I removed reappeared if I logged out or refreshed the page. I went to go back and remove it again, but in the edit window it wasn't there. Did I actually remove it or not? How come it reappeared instead of permanently going? I'm finding Wikipedia daunting to start so could someone review my other edits as well? Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 314WPlay (talk • contribs) 16:59, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

It seems to me that you removed the nonsense (thank you), and it's gone. Have you tried "refresh" in your browser? Maproom (talk) 17:03, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Yep, - the edit worked, I think you're just looking at a cached version of the page. Open it again in a fresh tab, or reload it. I've had a look at your other contribs, they look good - welcome aboard. GirthSummit _(blether) 17:05, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

article for submission -- questions

I am new to Wiki, want to create a Wikipage for our company's CEO. I've disclosed that conflict of interest on my user page. I believe what I have written takes a neutral point of view.

Two questions to that end 1) I saved a draft to work on later, and yet someone was able to review it and spike it. If it wasn't ready for review, why can someone delete it? That seems so foolish. 2) Here is the portion of the draft I had written. It is sourced with reliable, verifiable third-party sources. Only the most menial facts were sourced by our company website, which is within Wiki policy. There is nothing written that isn't fact-based and cited. Can someone tell me what is wrong with it?

Thank you in advance for any reply and guidance.

Collapsing

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Jayson Waller (born Dec. 5, 1979) is an entrepreneur and founder of POWERHOME Solar, an energy efficiency and solar panel installation company based in Mooresville, North Carolina. Waller was a top sales manager for Verizon Wireless and owned ISI Alarms, a home security company, before becoming co-owner of PowerHome Technologies, another home security business[1]. He branched off from that to begin POWERHOME Solar in 2014, and has been the CEO since. Waller has overseen extensive growth at POWERHOME, with the company being ranked No. 100 among the 2019 Inc. 5000 list of the fastest-growing private companies in America[2]. This is the second time for POWERHOME to be ranked among the top 100 in the last three years, as it was ranked No. 96 in 2017[3]. POWERHOME is also ranked No. 6 nationally among residential rooftop solar installers[4]. The growth came after POWERHOME lost $1 million in its first year of operation[5]. Waller’s success has earned him multiple awards, including a 2019 EY Entrepreneur of Year Southeast Award in the Emerging Services category[6]. He also has been named one of the Most Admired CEOs of 2020[7] and one of five Champions of the New Economy in 2019[1]. Waller is the face of the POWERHOME brand and has filmed commercials with the Detroit Youth Choir, the Detroit Lions and Cleveland Browns. His True Underdog podcast shares his entrepreneurial story and that of other successful entrepreneurs, public-influencers, athletes and celebrities[8]. He seeks to motivate others who may be going through struggles. With a humble upbringing, Waller says that when he grew up, others gave him a feeling that he was less than them, and that motivated him to change that perception by becoming successful[9]. Waller is a champion for the community, helping guide efforts to assist members of the military through the company’s associations with the Lifetime TV miniseries Military Makeover[10] and Major League Baseball star Justin Verlander’s Wins for Warriors Foundation[11]. Waller also helped his company form a partnership with the GivePower Foundation to donate $40 of every solar project it installs to fund clean drinking water projects in areas of need across the world. The solar-powered desalination systems installed with these funds can provide clean water to up to 35,000 people a day[12]. Waller also has earned three gold Globee Awards, two for Professional of the Year in the Energy & Utilities and the U.S. categories, and one as Entrepreneur of the Year[13]. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rogerkuznia (talk • contribs) 13:14, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Rogerkuznia Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. All edits to literally every page on Wikipedia are visible in the Recent Changes feed, this includes Drafts, and is likely how your draft was seen. In addition, the speedy deletion criterion used to delete your draft can be used on any page where it is determined to apply. I must concur with the reason for the deletion; the text of your deleted draft contained much promotional language; "Waller has overseen extensive growth at POWERHOME", "Waller is a champion for the community", just as two examples. It is true that some information about a subject can be cited to primary sources, but notability can only be determined though significant coverage in independent reliable sources. You've cited many of your CEO's accomplishments, but the sources don't seem to really be about him personally or otherwise do not give him significant coverage. Please read Your First Article.

Lastly, while you declared a COI, you need to comply with the stricter paid editing policy. 331dot (talk) 13:27, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

A Speedy deletion was enacted. Reason given: "A tag has been placed on Draft:Jayson Waller, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic." I agree 100%. Much of what you have posted above is subjective/promotion contant about Waller. In addition, you have created a draft Draft:POWERHOME Solar which has no references that meet the Wikipedia criteria of establishing corporate notability. So I expect when you submit that, it will be declined. David notMD (talk) 13:29, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Rogerkuznia, it might help you to understand what's going on if I explain that Wikipedia has very little interest in what the subject of an of an article has said, and absolutely no interest in what the subject of an article wants to say. It is only interested in what people who are wholly unconnected with the subject have chosen to say about the subject, and been reliably published. Almost nothing published, said, or written by Waller, by Powerhome, or by any other company he is associated with, is relevant to a Wikipedia article about him. --ColinFine (talk) 17:32, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Revert

Resolved

– OP blocked. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 15:55, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

I tried to edit wikipedia but someone reverted my edit. The explanation he left on my talk page is that the edit summary was blank. What do I do now? AE3yia1AJeQ (talk) 14:38, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

It is not particularly useful to ask the same thing in three different places. The article's talk page is the best place. (And as I just wrote there, no, the reason was not a blank edit summary, and the template placed on your user talk page does not imply that it was.)

In any case, you should not make any more edits to any Wikipedia pages until you have addressed and disclosed your conflict of interest, as explained on your user talk page. Thank you. --bonadea contributions talk 14:43, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy link: [[:{{{1}}}]] Young blood transfusion

AE3yia1AJeQ, welcome to the Teahouse. The user in question, Bonadea, reverted your changes as you appear to have deleted some neutrally-charged and sourced content. The addition of the company's website is probably what gave them the notion that you may have a conflict of interest in regards to the subject. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 14:45, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Bonadea, I would reply on your talk page but you have protected it. I have already addressed your question. I have no conflicts of interest. Now what? AE3yia1AJeQ (talk) 14:52, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

AE3yia1AJeQ, some of your edits are very poor. You have removed balanced critical coverage of a topic, and [and replaced it with a whitewash here], for example. The same edit added more links to ambrosiaplasma.com ThatMontrealIP (talk) 14:55, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

ThatMontrealIP, it is quite clear the coverage is not balanced. I wish to engage with you in discourse to improve the page. How shall we proceed? AE3yia1AJeQ (talk) 14:58, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Try editing some pages that are unrelated to blood transfusion and Ambroasiaplasma.com.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 14:59, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Seconded. --bonadea contributions talk 15:00, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Tenryuu The changes I made corrected the article and made it more neutral. Bonadea appears to disagree with me. What do I do now? AE3yia1AJeQ (talk) 14:53, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

No, your changes removed sourced criticism, added information that contradicts what the sources say, and added promotional text. Again, the article's talk page is the place to discuss this, but please note that there is a very strong consensus against any whitewashing of Ambrosia's activities. --bonadea contributions talk 14:59, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Bonadea, we disagree. How do we proceed? I would like to correct the errors on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Young_blood_transfusion. AE3yia1AJeQ (talk) 15:06, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

AE3yia1AJeQ, please continue your conversation with Bonadea on the article's talk page. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 15:03, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Tenryuu, I cannot, his talk page is protected. What should I do now? AE3yia1AJeQ (talk) 15:05, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

AE3yia1AJeQ, Like I said, please continue your conversation on the article's talk page. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 15:08, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

To be honest, you should stop posting the same "what should we do now" question to multiple talk pages. As has been suggested multiple times, edit something else. Continuing to waste everyone's time is WP:DISRUPTIVE.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 15:07, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

I would like to correct and improve https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_extension and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Young_blood_transfusion. I am not posting the same question to multiple pages. What is our next step? AE3yia1AJeQ (talk) 15:13, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Neither the article nor its talk page are currently protected. El_C 15:08, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Bonadea's talk page is protected is what I said. AE3yia1AJeQ (talk) 15:13, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Bonadea's talk page should be of no concern to you — the only thing you should be doing with regards to this dispute is discussing the matter on the article talk page. El_C 15:18, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Alright well, AE3yia1AJeQ is pretty clearly 210.6.209.89 evading their block (compare: [25], [26]). So can someone do us the honors and we can wrap this whole thing up. El_C perhaps? GMG ^talk 15:26, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

GreenMeansGo, the block on the IP expired today. I, however, am quite close to blocking the user for tendentious editing. Especially, due to "what do we do next" queries that they are repeating over and over again, coupled with the lack of any substance to their recent article talk page comments. El_C 15:39, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

@El C: Negative. The block on the IP expires in three minutes. The account has been editing for the past three hours in violation of the block, on the same article with pretty much the same issues. GMG ^talk 15:45, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

GreenMeansGo, I stand corrected. Indeffed. At this point, I think it's best the user demonstrates they are able to edit constructively via a WP:GAB approach. El_C 15:53, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

and I will stop. Just be clear with what you want. I don't want to be blocked.

"What you should do now" is stop trying to use Wikipedia to promote an unproved medical treatment. Wikipedia is a very poor platform for that, as it likes all its statements to be confirmed by reliable evidence. Maproom (talk) 15:27, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Maproom, I am trying to correct errors and make improvements. I have no conflicts of interest. I would be happy to cite all statements with evidence. How do I proceed? AE3yia1AJeQ (talk) 15:32, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

As answered elsewhere, on the Talk pages of the articles in question. Key here is what you consider as correcting errors, other editors consider as removing a valid description of the state of the science, and that what you consider as making improvements, others see as promoting an unproven therapy. David notMD (talk) 15:39, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

David notMD, I would like to be allowed to participate in the discussion. As my edits to two articles have been reverted, I am editing only the talk pages of those articles. As an example, "unproven" carries a negative connotation. From a neutral point of view it would be better to say "data on efficacy has not yet been published in a peer-reviewed journal but data on safety has". AE3yia1AJeQ (talk) 15:47, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

as GMG says above, Alright well, AE3yia1AJeQ is pretty clearly 210.6.209.89 evading their block... "(compare: [27], [28])" Contribs and pattern is the same. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 15:44, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

That's me but I'm not evading the block. The block ended already. AE3yia1AJeQ (talk) 15:47, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

As noted at top, AE now indef blocked. The safety data AE referred to was from a single, small, clinical trial, and hence not enough to add mention of safety. David notMD (talk) 18:12, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

How do I edit

how do I edit wikipdia — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.11.78.106 (talk) 17:52, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, 71.11.78.106! Are you referring to the act of editing, or what to do when editing? King of Scorpions 17:58, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Start with WP:TUTORIAL. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:37, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

What is {{{}}} for ?

What is

{{{}}}

for ?

How can one embed one page in another page ?

T3g5JZ50GLq (talk) 17:08, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

T3g5JZ50GLq, welcome to the Teahouse. That is code to designate parameters in templates. For more information see Help:Template#Handling parameters. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 17:24, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Tenryuu, as a Goof: embed one page in another page:

New British & Race-built galleon

T3g5JZ50GLq (talk) 19:34, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

T3g5JZ50GLq, are you referring to linking? You would have to to use double square brackets. I also recommend that if you're moving this to articlespace that you remove the asterisk bullets. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 19:38, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Tenryuu, Just a Sandbox experiment. Testing what Wikipedia/MediaWiki does.

🐲, 💬, and 📝, are they Unicode or UTF? T3g5JZ50GLq (talk) 19:57, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

T3g5JZ50GLq, the exact code I'm not sure on. I suggest using your sandbox to test things out. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 20:20, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Two brackets on each side will transclude a template. If you however add a colon before the title of an article, you can tranclude the entire page, try writing {{:Bird}} in your sandbox. There's rarely a good reason to embed one page in another (a couple of repetitive medical articles do that though) since it makes them a bit more difficult to edit. – Thjarkur (talk) 20:09, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Best template for magazines

What is the best template for citing digital versions of magazines such as the Atlantic, {{cite web}} or {{cite news}}? Oldsanfelipe2 (talk) 14:35, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Oldsanfelipe2, welcome to the Teahouse.

Third option: {{cite magazine}}. It includes a |url= parameter. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 14:39, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

I recommend using {{citation}} for everything to stop worrying which template suits each of your sources best. Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:20, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

These templates support practically the same parameters so it usually doesn't matter. I'm content with using Cite Web since it's the one VisualEditor's automatic citation makes uses by default. – Thjarkur (talk) 20:13, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

A Forum for Paid Editors ?

I was asked, on my talk page, by another editor, whether I am aware of advice or a WikiProject for editors who want to do paid editing, but want to do it both well and in accordance with Wikipedia policies and guidelines. My reply was unpleasant to and about paid editing, and they in turn rebuked me, in a way that I think was partly fair and partly unfair, but it was thought-provoking. They pointed out that we have a policy do not bite the newbies, and that they are a newbie to paid editing. I don't think that is the intent of the policy, but it was an interesting thought. So my question here, in a forum for advice to new editors, is whether there is a forum or project for paid editors, or whether the lack of a forum and the lack of constructive advice is intended as a disincentive to paid editors, or what. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:32, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Robert McClenon, in principle, I should help paid editors just enough to make disclosing more appealing than remaining undisclosed but not so much that we start to get flooded with less than competent wannabes who think they can make easy buck just manipulating us into doing the work that they are getting paid for. Usedtobecool ☎️ 17:55, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Ok, I actually read the conversation that prompted this. The last time I actually wanted and tried to help a COI editor was when I believed they had made good volunteer contributions to the project as well. So, I think I would try and help a regular volunteer who just happens to chance upon an opportunity to earn doing exactly what they'd been doing for free. They certainly deserve much better than SPAs that come in, create an article and disappear. As to the actual question, I would reason thusly: Why should volunteer editors spend their time and effort maintaining a forum to specifically help those who don't share the same values but only want to make money? And paid editors are, by definition, interested in self-interests. One, why would they spend their time doing something they are not getting paid to do, and two, why would any paid editor want to volunteer time and effort to a forum dedicated to helping the competition. All this to say, who'd really want to volunteer in such a forum even if it existed? Usedtobecool ☎️ 18:14, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, User:Usedtobecool. That sort of means that there isn't likely to be such a forum. A paid editor isn't likely to want to help other paid editors, who are competitors, and volunteer editors will only very rarely help paid editors. The original question on my talk page was from User:Integritas888, and they are more likely to get a positive answer here than on my talk page (since I already provided a non-positive answer). They do ask a reasonable question, which is why we don't just forbid paid editing if we aren't going to help paid editors. I think the answer is that we have compromised between trying to do something very difficult even if desirable, getting rid of paid editing, and just allowing paid editing, by allowing it under very restrictive conditions. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:34, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Yeah this compromise isn’t working, paid editing should be either banned or welcomed. I’m not going to keep doing any paid editing, I’m going to shutter this account, it’s been a waste of my time, the clients time, and most importantly, volunteer Wikipedians time. What concerns me for Wikipedia is by making disclosed Wikipedia editing hellish to do, no one is fooled that such editing is really effectively banned, and so people just edit articles without disclosure. The other thing that is concerning is that I got asked by a lot of clients during this brief two week attempt, “what do I do, how do I tell Wikipedia about myself?”, and it seems there should be some way of channeling their energies into helping Wikipedia, instead of just barring the gates and having the editors deal with a never ending wave of undisclosed paid editing. There should be some kind of “need an article about yourself, or your business? Let’s talk about it!” Someone who is just a regular wiki volunteer who can help people examine whether they or their efforts are notable or not without having to resort to asking people to do undisclosed editing. That would help kill the paid editing before people resort to it in the first place. Integritas888 (talk) 19:42, 11 March 2020 (UTC) (Normally User Judgesurreal777)

The problem isn't with Wikipedia, it's with paid editors indiscriminately taking on clients. Because you wrote a poorly sourced draft, it was rejected. There was no critical evaluation of the sources on your end. Our policies on paid editing are working exactly as intended. Praxidicae (talk) 14:17, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

We have pages and pages of policy about how articles can and should be set up, what we consider notable and how to keep articles from being overly promotional. The problem that paid editors (and their clients) run into is that they do not want to follow any of these policies. Even if we banned paid editing and it "went underground" or was not disclosed, you can tell 90% of the time when a user has a blatant COI or is receiving possible payments.^[1] The goal of a paid editor is often not the same goal as a volunteer user. The goal of the paid editor is to write an article in the best interests of their client, rather than the encyclopedia as a whole. As for the point that it should be the responsibility of a volunteer to determine notability and help people realize that their subject/topic isn't notable, we already have several forums for that. As I mentioned previously, editors at AfC tell people all the time that their subject isn't notable or that their draft is a blatant advertisement. Right here in Teahouse people can ask editors about notability. I would have suggested the Conflict of Interest noticeboard as well, but that's more for our own investigations of cases rather than assisting editors in COI editing. Bkissin (talk) 13:31, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

References

^ Source:Pick a Draft at AfC

Those are fair points, and I assumed that their were places to help like that, but I think my point is still valid that paid editing should be banned, mostly because explaining to people how to waste their time following procedures to produce articles that will not be approved is a waste of our volunteer workforce's time. We should "Be Bold", and ban paid editing, because they and their activities are just pointless (having tried it for two weeks as Integritas888, I should know. I tried to do it right, omit no, information, cite everything, but it was a waste, and no one should ever again go in thinking "oh, if I just follow these steps, there is an acceptable way to do paid editing!". There isn't. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 14:12, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Judgesurreal777, I wonder if part of the reason not to blanket-ban paid editing is that it would impact on things like the Wikipedian in Residence programmes? Technically that's paid editing, but less likely to lead to COI problems. YorkshireLad (talk) 14:43, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

I haven't bothered but if anyone really wants to figure it out, the discussion of interest is clearly linked from WP:PAID. Usedtobecool ☎️ 14:57, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Usedtobecool, thanks! I looked at the FAQ for the relevant change to the terms of use, and a pertinent quote is "it is hard to solve the problem of paid advocacy editing without accidentally discouraging good-faith editors, like the various GLAM (gallery, library, archive, and museum) projects." So it seems that is a major reason not to have a blanket ban. YorkshireLad (talk) 15:21, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

I took a look as well, and yes GLAM does have to disclose, but we love them and welcome their contributions, just like those high school kids who created articles for Wikipedia as their assignments. Their disclosure requirements seem lighter and More importantly they are much less likely to be biased as noted above. I personally don’t think a blanket paid editing ban would be difficult as long as their was a carve out for GLAM and education. Basically I would support anyone trying to ban non-education paid editing; Clearly we don’t want it, so we should just say so. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 15:27, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Judgesurreal777, We can't easily change the terms of use which is global, but to make it stricter as you suggest, seems possible to do locally. You can start a discussion at WT:COI or WP:VPP and turn it into an WP:RFC if it starts to go somewhere, if you feel strongly about it. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:45, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

The Inherent Conflict

It seems to me, and I may have missed something, that there is a false dichotomy being raised about paid editing, with the statement that we should either welcome it or ban it outright. I am not sure why there can't be a compromise. It is true that the compromise makes paid editing unpleasant, which is just fine from the standpoint of the volunteer editors who are the community. I think that the current system is working satisfactorily if it makes paid editors unhappy,but that is only my opinion.

Maybe any discussion of the policy on paid editing should be in a policy forum rather than a help forum. However, what I am seeing is that there is an inherent conflict between any desire to use Wikipedia for a commercial purpose, and the neutral point of view, which is the second pillar of Wikipedia. Any article that satisfies neutral point of view is not likely to satisfy the desire of a company to use Wikipedia for a commercial purpose. It may be that volunteer editors who would like to offer their services as paid editors think that the conflict can be worked, but maybe it can't, and if the conflict can't be worked usefully, then it may function as an effective quasi-ban, and that is all right. At least, I think it is all right for the Wikipedia community. Comments? Robert McClenon (talk) 18:15, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Robert McClenon, I think many people are just unaware what having a Wikipedia article means. All they know at first is, just having a Wikipedia article adds to the prestige. You don't want anyone looking you up to say "So, not good enough for wikipedia" yet. It is only when they have passed that landmark that they become aware of the new territory— why's my article just a stub when my competitors/colleagues have featured articles? Or worse, they see something negative which they must get removed by any means necessary.

In practice, a COI/Paid article is almost always identifiable from just reading the article. If the subject is notable, it could simply be stripped to bare bones and accepted with the understanding that all the poorly sourced fluff will have to go through edit requests before making it back. If the subject is not notable, it doesn't matter whether the editor is disclosed or undisclosed. The difference between disclosed and undisclosed editors comes down mostly to how much AGF to apply and how quickly can the editor be blocked when they start ignoring policy.

These small fishes (a struggling artist gets a gig) who don't even have three sigcovs and whose articles aren't gonna have many views anyway aren't the main problem that wikipedia has with paid editors (they are just frustratingly many and cause backlogs everywhere, that's about the extent of their harm). It's the bigger fishes (random examples: Apple/Samsung, Biden/Sanders, Russia/USA), the professional people who can cite every policy/guideline in the book, Wikipedia or real world, have endless time and patience to wikilayer around, with civility, and have mastery of language and even social engineering skills to push through subtle changes that can drive the narrative in meaningful ways in the real world. They are the ones who compromise the integrity of the encyclopedia in a way that can't easily be mitigated, on high impact, high viewership, vital articles. And I am not sure what would realistically address that. Just add that to the list of many imperfections of Wikipedia and move on, I suppose. How does it hopefully tie into your comment? The quasi-ban you speak of is likely an accurate description of the status quo, but in case of the small fishes only who anyway don't cause much damage in the grand scheme of things. And the big fishes are likely running wild because we are completely clueless.

(should probably be my final substantial comment, as even this one went every which way as I was typing it, and we're in the wrong venue for a long discussion; move it to WT:COI maybe?)

Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 20:22, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Ok just one last thought. If we keep the current system, where paid editing is hellish, we should at least have some kind of warning or disclaimer about how it is in general contrary to our values and we don’t encourage it at all, and you may be extra scrutinized as a result. And not some essay either, right on the COI and disclosure Wikipedia pages. Similar to what Robert McClenon told me; if an article is meant to be made, if it is notable, someone will make it, and being on Wikipedia is not necessarily a popularity contest or a feather in your SEO cap. That way it wont seem like “hey man, just disclose and it’s cool”, because it’s not. That way if you proceed and it’s hellish, you have no one to blame but yourself. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 15:09, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

In my opinion WP:COI and WP:PAY are strongly worded and unambiguous: You are very strongly discouraged from editing affected articles directly. [...] You should put new articles through AfC, but the paid editors I've bumped heads with say this can be understood as a gentle suggestion instead of a direct order. Maybe the current atmosphere should be made more clear, from what I've heard paid editing didn't receive as much hostility in 2014. – Thjarkur (talk) 20:45, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Please help adding the weight to the "quick facts" section on the Liberty Bell page

I'm not sure what the correct term for the short list of facts under the first picture on the top right hand of articles pages is but I am going to call them quick facts until I find out the proper name for it. On the page for The Liberty Bell in the list of facts it lists the height, the weight, the material, and other things but the weight is not listed. I tried to add it by copying the format that I saw but it did not seem to work. I think the best place for it is below the type of bell and above the material, if not there then below the height and above the completion date. If someone who knows more about how to edit these sections with the pictures it would be appreciated. The article lists The Liberty Bell as having a weight of 2,080 pounds (940 kg), but the info is buried down lower in the page. Please update the quick facts part if you can or let me know how I can do it. Thank You! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.93.153.139 (talk) 08:41, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi IP 73.93.153.139. It sounds like you're referring to the WP:INFOBOX for the article. An infobox is a template that is often added to articles to provide "quick facts" or a summary about the subject of the article. There are various types of infoboxes and they are have their own respective parameters or syntax that needed to be used correctly for them to work properly. The infobox used in Liberty Bell is Template:Infobox monument and you can find out how to use that particular template by looking at its documentation. That template doesn't have a parameter for "weight" which is why the edit you made is not showing up in the article. If you think such a parameter for "weight" should be added to that template, the place for you to propose such a thing is at Template talk:Infobox monument. If you want to discuss whether the weight of the LB is actually something that should be added to the article's infobox, the place to do that would be at Talk:Liberty Bell. Since infobox templates tend to be used on lots of articles, you probably should try avoid changing the template yourself because any accidental errors you might cause could impact lots of articles. -- Marchjuly (talk) 09:43, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the info, I will see what I can do. I already un-did my changes since nothing seemed to work right in the preview. There is a parameter at the bottom of the infobox labeled extra so maybe that could be used for the weight? I feel like this is something that I should let someone that knows more about this do since it can effect multiple articles. I'll start petitioning on the liberty bell page, Thank you again! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.93.153.139 (talk) 10:06, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Marchjuly, there's | extra = though. [29] could use some cosmetic aid, however. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:57, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

A good person to ask about templates is Primefac. He’s always been able to help resolve any issues I have with templates. — Marchjuly (talk) 12:30, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

This is an interesting question. I think a discussion about whether to include the weight in the infobox on the Liberty Bell page should continue at the thread started by this IP. I'm not sure if a specific "weight" parameter would be useful to add to {{infobox monument}}, because things like Civil Rights Memorial or Gol Gumbaz might not necessarily have a weight (at least, one that someone has/can be measured); a free label parameter could be added, though. That discussion should probably take place at Template talk:Infobox monument. I'll watchlist both pages and see how any discussions turn out. Primefac (talk) 14:13, 13 March 2020 (UTC) (please ping on reply)

I found Tsar Bell but these cases seem rare. Never heard of a free label parameter, but if it is what it sounds like, it's a good idea. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:28, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång: There's an |extra=, but no |extra_label= to go with it, as exists in other similar cases. I've proposed the addition at Template talk:Infobox monument#extra label (just in case there was some reason it is not there), and will add it if there is no objection after a couple days. This should be suitable for the OP's purpose on this article and won't affect any others (unless they, too, are edited to use the parm). —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 22:36, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

need some input on rs

Can someone take a look at William_Atherton#Personal_life 2nd paragraph. The first sentence is a book that I can't find online. The second sentence I don't think it's supported by the reference. I can't find anything otherwise supporting the statements. I tend to think for being blp they probably aren't appropriate. Char1iestarr (talk) 09:21, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Char1iestarr Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. A source does not need to be online to be used here- it helps, but isn't required. If you have reason to doubt it, you can post your concern on the article talk page. If you feel that information is not supported by the reference provided, you are welcome to remove it and discuss it on the talk page. 331dot (talk) 09:27, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll do some more digging to see if I can find anything to support it elsewheres. I've been trying to absorb another persons page that interests me more right now. It's making me play genealogist. ty Char1iestarr (talk) 09:39, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

@Char1iestarr: I added a cite to a clip at Newspapers.com of an open letter in the NY Daily News. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 22:57, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Pictures

Dear Sir How do I add pictures to stories? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ibusaamaka (talk • contribs) 17:26, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Ibusaamaka, and welcome to the Teahouse! To add a picture (here we call them "files") to an article, you should do it in this format: [[File:Example image.jpg|size|right|thumb|Example caption]]. ("Example image" is the file name). An explanation of parameters: "thumb" puts the file in a little box, where you can add a caption (the "caption" parameter). "Right" is the placing, you can also specify "left" or "center". "Size" is the size in pixels (example: "250px"). Hope this helps, King of Scorpions 17:37, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

@Ibusaamaka: You should read more about using images in the articles linked to at WP:IMAGE, especially WP:IUP regarding image use policies. There's a quick list of important points at WP:IMGDD, too. In short, images should be of encyclopedic quality, help to inform the reader about the subject, and must not violate copyrights.

Also note that the syntax for using images in WP:INFOBOXes (the box at the top right of many articles with a pic and summary info) is usually different. For example, if you wanted to add an image to an {{Infobox person}} that doesn't already have one, instead of [[File:Example image.jpg|size|right|thumb|Example caption]], you would add two parameters to the infobox:

|image=Example image.jpg (without the leading [[File:)
|caption=Example caption

—[AlanM1 (talk)]— 00:39, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Song articles

Hello,

Why is it that song articles do not include the lyrics of the song? Is there some sort of copyright which prohibits this?

Wikipedia already has some templates on what sections to add to an article based on the topic.

I propose that the template for the song articles include the lyrics of the songs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kickoff877 (talk • contribs) 19:57, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Kickoff877, and welcome to the Teahouse! Unfortunately, copyright does in fact prevent song lyrics from being included in articles, except for very limited portions under the fair use doctrine. Hope this answers your question, King of Scorpions 20:06, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

It's not just the copyright considerations, full lyrics is non-encyclopedic, we want to provide information on what reliable secondary sources have wrote about the song, not act as a lyrics database. See WP:NOTLYRICS. Lyrics whose copyright has expired could be added to wikisource though. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 21:20, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

@Kickoff877: Courtesy link: Wikisource —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 00:43, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

How to edit

how do i edit a wikipedia content — Preceding unsigned comment added by Harry2695 (talk • contribs) 08:21, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Harry2695 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Most articles are available for all users to edit. To learn how to before attempting to do so, you may wish to use the new user tutorial. 331dot (talk) 09:14, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Should I make an svg of these

Should I make SVGs of patches of different space missions, for example Mercury-Redstone 3? — Preceding unsigned comment added by SaluteVII (talk • contribs) 01:24, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

SaluteVII, welcome to the Teahouse. Are you talking about space missions in general or specific ones? Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 03:30, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi SaluteVII. You might be better off asking about this at WP:MCQ, but whether it's OK to do so may depend upon the copyright status of the patches themselves. If File:Mr-3-patch-small.gif is one of the patches you're talking about, then it should be OK for you to do so since that file is licensed as {{PD-USGov-NASA}}. Follow the guidance at c:COM:SVG and upload your svg version as a separate file. If, on the other hand, the file is protected by copyright, then things might not be so clear cut. Patches created by private companies or the space agencies of countries other than the US might not be public domain, even if they can be found on some official US government website. In such cases, your svg version would be either a derivative work or a slavish reproduction which means that the copyright status of the patch itself needs to be considered. Moreover, even if a svg of a copyrighted patch could be uploaded as non-free content, it would be best to only upload an official vector version released by the copyright holder as explained here. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:51, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

SaluteVII, I'll also add, assuming you have Graphics skills, that you check out the graphics lab and consider helping out:

Wikipedia:Graphics_Lab S Philbrick (Talk) 14:59, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Draft: Andre Herrero

Hello! I used the same publishing standards as his business partner, Adam Charlap Hyman. In this instance, it was not accepted. The references are all the same. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Archinerd45 (talk • contribs) 00:23, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Link: Draft: Andre Herrero.

@Archinerd45: Please sign your messages on talk pages by adding a space and four tildes to the end of the last line of your message, like this:

This is the last line of the message. ~~~~

The four tildes will be automatically converted to a signature that contains your linked username and a timestamp, which helps keep conversations organized. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 00:44, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Adam Charlap Hyman was created without being submitted to Articles for Creation. That it exists does not necessarily mean that it SHOULD exist. Also, while copying text and references from another Wikipedia article is allowed, you should have stated where the content was copied from in your Edit summary. David notMD (talk) 00:47, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Archinerd45, for more info, see : Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia S Philbrick (Talk) 15:02, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

For artist article

Disregard

– OP has been blocked for self-promotion. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 20:27, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Please help me making article about myself and i tried so many times to improve but no. I am a Musical Artist, songwriter, & singer, except I transform complicated Musical ideas into user-friendly images before the eyes of my own company’s "IVEDUNAS". Meaning of IVEDUNAS wrote in the name of love of mine Grandfather & Mother.Fan of niggas. I used to watch & listen most of music,videos of urban hits African, Spanish/ I believe in telling related stories through lyrics, so I’ve studied the basics knowledge of music creation before engaging on corporate team projects for creating music along a publishing music track on Sound-cloud, Reverb-nation and on Facebook. Involving on Sound-cloud & Reverb-nation, these two Music up-loader help me a lot to publish my music in many more Europe countries. Most of track was seem to be heard from Indonesia, Ukraine, Turkey and low per from USA.My portfolio showcases a lineup of my most recent tracks, which range from visual startup campaigns into the world—each of which have highest accuracy rate on listening and branding showcase. I’m always ready for creating new music and got opportunity to show my talent and have lots of dream to be like Thug-niggas. I spend my leisure time on creating track and used to sang on alone room. Fan of Chris brown,Micheal Jackson, Tyga and lil Wayne — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prazkhanal (talk • contribs) 15:10, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello Prazkhanal, see WP:NOTPROMO, WP:NOTSOCIAL. You need to meet the criteria laid out at WP:Notability (people) before Wikipedia can have an article about you.

Piece of unsolicited advice: Saying "nigga" once is once too many.

And, IVEDUNAS is clearly the ananym of Sanudevi. Usedtobecool ☎️ 16:04, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

@Prazkhanal: a more experienced user will/may likely come along and say there is a WP:conflict of interest problem. However, if a reputable source has covered you (ex newspaper), a fan could make said page Disoff (talk) 15:21, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Am I allowed to use swear words on my own sandbox page?

Can I really do whatever I want on my sandbox page? ApChrKey ^Talk 14:05, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

@ApChrKey: Your sandbox isn’t really yours per se as explained in WP:UP#OWN; so, any content you add to it will still need to comply with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines like WP:UP and WP:NOT. Sandboxes, however, aren’t held to the same quality standards as articles and you can use them to experiment with formatting or work on improvements to articles, etc. Others will most likely leave your sandbox alone as long as it doesn’t violate and policy or guideline. So, if adding swear words to your sandbox is something related to improving Wikipedia articles, then you should have no problems because Wikipedia isn’t censored. On the other hand, if you’re just goofing around with no apparent benefit to Wikipedia, then you might run into problems per WP:UP#NOT and WP:NOTWEBHOST. — Marchjuly (talk) 14:20, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

ApChrKey, As a specific example, including copyrighted text is not permitted. S Philbrick (Talk) 15:01, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

@ApChrKey: I think it depends, too, on what you're swearing about. If it's about other people, especially other Wikipedia editors, for example, it might be considered WP:UNCIVIL. Edit filters that look for certain phrases may also be triggered (I'm not sure if these specifically ignore some pages, like sandboxes, or not), which can bring additional unwanted attention. It's kind of like a desk in a real office – try to keep it professional to avoid problems. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 21:15, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Trustpilot reverted edit

Hello, like a week ago I noticed that Trustpilot article had a claim that I think is biased and sourced by original research. I then removed the claim Despite Trustpilot's claims of "no censoring", low ranking reviews are often removed (described by Trustpilot as the review being "taken offline") by the Trustpilot compliance Team where companies make allegations that the reviews breach Trustpilot's rules - even where this is demonstrably not the case. but my edit was reverted (Special:Diff/945069576/945069687). I asked the editor who did it but I got no answer on his talk page ( User_talk:Thepenguin9#Trustpilot_reverted_edit) I still think it should be removed according to Wikipedia guidelines but I don't want to start an edit war, what do you think? JavTehran (talk) 21:59, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

@JavTehran: Start a discussion on the article's talk page, where other editors can comment. RudolfRed (talk) 22:02, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

I think Trustpilot article might need clean up, not sure it complies with the guidelines. JavTehran (talk) 22:04, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

@RudolfRed: I don't see anyone answering on the article talk page, might be pointless to do so. JavTehran (talk) 22:06, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Hypothetical safety issue

Is there a place in the Commons, Teahouse, etc., for questions and discussions of one's safety as an editor? --PaulThePony (talk) 16:51, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

PaulThePony If you just have a general question, you may ask here. If you have a specific incident to discuss involving editor behavior, you can go to WP:ANI. If there is an immediate threat to your physical safety, you should follow the instructions at this page. 331dot (talk) 17:13, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

If the issue is not immediate, but involves personal information, most administrators can be contacted by email. 331dot (talk) 17:15, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

PaulThePony, do you mean a general discussion on policies and principles surrounding the topic, or do you need to report a specific incident that is a cause for concern? Usedtobecool ☎️ 17:17, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

With thanks to both of you, 331dot and Usedtobecool. There is no urgency/emergency, thankfully, meaning, in part, this is not due to an incident within Wikipedia. I do mean "a general discussion on policies and principles surrounding the topic." I realize now that the heading was unduly provocative and changed it--let me know if such a heading change is not cool for any reason. --PaulThePony (talk) 19:54, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

PaulThePony I think I'm still unclear as to what you're asking. There isn't really a place to discuss non-Wikipedia related matters. If you want to discuss some aspect of an article, such as a policy not being observed, you may ask on the associated article talk page. 331dot (talk) 20:16, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Sorry for the confusion, 331dot. I'll try to clarify the hyothetical. I'm placing this matter outside of the issue of threats made from one editor to another and the like which I understand have good, internal protocols. (Redacted) --PaulThePony (talk) 20:53, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

@PaulThePony: In general, no, IP edits cannot be transfered to a username. You can possible have the edit completely removed via WP:OVERSIGHT, depending on the circumstance. If there is any threat of violence, follow the info at WP:EMERGENCY. RudolfRed (talk) 21:27, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

PaulThePony, that sounds like a candidate for ~~WP:REVDEL~~ WP:OVERSIGHT, editing an IP's post with a registered account to change the signature doesn't remove the IP from the pages edit history, it could draw unwanted attention instead. Best to self-revert as the IP itself with some dull edit summary, and then get the edits ~~revdelled~~ suppressed by an ~~administrator~~ oversighter by privately contacting them. If you really need to make that edit, you can make it again, logged in, after ~~the revdel~~ it is done. Usedtobecool ☎️ 21:34, 14 March 2020 (UTC) corrected at 22:06, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

@PaulThePony: Please email the oversight team, which is the community body responsible for personal information issues. If there are safety concerns, please copy the Wikimedia Trust and Safety team at ca

wikimedia.org (or WP:EMERGENCY if there is an on-wiki threat of harm). Best, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 21:37, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, RudolfRed, Usedtobecool, and Kevin. Very helpful!! --PaulThePony (talk) 21:44, 14 March 2020 (UTC) Thanks especially to you, Kevin, for reaching out. All is well for now. <3--PaulThePony (talk) 22:22, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Found a seemingly promotional wikipedia account, what to do?

Resolved

– Editor in question blocked. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 22:36, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

This user: @NEOWIZ Global:

has the same name (basically) as this company https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NEOWIZ and has edited the "NEOWIZ" page. I read through

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest

AFAIK one of those pages said to do nothing unless User:NEOWIZ_Global posts more?

Respectfully, --Disoff (talk) 15:16, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Disoff, I have left them notes about conflict of interest and promotional usernames in case they return. If they do return to editing, you can report them to WP:UAA. The page says not to report editors who have not edited in the past two weeks except in case of egregious violation, so it can probably be reported right now too (Not exactly sure what falls under egregious). I actually posted a report, but then changed my mind, considering this kind of thing happens all the time and that they probably came only to update their website details and so won't edit again. For now, I think it best to simply check whether their edit was appropriate, and fix, revert or leave it alone as appropriate, and keep an eye on the article to see if they come back again. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:51, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

User blocked anyway. Usedtobecool ☎️ 16:59, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Citing an edition of a book

I have questions about citing a book with different editions. As an example, Stephen F. Austin cites The Life of Stephen F. Austin, Founder of Texas, 1793–1836 by Eugene C. Barker, originally published in 1926. The references list a 1968 second edition of the book. The footnotes use a short citation style with the 1926 date. My own copy is a reprint of the first edition, so I cannot confirm that the 1926 edition and the 1968 edition have the same pagination. Similarly with the Austin biography by Cantrell, I have a hardback with a publication date of 1999, and the article cites 2001 as the year of publication, which is probably correct for the paperback release. Which version should be cited when different editors are referring to different editions or different years of publication for the same book? And do they need to agree throughout the article? Thanks, Oldsanfelipe2 (talk) 22:39, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Greetings Oldsanfelipe2, and welcome to the Teahouse. Multiple editions of the same reference can be used, but it is considered good practice to cite from the current state of knowledge, which generally means using the latest available edition of a particular work. However, keep in mind that the most important thing is to cite the actual reference being used, whatever version that may be; as long as the page number is accurate for the edition that is cited, that's technically all that is needed.

If you have a later edition of a particular work and have verified part of the article from that work, I would recommend updating those references to reflect the edition that you have and the page number(s) in question (but only those parts you have verified). If another editor has a different edition and is actively working on the article as well, I suggest opening a discussion on the article's talk page.and coming to a consensus as to which edition would be most appropriate to use for the citations. CThomas³ (talk) 23:10, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

I haven't done a thorough search of the history, but this article has been in development since 2002, so we could be talking about any number of editors who were citing Barker. I am trying to clean up an article that was using about ten different ways of doing citations, including a bare reference, omitted authors, omitted publication dates, and two different styles for short citations. None of the short citations refer to the 1968 Barker reprint, so I have to assume that another editor instantiated the 1968 year of publication in the reference section without contributing any inline citations to it. Oldsanfelipe2 (talk) 23:48, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

I would say that if you haven't seen substantial activity on the article in the last several months (basically stuff other than driveby fixes such as typos, templates, bot edits, etc.) that you are probably okay just being bold and making your changes. If you find any inconsistencies with references as they currently exist in the article, absolutely address them. If you get reverted in any of your changes, that's a strong indicator that someone may have a different edition than you do, and then it's a good idea to take it to the talk page to hash it out. Good luck and happy editing! If you have any further questions, you are welcome to respond here on on my talk page. CThomas³ (talk) 00:32, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

my "Sandbox" disappeared from the top of the page where I click to work.

Hi.. I've been working very hard on my draft for my submission, the Etymology of Chicago... my email (Redacted). MY SANDBOX IS NO LONGER ACTIVE on the Wikipedia page. I got on my page today from a link I created for my desktop... but I would breathe easier if my "sandbox" up between "talk" and "preferences." I have nightmares about loosing all my work. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Etymology_of_Chicago?action=edit

Carl Carl J. Weber (talk) 05:14, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi Carl J. Weber. Your user sandbox can be found at User:Carl J. Weber/sandbox, but the content you previously added to it was moved by an administrator named DGG (see here) and can now be found at Draft:Etymology of Chicago; most likely this was done because you submitted your sandbox to Wikipedia Articles for Creation for reveiw, but the preferred WP:NAMESPACE for AfC submission is the draft namespace. Perhaps you intended to back up the draft you're working on in your user sandbox, but this is not really necessary (and potentially confusing) since you shouldn't lose anything as long as you click "Publish changes" whenever you finish an editing session; even if by chance the draft ends up deleted, it will still be possible for an administrator to recover it and restore it for you as long as it wasn't deleted for some type of serious violation of Wikipedia policy. If you really want to create a back up of your work, you might want to consider doing so somewhere other than Wikipedia.

As for not being able to see the "Sandbox" button at the top of your browser, you should be able to see it as long as you're logged into your account. Are you using a computer to edit or a tablet/smartphone to edit? Perhaps in the latter case the "Sandbox" button might appear in a different location to the size of the screen.

Finally, please be careful about posting your email address on Wikipedia per WP:REALWORLD; it's unlikely that anyone answering questions here at the Teahouse is going to respond to you by email, but such information might possibly be used by someone else in an inappropriate way. Like all Wikipedia pages, the Teahouse is a public page which means that anything posted here is there for all to see and use as they want. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:38, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

--- Thanks for the timely response. I’m using an desktop

User:Carl J. Weber/sandbox, does not bring me to anything recognizable to link to for my draft of Etymology of Chicago.

Draft:Etymology of Chicago; DOES bring me to the page I want.

I still don’t understand the navigation much…

If I bring up the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Carl_J._Weber page, where is, or how do I install a link from that. page to my draft?

Nor am confident in any way that I am sending this response to the right place…

Thanks much Carl Carl J. Weber (talk) 16:50, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

@Carl J. Weber: You can click Contributions at the top right of any page to see your edits. Old edits are moved when a page is moved so they currently link to Draft:Etymology of Chicago. If the draft is accepted then they would link to the article. You can save [[Draft:Etymology of Chicago]] in a page if you want a link to the current title of the draft. You can also find a link by clicking the "View history" tab at User:Carl J. Weber/sandbox and then "View logs for this page" at the top. This shows the move log with the new title. Often it would be enough to click "View history" but not in this case where a user chose to move the page without leaving a redirect. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:04, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Carl J. Weber, someone moved your draft to the draftspace where it can be worked on (and collaborated with other editors, should you so choose). It also means that when you are ready to submit it (and I mean checking the grammar, spelling, strong suitable references) the process is streamlined. But let me see if I understand what you want: do you want to be able to access that page in one click by using any of the links related to you at the top of the screen? Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 22:34, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello Carl J. Weber, I have made it so that you can reach your draft by clicking "sanbox". I have also linked your draft from your userpage; the "etymology of Chicago" phrase is now in blue in your self-introduction there. Do not worry, your draft will never be lost; even if you stop working on it and some deletes it, you can always ask to get it restored if you want to start again. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 07:34, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Mass changes dealing with punctuation

So there's a user making massive changes in punctuation, and I am not sure what they are, but here's what he or she has done: Special:Contributions/DannyS712. What's it all about? BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 06:51, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

@BeenAroundAWhile: (in the future, I'd appreciate being pinged if you start a discussion about my edits) I moved periods (or full stops) to go before reference tags, in line with Wikipedia:Citing sources#How to place an inline citation using ref tags and Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Punctuation and footnotes and as explained already at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Language#Fixing period locations and User talk:DannyS712#Period? DannyS712 (talk) 07:21, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

@BeenAroundAWhile: I don't know why this has to be in three places, but please see MOS:LQ for information about why the '.' goes where it does here. Also see the information Danny linked to about where references go in relation to punctuation. Most people that have been around a while, like us, understand there are different varieties of English with different vocabulary. I don't have any problem understanding someone that writes "full stop", or "colour", or "lift". There's no requirement I know of that edit summaries employ the variant of English in use in the article. There are plenty of editors whose native variant is different from the one most closely related to articles they edit. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 08:10, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

editing help needed

Please have a read of my draft article at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Dsouzaron/sandbox. I had submitted it before and it was deleted. Is it good enough now?Tissueboy (talk) 18:55, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Dsouzaron, welcome to the Teahouse. From a glance better grammar could be used. I harbour doubts if she meets the general notability guidelines for Wikipedia. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 20:34, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Please kindly refrain from giving yourself a completely different username so that people can ping you correctly. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 20:35, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

I'm inclined to agree she is not notable enough for an article; teachers rarely are. That she was at the same educational establishments as notable people does not make her notable, and her own education and qualifications certainly don't. (I write as a teacher who attended universities with notables and I have qualificiations!) That said, 50 years' teaching is a personal achievement, but not that special I'm afraid. Emeraude (talk) 09:38, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

My article keeps getting declined

It says it doesn't have reliable sources. I always link the most reliable websites. What can I do :( — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alisha9891 (talk • contribs) 12:34, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Alisha9891, thanks for coming to the Teahouse. I went through your draft and fixed a few minor problems.Nevertheless, you'd have to address the concerns of the user who declined your draft, "Sulfurboy". He pointed out that you didn't give enough sources. After all, when it was declined, it only had 1 source. (Now it has 3, but for an article this long to be accepted, I guess that 5 is a minimum standard.) You can see WP:ORGCRIT for more details, but according to that page, an article on a product would require more sources than, say, an article on a building. This is to prevent spamming and promotion, but if you can provide independent sources (a few more), then it would have a far greater chance of being accepted. Add oil with your editing and Sourcing! Cheers, tLoM (The Lord of Math) (Message) 13:10, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Alisha9891, the three sources all appear to be press releases. You need proper coverage independent of the company. Guy (help!) 14:31, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Indeed, Alisha9891. Remember that, for that article, Wikipedia has basically no interest in anything said by Paytm. It is only interested in what people unconnected with Paytm have chosen to say about the platform; if you can't find any such independent sources, then the platform does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, and it is a waste of everybody's time working on the draft. --ColinFine (talk) 15:31, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy: This appears to be about Draft:Paytm First Games, as Paytm is an existing article.David notMD (talk) 17:12, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you so much all, let me try again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alisha9891 (talk • contribs) 10:55, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Alisha9891, I took a look at the article. One problem with it is a lack of 'significant coverage' per WP:CORPDEPTH. There are a number of 'incidental' articles reporting an event or a press release but not much coverage about the subject itself, for example an article which goes into depth about the company, its history, how they operate, etc. That type of source is important to establish a subject's notability.

Also, much of the article (the explanation of games) is unsourced. If there aren't independent sources covering this type of information, then the info probably isn't notable to be included in the article (even if it might be true).

With more significant sources and more thorough referencing, I think the article would be able to pass WP:AfC. -M.Nelson (talk) 11:23, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

My article keeps getting declined

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject. What can I do? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 154.113.18.133 (talk) 10:28, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Have you checked out Where to get help section in your article? Next time, remember to sign your comment by inserting four tildes: ~~~~. If you don't, you will just get autosigned, and even if not, your username will get saved in history along with timestamp. There is really no way around. Fortunny (talk) 12:40, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

PLEASE APPROVE THIS ARTICLE

Draft:Manjappada_Kerala_Blasters_Fan_Club is a supporting club of Kerala Blasters FC Like West Block Blues of Bengaluru FC. so please approve this article

@Iamfrzu07: Your draft has been declined 3 times before finally being rejected. Please read the comments with

in front of them as to why reviewers are not inclined to approve it. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 14:30, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Akhmetova Laila Seysembekovna

Good day! 4th of December 19, I've created an article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Akhmetova_Laila_Seysembekovna). Is there a chance that it will be moved into the article space? Or maybe I need to review the draft or edit it? If so, please, make me know how I can improve it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ДиркСтруан (talk • contribs) 09:53, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

ДиркСтруан, welcome to the Teahouse. Looking at the page it is currently pending review. Because of the vast number of drafts that are waiting for review it can potentially take a long time before it gets looked at. Feel free to improve other articles while you're waiting.

Please remember to sign with ~~~~ at the end of your post.

Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 14:32, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

I am an artist , I have a new graphic novel out in bookstores everywhere, I used to have a wikipedia entry but it was deleted by admins

Hi, I used to have a wikipedia entry but it was removed a while ago by admins, I guess because they thought the content was not true or verifiable or not interesting enough.

My name is Ian David Marsden and I have already published several books and done quite a few things in the art, graphics, illustration and cartoon world. I was the very first Google Doodle creator for example.

I have a new graphic novel out which is about the life of the composer Marvin Hamlisch:

https://www.schifferbooks.com/marvin-based-on-the-way-i-was-by-marvin-hamlisch-6815.html

https://www.amazon.com/Ian-David-Marsden/

More about me:

https://marsdenillustration.com/about/

I do NOT wish to write an entry about myself, nor to write changes to any other entries regarding me or my books. Therefore I am adressing this forum. I don't know what it takes to "Merit" an entry but I thought maybe this new U.S. publication about a notable figure and one of only two winners of the PEGOT awards might qualify.

It would be very nice if at least my new book about Marvin Hamlisch could be added to the Marvin Hamlisch page. After that I would of course like it if my own entry could either be reinstated or if a new short one about me, my books and my artwork could be created, linked to all the relevant topics (illustrator, cartoonist, Swiss cartoonist, graphic novel author, etc.)

I will gladly provide any further information that is required. I would like to stress again: I don't want to write about myself and I don't wish to get into any arguments whether I should have an entry or not. I just wanted to put this information out there so that you can be the judge yourselves and decide and take approproate action, if any.

Thank you very much.

Ian — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marsdenillustration (talk • contribs) 12:32, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Next time, remember to sign your comment by inserting four tildes: ~~~~. If you don't, you will just get autosigned, and even if not, your username will get saved in history along with timestamp. There is really no way around. Fortunny (talk) 12:43, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

@Marsdenillustration:, hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I had a look around and I do not see any in-depth coverage of you or your work in independent sources. As such coverage is required for an article, you don't meet the notability standard. Thanks for your note.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 14:42, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

For information, the article was deleted in 2012, as a result of the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ian D. Marsden. Cordless Larry (talk) 14:46, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

@Marsdenillustration: The former article about you was deleted not because admins "thought the content was not true or verifiable or not interesting enough" but because that was the consensus of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ian D. Marsden, a discussion that you apparently participated in (under a different account name). If you think thst subsequent coverage in reliable, independent sources demonstrates your notability, you can ask for that deletion to be reviewed at WP:DRV. Deor (talk) 14:52, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Does a link to the publisher's website to the published book count as an "realiable, independent source"?

https://www.schifferbooks.com/marvin-based-on-the-way-i-was-by-marvin-hamlisch-6815.html

Book links in all of the major bookseller websites?

https://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/marvin-ian-david-marsden/1132899883?ean=9780764359040

https://www.target.com/p/marvin-by-ian-david-marsden-marvin-hamlisch-gerald-gardner-paperback/-/A-79514989

https://www.whsmith.co.uk/products/marvin-based-on-the-way-i-was-by-marvin-hamlisch/iandavid-marsden/paperback/9780764359040.html

https://www.amazon.com/Marvin-Based-Way-Was-Hamlisch/dp/0764359045

All the other books on my amazon author's page?

https://www.amazon.com/Ian-David-Marsden/

Google Doodles:

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702304911104576444363668512764

Indeed I did participate in the discussion in 2012 and I believe I already stated at the time that I don't see why I should have to prove that I am "notable". My books, my Google Doodles, My FIS World Championship Mascot Design are not figments of my imagination. They can all easily be verified. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marsdenillustration (talk • contribs) 15:12, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is notability, not just whether something can be verified, Marsdenillustration. Please see WP:GOLDENRULE for a simple explanation of that threshold. Your publisher's website is not an independent source. What is required is independent media or academic coverage of your work. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:32, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

@Marsdenillustration: we don't determine notability by counting up accomplishments. We determine notability (i.e. if someone is notable enough for an article) by counting up and assessing what others have said about the article subject. You have not been the subject of enough independent, in-depth coverage by others. It is that simple. We are also not keen on the article subjects trying to get their own article published, as it impacts on the neutrality of the encyclopedia. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 16:22, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

The Gallagher Index and Infometrics

Not an issue for Teahouse/Questions. Referred elsewhere.

--Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 17:23, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello all, long time listener, first time caller.

Just curious how to go about adding automated infometrics to articles? Eg; the SVG world maps with colouring showing the spread of viruses or demographic data and the like - do people just upload these SVGs on a regular basis or something? Can anyone please point me to some relevant templates/guides?

Reason I'm asking is that I've written some (Python) code which computes the Gallagher index scores for election systems, which helps to quantify the amount of dis-proportionality in voting systems. Would there be any interest in including such data in election articles? It's not really original research or anything, just an implementation of the least squares function to help churn through and present the data.

The basic idea of the Gallagher index is it gives you a measure of difference between the percentage of votes, versus the percentages of bums on seats in any given legislature. In the US election system this number can go over 10%, which is rather 'undemocratic' by international standards. Dis-proportionality itself is a non-partisan issue affecting both republicans and democrats, but the data I'm seeing for the US primaries does suggest some penalties and bonuses in some states which might be notable enough for inclusion, especially when this number is over 10%.

What are other people's thoughts on this? Would it be a useful and relevant inclusion on election outcome templates/articles? Or is it too close to original research? WinstonSmith01984 (talk) 12:56, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

The appropriate place to discuss this is the talk page(s) of the article(s) in question, WinstonSmith01984. John from Idegon (talk) 17:01, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Marking a person in red

Hello. I spotted the name of an author who I think qualifies as a notable person. As a first step, how do I mark her name in red as being someone about whom an article could be written? Alison Alison hunter (talk) 23:05, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Alison hunter Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Others may disagree but I think you might be putting the cart before the horse, so to speak. If you wish to write an article about this person, you should do that first before worrying about links to it(which is important, but you have to have the article first). If you have never created a new article before, you should use Articles for Creation to create and submit a draft for a review by another editor before it is formally placed in the encyclopedia. This way you find out any issues to work out while it is still a draft, when it will be treated less critically. Be advised that successfully creating a new article is the hardest task on Wikipedia, especially if you have not edited many existing articles. Before starting a draft I'd suggest reading Your First Article and using the new user tutorial. 331dot (talk) 23:11, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you 331dot I have just started drafting an article about her in my sandbox. Thanks for these pointers. Alison Alison hunter (talk) 23:52, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Alison hunter, out of curiosity, what is the name of the person who you want to make an article about?ThatMontrealIP (talk) 23:15, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi ThatMontrealIP Her name is Jessie Kerr Lawson. I saw her name in an article about my town, Anstruther. So many names listed were in blue, but hers was not even red. I've now started drafting something but it will take me a while. Thanks for your interest. Alison hunter (talk) 23:52, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Alison hunter, just to explain what red links are: they're just when someone has tried to link to an article that doesn't exist, like this: Jessie Kerr Lawson. (You can find out more about them here.) So to make her name red on the Anstruther page, you would just try to link her name to the (non-existent) page about her. That being said, I agree with User:331dot that it's better to make the article first. :-) (Incidentally, while I have never been to Anstruther, I was Pittenweem not that long ago—it's a lovely part of the world.) YorkshireLad ✿ ^(talk) 00:18, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

@YorkshireLad: Ah, you were a stone's throw from Anstruther. Just a stroll along the coastal path. Yes, it's lovely, as is Yorkshire! Alison hunter (talk) 18:27, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Alison hunter, I think you have found someone who deserves an article, if you mean the Scottish-Canadian poet and writer Jessie Kerr Lawson 1838-1917. She appears notable by our notability standards. I'll leave you a note on your talk page.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 02:10, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

ThatMontrealIP Thank you. I love what you've done. Alison hunter (talk) 18:27, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Allowed

Dear Managers, Am I allowed to transfer articles from drafts like this Draft:Mardas (Shahnameh) and this Draft:Iran-Turan war or not? Goodarz Irani (talk) 20:07, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Goodarz Irani, and welcome to the Teahouse! To answer your question, you technically could, at least once autoconfirmed. However, you should not do so, but you should wait for the review, which is likely to actually come sooner than 4 months. (It once took me two days to get an article reviewed.) Hope this answers your question, King of Scorpions 21:49, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Sean Depner

Hello Teahouse! So I submitted my article for the actor Sean Depner. It was declined twice, because of lack of reliable sources. The problem here is, most of the informations I got of him, are from social media accounts and that will not get accepted as a reliable source. I also used IMDB as a reliable source, but it also got declined. My article is a right based on my own research, but they are not reliable sources for Wikipedia. I do not know what to do now, because the actor does not have many informations on reliable sources. What would be your advice? Should I just delete it and wait for reliable sources? I really would like to publish my article. Greetings, Lia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lia Prince (talk • contribs) 20:00, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Link: Draft:Sean Depner. Interstellarity (talk) 20:49, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

If there are not multiple reliable (which social media isn't) and independent sources that discuss this person, he isn't notable. Notability is the requirement for having an article. John from Idegon (talk) 23:12, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Lia Prince, welcome to the Teahouse. Unfortunately IMDb is not considered a reliable source here on Wikipedia. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 03:22, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

How can one send a comment regarding a particular article to its editors?

Resolved

– Question answered. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 04:01, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Joe van Zwaren March 14. 2020 Good.o.joe (talk) 18:25, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Use the article's talk page. You can start a new section there if you don't want to continue an existing discussion. --David Biddulph (talk) 18:31, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

True story, please help -notability+have the company listed on wikipedia

I will tell the truth I started to write the articles and be active at wikipedia to have the notability of myself and my companies listed at wikipedia in the quickest way. I started approximately 5 days publishing at many languages but the process of getting notability is very ambigouous and depends on the approval of editors. I relly on the internet articles which spreads for more quantity of articles describing "how to get your company listed on wikipedia, Part 1" and others.

I had the luck or rather wisdom and the sober and vigiliance of my brain to be active in the most emerging technologies so according to the wikipedia 5 pillars and other articles if i will be right in writing and stick to the rules of wikiedia i hope i will get my profile nobility and my company will be listen on wikipedia.

Younger people(especially poker players) have their own profiles at wikipedia at german version which gives me big courage and motivation to speed up this investment.

Please help: — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rocketmanplus (talk • contribs) 18:43, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Autobiography. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:03, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

So far, every Talk page comment you have made has been reverted, as Talk pages are not intended as a forum for your own opinions and thoughts. Your attempts to create article-like content on your User page has been deleted. Wikipedia (English) has articles, not profiles. What may be permitted in one language can be forbidden in another. And, as noted, attempts at autobiography are discouraged, as are writing about your own company (see WP:COI). David notMD (talk) 19:08, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Rocketmanplus, welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia is, unfortunately, not a forum. We deal in sourced material, not unsourced assertions. If there are reliable sources to back them up they may be considered. Please understand that an article about yourself/your company is not necessarily a good thing. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 19:13, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

The nobility confirmation it is in my opinion very powerful incident as observing famous young poker players they have nice profiles at wikipedia(Domink Panka, Dmitr Urbanovitch, Chris Moneymaker) also other companies Berkshire Hathway, Kulczyk Investment have their own article.

I did my own translation of some of the company articles into the german but received this: No encyclopedic article or content) (thank you)

I will try to read more article to fit into the model as I reckon to deserve to have same profile like younger than me Dominik Panka, Dmitr Urbanovitch or Mike Mcdonald not mentioning about FAcebook, Mark Zuckuberg and others. {rocketmanplus} — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rocketmanplus (talk • contribs) 23:27, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Neither Domink nor Dmitr have English-language articles. Chris Moneymaker does. Please 'sign' your comments by typing four of ~ at the end. — Preceding unsigned comment added by David notMD (talk • contribs) 04:10, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Are Cookies Required for Registered Editors?

An unregistered editor has stated that they edit as an unregistered editor (IP address) because they cannot use cookies on the device that they use to edit. Is this correct? Is it true that an editor cannot log in to a registered account from a device that does not support cookies? Is there a workaround? Robert McClenon (talk) 00:28, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

@Robert McClenon: From WP:COOKIES, it states that you do need to be able to accept cookies to log in. There is no workaround mentioned that I could see. RudolfRed (talk) 00:32, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

What sort of device could an editor be using that doesnt support cookies in 2020? What sort of dumb terminal is in use? (Maybe that is a self-answering question, a dumb terminal.) McClenon mobile (talk) 04:03, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

It's also worth mentioning that anonymous editing also sets and uses cookies. But yes, if you want to stay logged in past the login screen, cookies are required. Otherwise, the servers would forget who you are immediately. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 04:11, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Red and green numbers

Resolved

– Question answered. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 04:38, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

what do the green and red + and - in contributions mean? please awnser in my sandbox so the tea house doesent get clooged — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thewikimeowman (talk • contribs) 14:58, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Thewikimeowman, this is the byte count of the edit. It shows how many characters were added (green) or removed(red) in the edit. The number in black to the left of that is the total byte count of the article. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 15:02, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Thewikimeowman, we don't answer questions elsewhere unless there are policy based privacy issues involved. The answer to your question doesn't "clog" the Teahouse. It's here to help you and to help others with the same question who may see it. Also, in general, if another editor is going to communicate with you directly, it would be at your talk page, not your sandbox. John from Idegon (talk) 17:15, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Discussing regarding the jian in Vietnam

A few weeks ago, I was involved in a ongoing dispute with SimeonManier (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jian&diff=945108100&oldid=944245559) which I want to end this sooner than later. Unfortuntaly, the only response from Simeon is this. I tired the Dispute Noticeboard but no admin had been responded. If anyone who is an expert in Vietnamese culture or martial arts, then you are welcome to discuss. I don't know these sources that Simeon removed are reliable or not. In regards to Vietnamese swordsmanship, I can't find any good sources about this art of swordfighting from Vietnam. Since China is known to influence Vietnam culturally, this is going to be a big dicussion. SpinnerLaserz (talk) 19:20, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

SpinnerLaserz, I have declined your edit request at the talk page and left a reply. If you do not have reliable sources to back up or do not know if the sources you have are reliable, that is a very poor position to enter a content dispute with. If you know of reliable sources that would support your position but can not access them, you can try WP:RX. Otherwise, dropping the matter until such sources are found/can be presented by yourself or with the help of another editor, may be your best option. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 05:01, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

One suggestion for the UI

Hello, i have a suggestion for the wikipedia's UI. When we have a long article needing a task done, it is frustrating to read it upto the end then scroll back up to click on the edit button or publish button. I wanted to suggest that can't we have a scroll up button at the bottom right corner in every wikipedia page? I think this will help a lot. Lightbluerain (talk) 17:29, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Lightbluerain, have you tried using the Home and End keys on the keyboard? Usedtobecool ☎️ 17:39, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

The best place to discuss questions about the UI is at the Village Pump, Lightbluerain: either WP:VPPR or WP:VPT. --ColinFine (talk) 18:54, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

@Lightbluerain: A browser search (often Ctrl+f) for "bottom" at Wikipedia:User scripts/List finds several scripts for this or the opposite direction. I haven't tried them. I always use Home and End. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:42, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

ColinFine, thanks a lot. Usedtobecool and PrimeHunter, that's a great shortcut! But i use wikipedia on mobile, and we don't have ctrl keys here. Lightbluerain (talk) 09:30, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

My question is "why not have the tabs (edit, talk, etc) at the bottom of the page as well as the top?" --Khajidha (talk) 14:05, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Khajidha, so that would take us back to ColinFine's answer above. Teahouse can only help you with what already is. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 05:26, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

(Question) Draft:Sadaharu Yagi for submission

Courtesy link: Draft:Sadaharu Yagi --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 20:31, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi. Since I am not experienced, I am not clear what part of the article looks like “advertising“ as the article looks written objectively and supported by secondary sources which are all facts based data available online. I would like to have an advice from experienced editors regarding what exactly should be changed so that the next submission doesn’t get declined. Looking forward to hearing from you. Thank you in advance! 75.83.94.230 (talk) 17:18, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello, IP user. The person to take this up with is the editor who declined your submission, SamHolt6 (I have just pinged that editor, so they should see this.) For what it's worth, I don't agree with them that it reads like advertising. --ColinFine (talk) 18:52, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Saw the ping. IP can ask me on my talk page or the draft talk for an in-depth analysis of the issue, but in short I will say the draft is likely in violation of WP:NOTADVERTISING given the past undisclosed paid editing issue. Couple that with the notability issue (raised by another AfC reviewer), and the draft has some issues that need addressing. SamHolt6 (talk) 02:03, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Without regard to any past issues or whether they are notable, I have to say I agree with Colin – it reads dry and factual, just the way we like it. I see no promotion, puffery, or attempt to mention any non-notable accomplishments (all the awards are Grammys, etc.). —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 07:42, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

ColinFine, SamHolt6, and AlanM1, thank you for the professional advice! Yes, I was aware of the tag mentioning something about undisclosed payments. I don’t know what happened with this article in the past, for me the current draft article looks pretty neutral and fact based. SamHolt6, could you please help me fix the situation and get the submission accepted? Should I write this on your talk page? Among Latin music producers and audio engineers, Sadaharu Yagi is well known for his work bringing 3 Grammys to Draco’s recent albums. As a music production geek, I simply want to contribute to getting this article published. Thanks!75.83.94.230 (talk) 23:17, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

As they said above, you can contact them at their user talk page or ping them to the draft's talk page. If you reach an impasse, you can ask them not to review the draft again and resubmit. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 05:30, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

nachos history

I know first hand that nachos were served at San Antonio Spurs basketball games in the Hemisphere Arena in the winter of 1975/76. This was several months before the Texas Rangers baseball games in the spring of 1976. These were the earliest examples of "ball park nachos". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xfthm (talk • contribs) 17:34, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Xfthm Unfortunately, we cannot accept personal knowledge as a source of information on Wikipedia. All information must be cited to a published, independent reliable source that is possible to verify. 331dot (talk) 17:51, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

So to enlarge on that, Xfthm: if you are able to find something like newspaper or sports journal reports on any San Antonio Spurs basketball games in 1975/early 1976 (perhaps in the archives of a local public library) that mentioned the serving of nachos, we could use those as Reliable sources to which we could cite the fact and amend the article(s) concerned. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.197.27.39 (talk) 08:52, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Rejection of Etymology of Chicago

Courtesy link: Draft:Etymology of Chicago --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 03:26, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello,

I had my article, Draft:Etymology of Chicago rejected. The reason given is that "This submission provides insufficient context for those unfamiliar with the subject matter. Please see the guide to writing better articles for information on how to better format your submission."

In one sense, most people are unfamiliar with the subject. That's why they are looking it up on Wikipedia. I am putting pieces together, fully referenced, in a new way, in the spirit of what I think an encyclopedia should be. My introduction (lead) gives the essentials of what the piece is about.

My piece is a scholarly article -- with no jargon or technical talk -- written for an intelligent person interested in the subject of "where did the word Chicago come from." What have others said, who-what-where-when, and what is new to say about it, based on existing resources. Fifteen years ago, a Pulitzer Prize winning investigative reporter for the Chicago Tribune (William Mullen) said that my work would revise history. What Wikipedia has currently for the etymology of Chicago is subject to critical review of the background information.

If a person reading my piece was unfamiliar with the main actors and events, I have links that give context to many of them. Could I please have some other opinions about the rejection? What in this case in meant by "context?

I intend to write more articles in this subject matter area, and I believe that Wikipedia is in the spirit of what I would like to give.

Carl

Carl J. Weber (talk) 03:02, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi Carl J. Weber. You write a whole page about the etymology of Chicago but never link Chicago. That article should be linked in the opening paragraph to give context. I also suggest linking etymology, orthographic, provenance, and folk etymology, or using simpler terms. You claim "no jargon or technical talk" but I don't think you realize what sounds technical to ordinary people outside your field. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:50, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Carl J. Weber, I personally don't think that the context is insufficient. However, the formatting could definitely be improved to fit Wikipedia article standards. I'll point out a few things:

Articles have lead (lede) sections that do not have a heading, making the first heading wholly unnecessary.
Do not throw bold and italics everywhere in the article. See MOS:NOBOLD.
Headings follow sentence style capitalisation, not title.
External links have their own section (usually at the end) in articles. They (usually) do not go in the body. See WP:EL.

I would message the reviewers on their talk pages if you want to get clarification for their reasons. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 03:58, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

I did a bit of clean-up, but did not address the reviewers' concerns. David notMD (talk) 04:32, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Carl J. Weber, to above, I will add that, if you are going to link to your personal website, you have a conflict of interest (WP:COI) which you must declare. I do not think a link to your website is essential, so I recommend just dropping all the links, then you don't have to worry about it at all.

I was concerned by what you said above, that the "piece is a scholarly article... and what is new to say about it ... said that my work would revise history." That says to me that you are trying to build a new research article of your own, not just summarise what other sources have said. Reading the draft also gives the same sense, that the sources are not used to corroborate the claims in the draft, but rather the cited sources are being used as a foundation for an original thesis. This is incompatible with the purpose of Wikipedia. We have a strict NO ORIGINAL RESEARCH policy. If your intention is to get new knowledge out into the world, I suggest getting your work published in a scholarly journal. Only then, will it be acceptable for said new knowledge to be incorporated into a Wikipedia article. Usedtobecool ☎️ 04:33, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Carl J. Weber, I took a pass a this and made some formatting edits. My overall impression was that there is too much information for the average reader.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 04:48, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

I disagree with the other reviewers that it doesn't provide sufficient context. However the article appears to be mainly original research that is not reflected in reliable published scholarly sources. We can't summarize how words are used in primary sources, we only summarize what reliable secondary sources say. Note that writing an article from scratch here on Wikipedia is one of the hardest things one can do because there are so many things that are valued in the real world (novel deductions and beautiful argumentative prose) that are not valued in Wikipedia's hyper-neutral no-original-research world. We cannot cite your own material unless you first get it published in a scholarly source, and even then it the viewpoint would only be given attention in proportion to its prominence among other scholarly theories (see WP:DUE). I would not recommend continuing editing the draft here since Wikipedia isn't a publisher of original thought, I would however recommend expanding some of our already existing articles with reliably sourced material. – Thjarkur (talk) 10:10, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

1:1 translation from German Wikipedia rejected in the English space – why?

Hello,

It would be nice if someone could give me a few tips about what I did wrong - and how I can do better in the future: Unfortunately I can not quite understand why this (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:ContiTech) article was rejected. Can anyone tell me specifically where something does not fit? It is a 1:1 translation from the German Wikipedia (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/ContiTech), has been online there for 14 years and has since then been checked by several administrators and adapted again and again by numerous participants (https://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=ContiTech&offset=&limit=500&action=history). And I think that it’s written from a neutral point of view, and that it refers to a wide range of independent, reliable, published sources.

Greats Stefan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stefankohl (talk • contribs) 11:44, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Stefankohl Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Please understand that the German Wikipedia is a separate project from the English Wikipedia, with its own editors, policies, and practices, and what is acceptable there is not necessarily acceptable here. The draft seems largely sourced to press release type articles, the company itself, and other primary sources, which do not establish that this company meets our special definition of a notable company(please review). The draft just tells about the company and what it considers to be its history; Wikipedia (this one) is only interested in what independent reliable sources state about subjects like companies. 331dot (talk) 11:49, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

username login question

Resolved

– OP satisfied with answers given. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 14:08, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Why does one not stay signed in when navigating between, for example, Wikipedia and Wikiquote? Separate question: Why does a username appear blue (active) in Wikipedia (when signed in) and red in Wikiquote (when signed in)? I've noticed this for myself and others. --PaulThePony (talk) 16:47, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Blue means that there is a page at the destination. For example, you have a user page at User:PaulThePony, so in your signature, the rendered text for [[User:PaulThePony|PaulThePony]] shows up as PaulThePony, in blue.

If there is no user page for the user (either because the user does not exist or because there is such a user but he or she has not created a user page), it will show up as red: [[User:User:NoSuchUser|NoSuchUser]] shows up as NoSuchUser. TJRC (talk) 17:07, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

As to the other part, likely because it's a different website. Usedtobecool ☎️ 17:43, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Redlinks are absolutely nothing to do with whether anybody is logged in or not, PaulThePony: they are only about whether a page exists or not. User:PaulThePony exists in Wikipedia, so that link is blue. If you put the same thing ([[User:PaulThePony]]) on a page in Wikiquote, then the link will be red, because you have not created a User page in Wikiquote. (Confusingly, the "redlink" mechanism doesn't work across wikis, so the link wikiquote:User:PaulThePony does appear blue here in Wikipedia, even though the page doesn't exist). --ColinFine (talk) 18:47, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

@PaulThePony: You are supposed to remain logged in when you change between Wikimedia wikis but it sometimes fails, e.g. due to cookie issues in your browser. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:51, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your replies, TJRC, Usedtobecool, and ColinFine. Following up, do higher edit tallies result in attainment of editorial privileges? Is it, then, impossible to have particular tallies within Wikipedia, Wikimedia, and Wikiquote, result in one total such that the separate tallies would amass toward such privileges? And, while I've got your attention -- ;) -- should any new follow-up question be presented under a different 'new' subject heading? — Preceding unsigned comment added by PaulThePony (talk • contribs) 20:30, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

PaulThePony, no. The community can trust you with additional tools based on your history of contributions, that includes the quality of your contributions, your conduct with respect to other members of the community, and the level of knowledge of policies and guidelines you display. Edit count doesn't tell much. I am not clear what exactly the second question is, but I'm guessing it is no longer pertinent. You can ask followups here. When you want to ask about a completely different topic, you can either create a new section or do that here as well. There are no firm rules. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 20:59, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

PaulThePony, the only "editorial privileges" I'm aware of with edit count (and by extension, time) is that your account can become autoconfirmed (with 10 edits after 4 days of account creation) and eventually extended confirmed (with over 500 edits after 30 days from account creation). Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 22:40, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, PrimeHunter. That is very helpful in understanding the buggy nature of the beast. :) Thank you also, Usedtobecool. That does address all of my questions. P.S. You're still cool to me. ;) --PaulThePony (talk) 21:05, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, Tenryuu 🐲. How may I find out how many edits I've made? --PaulThePony (talk) 23:06, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

@PaulThePony: There are several ways to get your edit count (which may give somewhat different results). One is to go to your contributions page and click on "Edit count" in the box at the bottom. Another is to click on "Preferences" at the top of any page; an edit count is given under the "User profile" tab. Deor (talk) 06:00, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

PaulThePony, what Deor said. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 14:57, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

With thanks to you both, Deor and Tenryuu 🐲. I shall do as you suggest. :) --PaulThePony (talk) 08:55, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

How to cite more than one author in a book?

Hey eveyrone,

Just wanna ask, when filling in the book citation, how can I add more than one author when it only provides one tab on first and last names of author? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pinkdelta (talk • contribs) 11:24, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Pinkdelta, at the bottom, there should be a button to add additional information. When you click on it, it should provide additional parameters. Either choose from the list, or type in. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 11:33, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

If you edit with wikitext, and use the reftoolbar described at Help:Referencing_for_beginners#Using_refToolbar, there's a green+ button for adding more authors. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:56, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Help with a citation

Can someone kindly help me correctly cite a source to an essay by a specific writer that is part of a series of essays included in a gallery publication, i.e. a curator/writer Merike Talve wrote the essay "Vestiges of the Avant-Garde in Installation", an essay written for "Luminous Sites: Ten Video Installations" (1986). Would this be correct?

Talve, Merike (author). «Vestiges of the Avant-Garde in Installation», "Luminous Sites: Ten Video Installations", a Video In /Western Front production, Vanguard Publications, 1986 (cat) ISBN 0920974147.

Thank you! LorriBrown (talk) 19:55, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi LorriBrown for this type of reference I normally use {{Cite book}} -On the template page there is an example of "Citing a chapter in a book with different authors for different chapters and an editor". Hope this helps, do come back here if you need further assistance. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:43, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Dodger67 That is very helpful, thank you! I have another question though, is it important in citations for a bibliography to include all writers and artists (for a exhibition publication) but okay to not include them in the bibliography for the individual writer? I ask because some of the publications have multiple writers and multiple artists which sort of makes the entry confusing. Thank you again! LorriBrown (talk) 22:52, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

LorriBrown, hii! Assuming I understand you correctly, full citations are good for cited references, further reading or bibliographies that are general references, and external links, but for the article body bibliography of the author who is the subject of the article, I recommend listing only the book titles (and other notable/minimal-identifying details about the book in simple language, not as a formatted citation (eg. "Title (year)" for books with their own articles, title translation if not in English, possibly adding "coauthored with Jane Doe" if there are only two or three coauthors with nearly as significant contribution, and maybe "(ISBN:XXXXXXXX)" at the end). Maybe create a table like filmographies if you want to add consistently additional details about the books. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 16:52, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Actually, turns out WP:BIBLIOGRAPHY goes to the page that has the actual guidelines on what I was talking about. Usedtobecool ☎️ 16:55, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Usedtobecool Thank you for addressing my question! :-) The thing that I seem to struggle with the most is how much information to include in each line entry in a bibliography (for articles written by the subject) some that do not have citations (no online version of the article available) or for a list of publications (curatorial exhibition catalogues) that the subject has curated and/or written the essay - or may have written an essay for another curators' exhibition catalogue. I can see that some of the examples that are provided do not go into a lot of detail; this seems reasonable because the subject they use in the examples are well know individuals who have Wikilinks. I readily admit that I may get easily confused and overwhelmed with the details.... The subject of the article I've been working is a woman who is not well known like in the examples. It may end up that her notability will be challenged at some point perhaps. I am hoping not but want to make sure the t's are crossed and the i's are dotted to give the article a better chance to survive. Several of her essays are not available on line and in magazines that no longer active but the work is available in certain library and organization holdings. I've found several articles in the local university and have requested some others from the local librarians. She is a Canadian and the magazines are from Canada from the 1980's. Several of the curatorial publications are out of print. I've been able to verify many of the articles thru google books, some archive organizations and good old google. I struggle with how much detail to include for example with the reviews written about artists. I've included the names of the gallery and city which I suppose may be extraneous. I tried to minimize the citations by using archive organizations search function that lists several reviews on one page. In reading the page that you note I see that you should not use the google link unless the book is available on line so I'll need to look at that. I've included the gallery & city where the exhibition took place and I am supposing that would be irrelevant. From what I've read (from my point of view) her writing was brilliant but I understand that is not relevant to determining notability.

Another question is do I need to disclose COI with this subject because she curated a show about a person that I do have COI with? This was not and is not the catalyst for my interest in creating an article for this subject; however, it was how I first became aware of her curatorial activities and writing skills. Kind regards, LorriBrown (talk) 03:13, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

LorriBrown, no, you do not have a COI, since she can no longer work with the person you have a COI with and hasn't for at least 22 years; unless you have become and remain friends of the family.

Bibliography doesn't require citations since the books are themselves citations (unless the work was written using a pseudonym in which case you need a secondary source connecting the subject with the pseudonym).

A list of works by the subject doesn't add to notability, only works on the subject can. Having a lot of obscure details is worse than having a few of them.

On the technical side, I think this could work:

Published reviews/essays

That last exhibition, included in This collection of art reviews (1999), edited by Editor1, Editor 2.

Practically speaking, bibliography is for books, we don't include every piece of writing ever published by our subject. Imagine if we tried to do that with Roger Ebert. This seems specially relevant with the works published in Vanguard. You have already mentioned that the subject worked at Vanguard. That obviously means she would have published stuff in the magazine. If any of those were specially noted/referenced by other writers, those could be mentioned to give useful information, such as "This essay that she wrote for Vanguard was [reasons why this essay became special]". A simple list of things published in Vanguard which gives no further information on why any of it might be important enough to be included, provides no useful information since that adds nothing to the reader's understanding of the subject than when they read the sentence "She worked for Vanguard in the early 80's".

Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 06:07, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Usedtobecool Thank you very much! LorriBrown (talk) 15:04, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Another visual editing question

Can you add timelines using the visual editor? Also, is there a guide on how to do it on source? WDM10 (talk) 07:04, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

WDM10, maybe see WP:Timeline and the help page it links to while you wait for an answer? I don't know if that helps at all since I have never worked on one. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 07:12, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

@WDM10: I've no idea about doing it in visual editor. In source editor though, if you have a particular type of timeline in mind that you have seen in an existing article, the easiest thing to do is edit that article, copy the code used to make the timeline to your article, then modify the copied code to reflect your data.

Thanks for guiding me to that. WDM10 (talk) 07:35, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

If you don't have a particular article in mind, there are apparently several types of timeline listed at WP:Timeline. If you click on one of the links to a template, like {{Graphical timeline}}, and then click on "What links here" on the left sidebar, then in the "Filters" pane, click "Hide links" and "Hide redirects" (so "Show transclusions" is the only "Show" remaining), you get a list of the articles that "transclude" (use) the template, e.g., Cambrian. I hope this makes sense. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 07:29, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for guiding me to that. WDM10 (talk) 07:35, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

@Whatamidoing (WMF): another visual editor question, where the answer is likely no, but not many who can give it definitively. Usedtobecool ☎️ 07:42, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the ping, Usedtobecool. You can't insert a new timeline, but if a timeline is already on the page, then you can edit the content (a very basic editor – a basic box with the codes in it). You can also open an article that has a timeline in it in the visual editor, copy that one, and paste it into the visual editor in a new article. I've requested that they add support at phab:T247766. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 15:46, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

WikiProjects

Are regular editors able to create WikiProjects? I want to create WP:WikiProject Backlogs, a Wikiproject dedicated to clearing backlogs, and was wondering if I had permission to do that. Thanks, King of Scorpions 21:52, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi, King of Scorpions. Yes, but it is recommended to propose it rather than go ahead and create it directly. See WP:WikiProject Council/Guide, especially the section Creating a WikiProject. --ColinFine (talk) 22:20, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Bring this up at Wikipedia:Cleanup as they are very active and can recommend what is best.--Moxy 🍁 22:34, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

@Moxy: On the main page or the talk page? King of Scorpions 15:05, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Talk page....ask if the project incorporates backlog agendas.--Moxy 🍁 16:15, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Done King of Scorpions 16:34, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Vandalism help

If there is a high level of IP vandalism on a page over the last few hours, is that enough to request page protection (it might only need to be short term)? And if so, what's the fastest way to get the protection?

The page is Bridgeport, Connecticut, Centennial half dollar. Thanks! - Whisperjanes (talk) 06:05, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Whisperjanes, welcome to the Teahouse. I agree that the page can do with some semi-protection, as that will prevent IP editors from editing. There are two ways you can request protection:

Put {{edit semi-protected}} on the article's talk page and state your reasons why it should be protected.
Go to the WP:RPP board and state your case and proposed action.

Hope this helps! And thanks for linking to the article in question and signing. :) Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 06:14, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, Tenryuu! And for future reference, does one of those ways usually get a faster response, from your experience, or are they pretty similar? - Whisperjanes (talk) 06:18, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Whisperjanes, I have not personally participated in getting a page protected so I'm afraid I can't tell you which method is faster. I know of these two solutions from checking out the source code from protected pages and the action that was provided in this archived Teahouse question. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 06:23, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Whisperjanes, when it's just one user, it's better to leave warnings to their talk page, and report them at WP:AIV if they persist, or if vandalism is all they are doing and they are doing it so fast that it is urgent to damagecontrol, you can skip the talk page and report directly.

The fastest way would be to post to the talk page of an admin who is online; of course that won't be possible if you don't know many admins. In case AIV has a backlog and it is urgent, you can directly post to WP:AN asking that appropriate action be taken. If the issue isn't something that would be obvious to everybody, and might require discussion/explanations, WP:ANI would be preferred to AN. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 06:21, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

To clarify, if blocking an editor, an IP or a range of IPs is likely to take care of the problem, Page protection is unwarranted. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 06:25, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Usedtobecool You know what I just realized? I think it's because it's Today's Featured Article. Is that common? I don't think blocking a range of IPs would take care of the problem in this case. But would requesting protection be too much, since it's a TFA? And thank you for all the helpful information so far! - Whisperjanes (talk) 06:38, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

The IP has been blocked by @Oshwah:. Perhaps, they can help here. I am not sure about protection policy vis-a-vis TFA's. Usedtobecool ☎️ 07:08, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Whisperjanes - Yes, vandalism made to the current featured article of the day is extremely common and occurs like clockwork for each article that makes it to the front page. The protection policy applies to this page just like it would any other page on Wikipedia, and Wikipedia's protection policy spells these guidelines out in detail. While there are some admins who will out-right refuse to protect an article if it's currently today's featured article and is being featured on the main page. For the record, I'm not one of those admins. ;-) However, I note that there are admins (including myself) who try to keep the duration of any page protection applied to today's featured article to be as short of a length as possible (usually an hour or two). I understand their main argument that, by principle and as a website that we say "anyone can edit", we're showing new users and potential future editors that this isn't really the case when we protect the featured article on the main page. However, I also believe that we should do what's necessary in order to put a stop to repeated and high-rate disruption when it's found. You're of course always welcome to file a request to have a page protection by visiting this noticeboad and following the directions there; you're not doing any harm by doing so. If anything, it'll be helpful and bring the issue to the admins' attention. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:27, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you all for the help! I'm glad to understand more about the protection policy now c: I think the IP vandalism has gone down on that article considerably since that one IP was blocked, but I'll keep an eye out and report if it gets worse again. - Whisperjanes (talk) 16:39, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Edit Sidebar Links on Work Wiki

Hello! I'm trying to learn some Wikipedia edit, as my workplace uses a private Wiki to manage code documentation. In this wiki, we have a sidebar with headings akin to the ones displayed on an open Wiki (i.e. Interaction and Tools). However, the links under those headings are outdated. I've been looking through the archives, and have gone in to edit various pages, but have seen no means with which to edit the sidebar links. If there does exist a reference article, or if someone can point me in the right direction, that would be very kind. Urodele (talk) 14:25, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Urodele, have you looked at mw:Manual:Interface/Sidebar. If it isn't on there, you might have more luck asking at mw:Project:Support desk - there are only 11 local editors that can edit the interface. ~~ QRA: Alex Noble - talk 15:03, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Alex Noble, that looks like exactly what I want! I'll be sure to read it more thoroughly and test it out, then otherwise head to the support desk. Thanks for your help. Urodele (talk) 15:13, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

We only have 11 Wikipedia:Interface administrators who can edit sitewide JavaScript and CSS pages. But most pages in the MediaWiki namespace can be edited by all 1144 normal administrators. This includes MediaWiki:Sidebar and pages defining terms there like MediaWiki:Currentevents-url and MediaWiki:Currentevents. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:39, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

PrimeHunter Thank you for information!Urodele (talk) 16:46, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Le Grand Mag article

Hi everyone! Can someone please help me understand why my draft was rejected? I provided sources to support my article, but I got the feedback that "this submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources", can someone help me? Luxury yogi (talk) 14:17, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Luxury yogi, welcome to the Teahouse. Taking a look at the deletion logs tells me that your draft has been deleted speedily two times (one recently and the other over a year ago) for the same reason: unambiguous advertising or promotion. This suggests that you should:

rework the article's prose to have it be much more neutral in tone
find sources that talk about your subject, but are not connected to them (e.g., not social media sites, company websites, etc.) Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 14:49, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Hi Luxury yogi, I hope you are well. According to the logs, your draft was deleted today for being "unambiguous advertising or promotion". Since it has been deleted, I cannot see the draft so I cannot say specifically what was wrong with yours that led to its deletion. However, Wikipedia articles must be written from a neutral point of view and not in a way which advertises or promotes their subject - the two admins who have deleted your draft believe that yours was too promotional. While having sources in your article is important, this alone is not sufficient for a Wikipedia article and will not save it from rejection if it is written like a promotion. I would also note that the type of sources you include in an article is important. You should use multiple sources which are reliable and independent of the subject and offer significant coverage of the topic. As I said, I cannot see the deleted version of your article so I don't know exactly what sources you used on the article (an admin might be able to help here); however, that might also help to explain why your draft was rejected and then deleted. Let us know if you have any further questions. WJ94 (talk) 14:58, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Would this article on Robb Report https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robb_Report be a good example to follow in terms of neutrality and references? Because I would say Le Grand Mag is to luxury lifestyle as Vogue is to fashion. Thank you so much! Luxury yogi (talk) 15:15, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Imho, Robb Report is another candidate for deletion. These are glossy magazines filled with advertisements for luxury products. Creators of the products pay for the articles/advertisements, the magazines are distributed free to wealthy people, and no-one actually reads them. Consequently no-one writes about them either, and they are not notable as Wikipedia uses that word. Maproom (talk) 17:16, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Natasha Moraga

Hi... the article Natasha Moraga still is tagged for tone. I have worked on it and asked on the talk page if anything else needs to be done but it seems to be forgotten. Can anyone take a quick look? --HicksW (talk) 15:51, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

HicksW, welcome to the Teahouse. Taking a quick glance at it I can see parts of it which are peacocking a little. I'll give it a closer look in a bit. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 16:51, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Tenryuu thank you--HicksW (talk) 16:54, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

@HicksW: I did a complete edit of the article. Some stuff I've deleted as it didn't serve any purpose besides praising her, and others I've enclosed in comments due to their size and could be re-included in the article if they can be made more neutral.

Shameless plug: If you ever have questions or would like feedback from other editors who do the same thing I do, please drop by the requests page of the Guild of Copyeditors and someone can help take a look at your article and edit it accordingly. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 17:21, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Article doesn’t meet notability guidelines?

Hello, I’m new to Wikipedia editing, but I found this article https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inta_Omri on an extremely famous middle eastern song. After having read the notability guidelines, I strongly believe it is notable enough to warrant its own article, but the article itself is severely lacking. There is a warning type thing on top of the article that says “The topic of this article may not meet Wikipedia's notability guideline for music.” How can I help show that the music is notable? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Erythrochroism (talk • contribs) 15:38, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Hey Erythrochroism, welcome to Wikipedia! If you want to show that the song is notable enough, you could add independent and reliable sources to the article. You can remove the notice once the sources have been added, as the issue has then been addressed. --MrClog (talk) 15:57, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

This may seem like a silly question, but do the sources have to be referenced in the information in the article, meaning cited to support some information, or can I add them at the bottom just to establish notability? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Erythrochroism (talk • contribs) 16:14, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

I would advise you to use them to support existing information or to support new information. --MrClog (talk) 16:21, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Erythrochroism, ideally the references should be cited at the sentences of the content they support. The software will generate a reference list when {{reflist}} is used. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 17:45, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Reverting an edit based on POV

What should be my action, if an editor reverts my edit which had WP:RS citation with her/his own generalized phrases based on his POV which doesn't improve the section in the article much? TIA. Santoshdts (talk) 20:12, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

@Santoshdts: Start a discussion on the article's talk page. Don't start a edit war. See WP:BRD. RudolfRed (talk) 20:28, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

RudolfRed Thanks for reply, currently in discussion stage. I hope some better content emerge. Santoshdts (talk) 20:57, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Making a family tree on Wikipedia

Hi guys, I am trying to construct a family tree on Wikipedia but so far I have had no success. I used the templates given on this link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Family_trees but none seem to be working so far. Whenever i input data it is collapsed on the page itself. I tried using the added parameters but nothing seems to be working. E.g. for the Ahnentafel template their is the |collapsed=no to {{ahnentafel}} parameter. Are there any how to do videos, or step by step instructions? — Preceding unsigned comment added by EthanyRouge (talk • contribs) 19:40, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi EthanyRouge, welcome to the Teahouse. There are only the template documentation pages you may have seen like Template:Ahnentafel and Template:Tree chart. Editors often look for working code in an existing article and adapt it for their purpose. If you save your code at the "Sandbox" link at top of any page then we can see what is wrong. If you have only tried [30] then I'm afraid it's too confused to guess what you are trying to do. VisualEditor seems poorly suited for this. Try the source editor. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:03, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Was the main page of Wikipedia ever vandalized by administrators?

Has this happened before? ApChrKey ^Talk 21:34, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

@ApChrKey: No. Then again, why would trusted editors vandalize? LPS and MLP Fan (Littlest Pet Shop) (My Little Pony) 21:38, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

@LPS and MLP Fan: But what if they slowly work to gain support and then vandalise the main page? ApChrKey ^Talk 21:43, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

@ApChrKey: I don’t think so. If you have any other questions, feel free to ask me or another host. LPS and MLP Fan (Littlest Pet Shop) (My Little Pony) 21:46, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

See also WP:DDMP. YorkshireLad ✿ ^(talk) 21:51, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

@LPS and MLP Fan: I hope this question doesn't permanently end my chances of becoming an administrator. ApChrKey ^Talk 21:52, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Don’t worry; you are fine as long as you make helpful edits to the encyclopedia. LPS and MLP Fan (Littlest Pet Shop) (My Little Pony) 21:53, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

LPS and MLP Fan, if you don't know the answer to a question leave it for someone else to answer, don't just make things up. To give the actual answer, yes, it's happened surprisingly often, particularly in the early days of Wikipedia, although in more recent instances it's tended to be the result of admin accounts having their passwords compromised rather than the more traditional "admin flouncing out after an argument". (This is one of the primary reasons we now enforce strong passwords.) It hasn't happened for almost a year; the last instance was on 24 March 2019. We've also surprisingly often had admins accidentally cut-and-paste material onto the Main Page when it was intended for somewhere else, such as here, while Maxim managed to accidentally delete the main page altogether once. ‑ Iridescent 21:57, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

@Iridescent: Another question... Why are some vandalism edits deleted from the page history of a page? They are grey and cannot be viewed. ApChrKey ^Talk 22:02, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

@ApChrKey: See Wikipedia:Revision deletion. It doesn't have to be due to vandalism. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:05, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

As the policy on redaction (revision deletion) explains, there are several reasons for it, that include some copyright violations and some BLP violations. Vandalism is not usually redacted in this fashion unless it is considered to be "purely disruptive", which is something of a judgment call. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:14, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Articles

I was under the impression that when i wrote an article, it would start as a draft, but the first article that i wrote immeadietly got uploaded as if it was finished, which it was far from being, and it got deleted. How do i make drafts and not articles? Sbob99 (talk) 15:27, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Sbob99, and welcome to the Teahouse! It's simple to create a draft; you just type "Draft:Foo" (where "Foo" is the draft name) in the search bar (in the top right part of the screen). Then, you can create it. Hope this helps, King of Scorpions 15:39, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

@Sbob99: Also see WP:REFUND if you want to request a copy of the deleted material. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 01:27, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia citation bot....?

Hello Wikipedians, Would you please provide with example usage of the citation bot via the webpage link below? https://tools.wmflabs.org/citations/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Citation_bot/use I have tried it, but faced with THE error message and no result. If you kindly answer my inquiry, Please add my ID Goodtiming8871 in your reply and I can see notification via email Kind Regards, Goodtiming8871 (talk) 00:42, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Greetings @Goodtiming8871:. Note: I am not an experienced editor. I used the citation bot on a single page. This is a link to the diff. You can see in the diff that, for this page at this time, it only normalized letter casing of isbn. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Backpacking_(hiking)&curid=854046&diff=945942998&oldid=943718539&diffmode=source —¿philoserf? (talk) 02:47, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Question by Phatman2045

how to edit — Preceding unsigned comment added by Phatman2045 (talk • contribs) 05:17, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia and welcome to the Teahouse, Phatman2045! To get started editing, I suggest looking over Help:Introduction to get an understanding for how to edit. I'm also going to leave you a message on your talk page with some more information about Wikipedia that might be helpful for you. If you have any more questions, please feel free to ask away! OhKayeSierra (talk) 05:24, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Zagg Wikipedia Page

I'm working on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zagg . For the past few months, this page has had the flag that it's written like an advertisement. I removed content that I thought would trigger this warning and then updated all of the outdated information I found on the page. I also removed sources that weren't credible with better sources I was able to find on the web.

Could someone take a look and let me know if there's any additional action I should take to get that removed? I'm still trying to figure out this whole wikipedia editing thing!

Thanks for your help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by NB1995 (talk • contribs) 18:54, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello NB1995, you should not be directly editing the article. As per the WP:PAID editing policy, you need to declare your employer and client on your userpage and use WP:Edit requests to make changes to the article. Usedtobecool ☎️ 07:42, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Help - In reference 13

{{Tl|cite web|url=http://sbcihq.in/d-p-burma-memorial-lecture-award/D. P. BURMA MEMORIAL LECTURE AWARD

I am trying to create this link, but why this - cite web/url is visible in reference.

Shruti Malaker (talk) 05:04, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Shruti Malaker, You didn't close the template at the end with the }}. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 05:45, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi Shruti Malaker. You can found out more about the formatting of the "cite web" template at Template:Cite web, but it looks like you're leaving out some important parameters and that's what's causing the url to be displayed in the citation.

One of the more basic formats of a "cite web" template looks like this: <ref>{{cite web|last=|first=|url=|title=|date=|website=|access-date=}}</ref>. You should try and fill as many of these parameters as you can for the citation to be displayed properly.

What you've formatted above looks like

<ref>{{cite web|last=|first=|url=ttp://sbcihq.in/d-p-burma-memorial-lecture-award/D. P. BURMA MEMORIAL LECTURE AWARD|title=|date=|website=|access-date=}}</ref>

and that's leaving some important paramters empty. In particular, you seemed to have unintentionally combined the "url" paramter and "title" paramters together so that no "title" is being displayed in the citation. So, try formating the template like

<ref>{{cite web|last=|first=|url=http://sbcihq.in/d-p-burma-memorial-lecture-award/|title=D. P. Burma Memorial Lecture Award|date=|website=|access-date=}]</ref>

and see if that resolves the problem you're having. The meanings of the other paramters like "last" and "access-date" are explained on the template's documetation page; you're not required to use them all, but generally the more you can complete the better. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:04, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

P. BURMA MEMORIAL LECTURE AWARD http://sbcihq.in/d-p-burma-memorial-lecture-award/D. P. BURMA MEMORIAL LECTURE AWARD Check |url= value (help). Missing or empty |title= (help)

I put code }} in the last but now it is showing as - value (help). Missing or empty |title= (help)

Shruti Malaker (talk) 05:58, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

@Shruti Malaker: Put D. P. BURMA MEMORIAL LECTURE AWARD Check after the parameter |title=.

Please don't make a new section to reply; edit under your question heading so that we can keep everything in the same section. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 06:05, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Help - In reference 13

^[1]

I did so many changes, but unable to do it.

http://sbcihq.in/d-p-burma-memorial-lecture-award. Missing or empty |title= (help)

Shruti Malaker (talk) 07:04, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

References

^ "D. P. Burma Memorial Lecture Award | SBCI".

Hello Shruti Malaker, I have fixed it for you. If you are having trouble getting the hang of it, there should be a "cite" button at the top of the editing window. You can use that one. For most cases, you can simply choose automatic, provide the url and it will make the citation for you. In some cases when it fails, you can go to the "manual" tab and fill in the details. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 07:20, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Help - In reference 13

http://sbcihq.in/d-p-burma-memorial-lecture-award. Missing or empty |title= (help)

Thanks for your modification in reference 13. But the problem is still there.

Shruti Malaker (talk) 07:34, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Shruti Ji, please stop creating a new discussion every time you reply. Instead, please find the thread of the continuing discussion to reply. I am not seeing the error. Please refresh the article and if it persists, provide further details as to where and when you are seeing the error message. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 08:00, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Help with archiving sources

Hello! I use a lot of different news articles in my edits and would like to get some help where I can find proper guidelines regarding archiving sources. Other editors have been adding archives to some of my sources and it feels like it could be helpful for me if I could do that myself also. Would really appreciate if someone could give me some guidelines regarding this matter! Thank you in advance :) Zandor (talk) 07:10, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

DariuZzandor, see Help:Archiving a source, and/or give User:IABot a try. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 08:08, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Usedtobecool Perfect, thank you very much, will check them out! Zandor (talk) 08:16, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Contacting an editor who edited my draft

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Etymology_of_Chicago&action=edit
A simpler link: Draft:Etymology of Chicago (added by CiaPan (talk) 12:33, 17 March 2020 (UTC))

Hello... How can I find the contact info for the person(s) who edited my draft, so I can contact them and discuss their review. Thanks Carl J. Weber (talk) 02:31, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi Carl J. Weber. What you can do is go to the drafts page and near the top you should see a "View history" tab. This is the page's history and if you click on you be able to see a record of every person/account who edited the draft. All you will need to do is find the person you want to contact and then click on their user name. This will take you to their user page, and all you need to do then is go to their user talk page (look for the "Talk" tab) and then post your message.

Finally, I noticed something the last time you posted at the Teahouse that seems to have happened once again. When you want to start a completely new discussion at the Teahouse or on any other talk page, the easiest thing to do is to scroll to the very top of the page and click on "New section" (since the Teahouse is for geared towards new editors, there's also a big blue button at the top that says "Click here to ask a question" that does the same things). When you click on "New section" a new window will open and you can post your comment. Make sure to try and add a "Subject/headline" and then click "Publish changes" when you're rading to post. This will ensure that the thread is put in the correct place on the talk page, etc. It kind of looks like you're either clicking "Edit" at the top of the page or scrooling down to the very last thread on the bottom of the page and clicking "Edit" for that thread. You can do those things if you like, but you then will have to make sure you properly format you post, add a headline/heading, etc. because the software will not do it for you. If, on the other hand, you want to add a new comment to an already existing discussion thread, then you shouldn't click "New section", but rather just the "Edit" button for the particular thread and then add your comment. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:54, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

an edit attributed to me, I didn't do?

I went to the site to look for pummelo, and got a notice that there was a message for me. Huh? I have never "inputted" a thing to Wikipedian I simply don't have knowledge worth posting there. <G> Then, when I clicked on this "message", I was told that and edit the bot figured came from me was taken down. Then, there was an actual "warning", with a long number behind it. What?!? It was supposed to be about Queen, Lambert, as I recall. I hear of this subject for the very first time when reading the warning message. What gives? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.35.188.15 (talk) 13:02, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

You will see that the message is from 2017. At the foot of your user talk page it should be displaying the message in MediaWiki:Anontalkpagetext, explaining that yours is an IP address which may be shared. The contributions from that IP address are shown at Special:Contributions/72.35.188.15. To avoid seeing messages which may not relate to your own edits it is wise to create an account. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:10, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) User:72.35.188.15, hi! I see the edit; it was made in 2017. When you're editing without being logged in, your edits are logged under your IP address; ISPs sometimes recycle these and give them to new people, and you'll have a different one when you use a different computer, say. If you don't wish to edit Wikipedia, you don't need to worry as long as you aren't actually making the edits, though you can avoid them by creating an account, which has other benefits. It's also recommended if you decide you would like to edit—it doesn't have to be about having knowledge that's not on here, as there are lots of ways to contribute. See the tutorial for more on that. YorkshireLad ✿ ^(talk) 13:11, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

How to get permission to translate and link protected articles

I have translated a protected article but I can't link the newly translated page with the original one. How do I get permission to do that? Kidus (talk) 10:58, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, Kidus, I don't understand what you are asking. Interlanguage links are usually handled in Wikidata, and as far as I know there's no question of permissions there. Please explain exactly what you are trying to do, and what happens when you try. --ColinFine (talk) 11:44, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

I translated this article (which is a protected article) into this. But the language link wasn't automatically added (as it is for non-protected articles). When I try to manually link it, I get an error saying I do not have the necessary permissions to do so. Sorry if this is not the place to ask this. Kidus (talk) 12:17, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

T'ena Yest'illiñ, Kidus. You'll have to ask at am-wiki: this is nothing to do with en-wiki. I very much doubt that it's anything to do with the article being protected here, but I may be wrong. As far as I can see, 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic is already linked to am:2019-20 ኮሮናቫይረስ ወረርሽኝ, via d:Q81068910. --ColinFine (talk) 13:27, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Amesegnalehu (Thanks), ColinFine :) It seems resolved now. And yes it is because the article is protected because I've had issues like this before. But I'll check at am-wiki in the future. Kidus (talk) 14:49, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

How to see contributions of blocked user?

I was wondering what contributions this user made: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:NEOWIZ_Global

but i cannot find a way to view it, unlike if i try to view contributions for most users. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Disoff (talk • contribs) 14:18, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

User:Disoff The editor may have not made any edits to existing articles. All of their edits may have been to pages that were deleted as spam. This sometimes happens with blocked editors. McClenon mobile (talk) 14:44, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Central Auth is a useful tool for this because it has administrator access on all projects as far as edit counting is concerned. This user has only made one edit on the English Wikipedia and it was deleted. That doesn't let you see the edit, but it does tell you there was something there. GMG ^talk 14:47, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi Disoff. Edits to pages which were later deleted are not shown in contributions. They can be seen by administrators. The user only made an edit to NEOWIZ and was blocked for their username. See User talk:NEOWIZ Global and Wikipedia:Username policy#Promotional names. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:51, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Adding redirect

Hello! I hope this is an appropriate question. I haven't been able to find a very straightforward answer elsewhere, although I must admit I haven't been searching very thoroughly. I am interested in creating something to add a redirect note to what currently comes up when one types in a certain acronym to another article of an organization with the same acronym. First, am I allowed to do this? My account isn't very old, and I've only done 10 edits. Second, is this possible? I can give more detail if necessary. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TariffedSparrow (talk • contribs) 16:36, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Yes, you can do this. You might let us know what the redirected term might be, and whether you are connected to the organization in question. The basics on redirects are at WP:REDIRECT.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 16:38, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi TariffedSparrow . Please always be specific in questions. There are many possible circumstances. What is the acronym and which article do you want readers to find? PrimeHunter (talk) 16:42, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

The acronym is "PWSA". I'm hoping for readers to find Pittsburgh Water and Sewer Authority, as it currently automatically redirects to a different organization. I am not affiliated with either organization. Thank you for your assistance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TariffedSparrow (talk • contribs) 16:47, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Ok, I see that PWSA and pwsa gives different results. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:56, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

@TariffedSparrow: PWSA already redirected to Pittsburgh Water and Sewer Authority and has done so for nine years. I guess you mean pwsa which redirected to Pregnant Women Support Act. I have changed it to also redirect to Pittsburgh Water and Sewer Authority (which gets more traffic) and added a {{redirect}} hatnote at top with a link to the other article. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:01, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you so much for the help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by TariffedSparrow (talk • contribs) 17:03, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

incorrect link

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_French_Open_%E2%80%93_Women%27s_Singles the link at the bottom of the page is to the 2012, not the 2013, singles draw — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scott Blair H (talk • contribs) 18:38, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Scott Blair H, thanks for catching that. I've started a discussion on the article's talk page. If you are able to find a PDF that corresponds to the 2013 championships, be bold and replace it. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 18:56, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Update Scott Blair H, I thought you might like to know that the external link has been fixed.

Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 20:46, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Peer reviewing articles

How long does an article usually take to get peer reviewed? I'm fairly new to the process as I listed an article of mine just over a month ago and it hasn't gained any traction. WDM10 (talk) 08:39, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

WDM10 It can take many weeks, sometimes months, as we're all volunteers here, doing what we can when we can. 331dot (talk) 08:50, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. WDM10 (talk) 08:51, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

You do not need to wait for a review, the Articles for Creation process is not mandatory. If you think the article is sufficiently well sourced you are free to move the article yourself to mainspace. However, I believe the source you are using is a self-published source, I would recommend removing it and using a reliable source instead. – Thjarkur (talk) 20:27, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

@Þjarkur: Thanks for your response. Which article are you referring to? WDM10 (talk) 20:29, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

The first one I saw was Draft:Australia vs England in rugby league, which is based on RugbyLeagueProject.com, a self-published source by some fans. – Thjarkur (talk) 20:32, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

@Þjarkur: Thanks for the clarification. I also made reference to the 2019 Rugby League annual, wouldn't that be considered a reliable source or do I need more? WDM10 (talk) 20:35, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

That's a good source, if you can remove all the citations to RugbyLeagueProject and use official sources instead then that's preferable. – Thjarkur (talk) 20:39, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

@Þjarkur: Thanks for your help. By the way, the article I was initially referring to was List of Rugby League World Cup hat-tricks. WDM10 (talk) 20:41, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Also rugbyleagueproject.org seems to be the official statistics provider for Welsh rugby league, if that changes anything. WDM10 (talk) 20:44, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

I completely misunderstood your original post... I just assumed you were referring to AfC reviews since I saw you were submitting some drafts, but you were referring to actual peer reviews. Yes as 331dot says, it's fairly random and just depends on someone interested finding it. – Thjarkur (talk) 20:59, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

@Þjarkur: Thanks anyway for your help. WDM10 (talk) 21:18, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Trying to contact

FYI

– The section heading was made by Tenryuu. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 21:52, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi... I was talking with an editor, DragonflySixtyseven, and I lost my link. Where might I search to find it. Thanks. Carl J. Weber (talk) 21:45, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Carl J. Weber, if you're looking to speak with this editor, please leave a comment on their talk page. If you're looking for the history of the draft, you can click on "history" at the top of the page when on your draft.

Please click on "new section" at the top of the page so that your question gets its own heading and is not grouped in with the previous question. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 21:52, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Information to discuss!

Hello Mates,

I have experience from multiple industries...

Several projects and points needs a lot of information to be added and they are extremely legitimate, and would love to contribute...

But i am very weak in creating contents so please some one help if possible, or teach me... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nicholaschoksi (talk • contribs) 17:03, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Nicholaschoksi, welcome to the Teahouse. If you want an interactive way to learn how to use Wikipedia, you may want to try out The Wikipedia Adventure first. It will show you the basics of how an article should be structured and how to collaborate with other editors. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 17:15, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

The blue links that editors added to your Talk page provide guidance. David notMD (talk) 22:03, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Creating Articles

I have been looking for some time on how to create a wikipedia article. Could someone please provide me with the steps to do so. Much Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yacufan (talk • contribs) 22:10, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Yacufan Hello! This article helped me a lot, Wikipedia:Article development. This can also be helpful when you decide to create one, Help:Your first article. Best regards, Zandor (talk) 22:15, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Yacufan Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I will caution you that successfully creating a new article is the hardest possible task to undertake on Wikipedia. It takes much time and practice. New users who dive right in to article creation without experience and understanding the process often end up disappointed and with hurt feelings as their work is mercilessly edited and even deleted by others. I don't want you to have bad feelings; new users are much more successful when they first spend time editing existing articles in areas that interest them, to get a feel for how Wikipedia works and what is expected of new articles. If you do this, you will increase your chances of success.

However, if you still wish to attempt to create an article, you should read the pages suggested by DariuZzandor, and perhaps also use the new user tutorial. You may then go to Articles for Creation to create and submit a draft for review by another editor, so you get feedback on it before your draft is formally placed in the encyclopedia, instead of afterwards. 331dot (talk) 22:40, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Sayonara Player with reliable and independent sources

Hello members,

in October 2019 the draft article Draft: Sayonara Player has been created. Two months ago it was updated with reliable and independent sources. In the meantime five members worked in finishing a reliable Wiki entry. Could someone please review the current version?

2A02:908:1A74:4360:982B:5BC0:A1F8:5AED (talk) 07:37, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

You could resubmit the draft, but as it stands, it is unlikely to pass. You need sources demonstrating the notability of the software, that is, sources that are both (1) independent of the subject, (2) reliable (meaning, published in an outlet with a history of proper editorial oversight) and (3) deal with the subject at length. Right now, the sources meeting (1) are:

[31] which according to [32] is pretty much user-generated content (see WP:SPS), failing (2)
[33] (wiki, so user-generated content, fails (2))
[34] is a blog so probably fails (2), and in addition three paragraphs likely fails (3)
[35] might be a good source (I have no idea whether the site meets (2))

So at best you have one good source, when "multiple" are required by WP:GNG. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 09:03, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi 2A02:908:1A74:4360:982B:5BC0:A1F8:5AED, the reason your submission was denied was because it lacked many secondary and independent sources. There didn't seem to be any significant coverage and a quick Google search shows the only websites mentioning the software are download websites. Sadly, I don't think your article is notable enough to be on Wikipedia. Hope this helps. Bᴇʀʀᴇʟʏ • ^{Talk to me}∕_{What have I been doing} 09:54, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Dear Tigraan and Berrely. Thanks for your answers, which I can't completely understand to be honest. In the Comparison of audio player software there are lots of less relevant players listed with almost no (1) independent or (2) reliable or (3) at length dealing with the subject sources like Guayadeque Music Player, JuK or with even no sources like MusikCube (how can this happen by the way?). After the submission was denied lots of independent sources had been added, but I wonder why there are so many different measurements, given the list of audio players in the English Wikipedia. I was searching for a mighty audio player in a Linux system for over 10 years or more and I would love to share my discovery, as it is the first capable player from my point of view and has been highly praised in tests (see references in the article draft).

Courtesy link: Draft: Sayonara Player 2A02:908:1A74:4360:78D9:9178:E4CD:36B5 (talk) 20:54, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia, because of its nature, contains lots of articles in violation of its policies. The existence of poor articles is no justification for the existence of other poor articles. Regarding the specific articles you listed... JuK has in its refs [36] and a (deadlink) Linux Magazine article. MusikCube indeed lacks sources but a quick search finds two reviews (the first one is from a usually-reliable outlet). For Guayadeque I find this and [37]. Maybe some of those are actually not enough, but they stand at least a decent chance at surviving an "articles for deletion" nomination, which Sayonara Player does not as far as I can see. (If you find an article that has no source and nothing that can be found online, feel free to nominate it for deletion or bring it up and we can do the nomination for you.) Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 14:47, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Just to chip in on notability, as a GNU/Linux user since about 1998 or 1999 (for whatever that's worth), this software was new to me, but there's a lot of software and not being aware of it doesn't incline me to think it's un-notable either. And seeing it has a launchpad.net project page does add to it's notability. This means it is on the path to become a standard Ubuntu package. If it was in the default APT repositories for Debian, Ubuntu or in RedHat/CentOS - I'd suggest it would certainly be notable enough to warrant an article. Just my $0.02 WinstonSmith01984 (talk) 12:29, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Speaking to myself here because I'm an idiot.. didn't scroll down enough on the homepage for this application. It's in Fedora, Gentoo and ArchLinux. So, I vouch for including this on the basis it is standard software distributed as part of numerous, popular Linux distributions. WinstonSmith01984 (talk) 13:13, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi Berrely, I clicked that link to the Google search you provided, but must be getting a different set of results to you. In the first page of hits we have the notable Linux Magazine talking about it here [38] and another independent positive review here:[39]. It certainly seems to me at least, notable enough for inclusion and is likely to have hundreds or thousands of users given the breadth of distribution it enjoys in mainstream Linux distributions. WinstonSmith01984 (talk) 13:41, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you WinstonSmith01984 It is good if others also understand the factual, objective point of view based on the sources, because you get self-doubt caused by the non-comparability and non-objective views that sometimes appear in the talk. 2A02:908:1A74:4360:35F6:6811:155C:68F3 (talk) 11:03, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

You're welcome, I'm going to try compiling it even, looks like a great media player! One other concern I had, was the rationale for objection based on notability being that the "only" websites mentioning it were "download websites". That adds to the software's notability - rather than detracting from it - because it establishes that the software is being distributed on the Internet. I would draw a different conclusion to Berrely given that fact, but that's just me. I'd also point out it seems like quite a high standard this article being held to. WinstonSmith01984 (talk) 11:11, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Is there anybody who could review the article? I don't understand the number of pending submissions, but it's a little lower currently...?! 2A02:908:1A74:4360:2048:8F0:323F:CF88 (talk) 22:58, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Why my page is declined

I want to know the reason that why my page is declined? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arbaazdurrani (talk • contribs) 00:08, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Arbaazdurrani Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The reason for the decline was given in the draft itself, at the top. The draft was sourced to little more than social media pages, which does not establish that the person meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable person. You can't use social media to do that, you need to use independent reliable sources. Please read Your First Article for more information. 331dot (talk) 00:14, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Paid to Write About Someone But Not Sure How to Disclose Financial COI

Hello, I just submitted my first Wikipedia article and I was paid to write a biography about a prominent coin book author. I chose which sources to use and cite for information and to verify facts and other points covered in the bio, but I'm not sure how to disclose this as a financial COI. How may I do this as the post is considered by Wikipedia for publication? Thank you

This is the page I wrote: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:John_Highfill

Thank you so much for your time and help!

Joshmac81 Joshmac81 (talk) 00:17, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi Joshmac81. Thanks you for being open about your connection to the subject you're writing about. You should find the information you're looking for in Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure and Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI. Please note that declaring you have a COI doesn't guarantee that the draft you're working on will be ultimately approved. For that to happen, you will still need to demonstrate that the subject meets Wikipedia:Notability or in this case Wikipedia:Notability (people). -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:21, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Just going to add that with respect to Draft:John Highfill, you might want to look at Help:Your first article, Help:Referencing for beginners, Wikipedia:Manual of Style and maybe even some of the biographes about similar individuals which might be found in Wikipedia:Featured articles for some general ideas/tips as to how Wikipedia articles are expected to be written and formatted. I've noticed a few formatting errors, etc. in your draft that you might want to clean up. None of these things are very major issues and will not affect whether the draft is ultimately approved, but this kind of copyediting/cleanup might actually help you understand a little bit more about how articles are expected to be written, which in turn may help notice and fix similar errors in other already existing articles if you decide to branch out a bit and do more than work on this draft. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:31, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Young New Zealand Party

Courtesy link: Young New Zealand Party --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 01:15, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi how can I claim ownership of a brand organisation or act as a rep to ensure all the information is updated and correct? Page got reverted for vandalism but it is all very true so I don’t really understand?

Please let me know how I can put my edits back up.

Or how can I create a new page and delete the one shown?

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.180.123.132 (talk) 22:17, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello! Unfortunately it seems like your edits were reverted due to your edit being seen as promotion of the organisation, see the following, WP:PROMOTION. Edits on Wikipedia should not be written in a promotional manner, since Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. Also, there is no general way, as I am aware of, to claim ownership in the way you mention. Everyone has the ability to edit on Wikipedia and as long as you have reliable sources that aren't directly written by the organisation in question, it is fine to use. The information should not be written in a promotional manner, though. Best, Zandor (talk) 22:33, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

If you are a representative of an organization, you must read and comply with the conflict of interest and paid editing policies, and make the required declarations. 331dot (talk) 22:36, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi thanks for the response and it is not self promotion that is exactly what the organisation does holds people accountable that is a constitution obligation.

I believe the system has automatically done that but it hasn’t taken into consideration that that is exactly what we do. How can I get the edits back?

The update was professional direct and in no way promotion at all instead described exactly what the organisation does. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2406:5A00:F82A:3B00:E990:30DC:27B7:8AC0 (talk) 22:42, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi IP 139.180.123.132. The simple answer is that you can’t do such a thing for the reasons given in Wikipedia:Ownership of content. Wikipedia articles aren’t owned by the subjects they’re written about or any one individual editor in particular. In addition, you might also want to read the following pages for reference as well: WP:42, WP:COI, WP:PAID, WP:NORG and WP:NOBLE. The gibberish-looking items in blue are actually short-cut links to various policy and guideline pages that you may find helpful. Please pay particular attention to WP:COI and WP:PAID because they are areas where you might run into problems if you’re not careful. — Marchjuly (talk) 22:45, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Discussions are not removed. An organization does not get to determine if there is information about it on Wikipedia, because Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources state. If you wish to assert that your organization does not meet the notability criteria for organizations, you could propose it for deletion by following the instructions at WP:AFD, but you must have an account to do that. If you did, you would still need to comply with the policies I mention above.. 331dot (talk) 23:13, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

The original question appears to be about Young New Zealand Party. The was a historical party. What was added - in a decidedly unencyclopaedic tone and without references - was content about a new organization going be the same name. This probably requires a separate article, submitted as a draft, rather than an addition to the old article. The deleted content is not lost - it can be seen and copied from at View history - but it should not be added back to the existing article. David notMD (talk) 00:33, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

User:YoungNZParty is not an allowed User name, as editors are individuals, not organizations. Easiest to abandon that registered name and create a new one versus processing a name change. David notMD (talk) 00:36, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Copy & paste to new article vs. moving a draft to a new article?

I've normally moved drafts to new articles or have gone through the AfC review process. Since I am able to post an article to the main space I am likely to do it that way. I've read recently (somewhere ?) that drafts should be copied and pasted into new articles. Since I have a tendency to do many edits and modifications to an article before I am finally satisfied with it - I was curious to know if this is an accepted method or if it is not recommended. I guess my thoughts are that my somewhat drawn out process of creation really would be of no interest - just the end results... Any thoughts please. Also, if that is okay to do that in that manner how do you delete a draft? Thank you! LorriBrown (talk) 17:05, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

No, you shouldn't copy and paste the draft, LorriBrown, as that will result in loss of the edit history (which is particularly important if anyone else has edited the draft, as that attribution needs to be maintained). The solution is to move the draft to mainspace - see HELP:MOVE. Cordless Larry (talk) 17:13, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi LorriBrown. If there are other significant contributors to the draft or the article is not created by the draft author then the draft must be moved to preserve the page history which credits the authors as required by our license. If you are the sole contributor then you are allowed to copy-paste it per Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia#Where attribution is not needed. It's your choice. I don't know a guideline with a preference. You can request deletion of a draft in your own userspace with {{db-u1}}, or you can redirect the draft to the article. You can also reuse the draft page for other purposes. This is common for userspace drafts created in "sandbox" page names. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:19, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you Cordless Larry and PrimeHunter. Yes, of course I've been the only editor. It makes sense you wouldn't want to do that unless you were the only editor - which I have been but did not disclose that in my question... sorry.LorriBrown (talk) 17:40, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

@LorriBrown: Even where a copy-paste move is possible, IMHO, it might still be better to "move" the draft just so others can see that you didn't simply create the article in the mainspace in one massive editing session but actually had been working on it in stages for some time. There's nothing wrong with creating articles in the mainspace; sometimes when a empty page suddenly becomes a fully created article, however, the intermediate steps it took to get to that state are not readily apparent unless you actually attributed the draft/userspace draft you were working on in the edit summary you leave when creating the article. A page move is a fairly easy thing to do as long as there are no technical restrictions (e.g. a page with the same name already existing) which require administrator assistance. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:48, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

WikiProject Directory

I notice this list has not been updated since February 20. (Wikipedia:WikiProject Directory/All) Is that normal? I ask because I am waking up a WikiProject and care that the information about it is correct. I also noticed that this possibly related page hasn't been updated in 4 years while the bot’s page says it is still active. (Wikipedia:WikiProject Directory/Description/WikiProject Backpacking) —¿philoserf? (talk) 01:17, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Philoserf, the /All page, according to its history, is updated as often as a week but also has periods when it was not updated for much longer than a month. It was not updated between August and December last year. The Backpacking page was moved before it stopped being updated. I am guessing it didn't work as well after the move as it did during testing but nobody cared enough to want it fixed. The best person to answer both questions would be the bot operator who doesn't seem to be very active on the project. So, perhaps email them if you really need to know. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 03:25, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you Usedtobecool. I wonder what I am seeing in history of the /All page then? 10:13, 20 February 2020‎ Reports bot talk contribs‎ 378,192 bytes +119‎ Updating undo. I wasn't aware the Wikipedia:WikiProject Backpacking page had been moved. It had to have been before 2/20/202. I will look at that history too. —¿philoserf? (talk) 03:34, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Philoserf, what I meant was, though it's true that the /All page seems to be updated weekly in general, this gap of one month (20 Feb. to today) isn't without precedent either, since there was a gap of four months last year. I didn't mean to say the wikiproject had been moved, I meant Wikipedia:WikiProject Directory/Description/WikiProject Backpacking had. It has one update when it was still in the bot's userspace and no updates since it was launched; so my guess is something went wrong with the launch but there was no one to note the problem or want it fixed. Sorry for the confusion. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 04:13, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Now I grok Usedtobecool. The bot operator is off wikipedia at the moment. I will relax knowing it might not bee something I haven't done right as I revive the project. Thank you very much. —¿philoserf? (talk) 04:19, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Teahouse Archive

Should there be a searchbox to the Teahouse Archive? T3g5JZ50GLq (talk) 17:24, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

T3g5JZ50GLq, in what way? There is one on the main page, see file:20200316_search_archive.png ~~ QRA: Alex Noble - talk 17:34, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

There is also one on the top right of this page --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 03:00, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Did not see it, it is below a very long list, could it be more useful to put it above the long list?T3g5JZ50GLq (talk) 04:29, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

New contributor - new page

Hello teahouse, I am new to Wikipedia and have just made my first few edits on existing pages. I would like to create a new page, but how do I find out when I am able to create new pages? Also, is it possible to copy an existing page so I can use its structure?

Kind regards, Richard. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ricu112 (talk • contribs) 06:56, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Ricu112, and welcome to the Teahouse. Looking at your contributions so far, it appears that you are here mostly to promote Recipharm. Do you have a conflict of interest regarding this company? If so, please comply with our mandatory Paid editing disclosure and all its provisions. Thank you. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:26, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Hi Ricu112. If by new "page" you mean a Wikipedia article, then you will be able to create one once you're account has become WP:AUTOCONFIRMED; however, before you set out to create an article you might want to look at Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything for a general idea as to what types of subjects are generally considered OK to create articles about. You can find out some information on how to create articles in Help:Your first article, how to format, etc. articles in Wikipedia:Manual of Style and how to add references to articles in Help:Referencing for beginners, but the most important thing is going to be to find a subject that meets Wikipedia:Notability because a lack of Wikipedia notability is usually the reason while an article ends up being deleted. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:42, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Suggestions to save the page from Deletion

A new page created for Ashwin Kumar Lakshmikanthan is marked for AFD deletes. Please suggest ways to save the page from Deletion.

@Adapongaiya:, please read the WP:GNG for reasons as to why the article is nominated for deletion. Most crucially, the subject has not met Wikipedia's those guidelines.

Please remember to sign with ~~~~ at the end of your post.

--Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 17:15, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you. Could you please let me know how to link this Wiki page Ashwin Kumar Lakshmikanthan to the google search results ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adapongaiya (talk • contribs) 01:40, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Google search results can't be used as a reference in an article. The search results may change with time. If any of the pages which Google finds are appropriate reliable sources to support relevant parts of the article text, then you can cite the source concerned, rather than the Google result. --David Biddulph (talk) 09:50, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Could someone edit the page Mountain Fair and help start it's talk page?

I created the page Mountain Fair about a large annual summer arts fair in my area. Since I created it about two years ago, I've been the close to the only one who's made any edits to the page, having made a vast majority of the edits that have been made to it. Could someone please take a look at it and edit as needed? Also it's talk page hasn't been started yet and I've noticed that most talk pages have some similar stuff in them like a page eating, wikiprojects it is a part of, etc. and I'm not sure what it needs. Could someone please take a look at the page, edit it as needed and help start it's talk page? Thanks so much in advance to anyone who does any of this. Greshthegreat (talk)

Hi Greshthegreat. If you'd like a sort of formal review of the article, you might try asking at WP:PR. If you want to try and figure out which WikiProjects might cover this type of article, what you can do is look at the talk pages of similar articles and see which WikiProjects cover them. Similar articles are often categorized in the same way so look for similar types of festivals in Category:Annual fairs and check their talk pages. Pretty much all of the WikiProject banners you'll find on a talk page contain a link to the project's main page, and each project has its own talk page; so, you can also ask for assistance there. If you're not sure what I mean by this, take a look at the top of the talk page for the Teahouse as an example. Once you find an appropriate WikiProject, just add it's banner to the top of the page. WikiProject banners are templates; so, all you need to do is find the name of the template and go to its documentation page to see how it works. One WikiProject whose scope the article probably falls under is Wikipedia:WikiProject Colorado and the WikiProject banner for that project is Template:WikiProject Colorado. Another WikiProject that might cover this is Wikipedia:WikiProject Festivals and it's banner can be found at Template:WikiProject Festivals. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:59, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

I put a general and CO banner at the top of Talk. You can amend that if you wish. David notMD (talk) 10:02, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Edit requests backlog

Hi guys. I have a pending edit request at Talk:Innocent Umezulike with the last message remaining unanswered for 10 days now; a backlog of requested edits has also been building at Category:Requested edits over the course of this month. I suspect the COVID-19 pandemic may have had something to do with the recent unresponsiveness of willing editors, but some of them (mine included) are from paid editors who are counting on willing editors to fulfil them, especially during a period like this. Davykamanzi → talk • contribs • alter ego 19:10, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I suspect that the deluge of rapidly evolving information has something to do with it. If the editors you are working with are busy, try speaking to someone else. Mgasparin (talk) 19:44, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Sorry to be blunt, but requests being from paid editors is not exactly a reason why anybody should prioritise them! (Some people might but that is up to them.) It is great that you follow the rules and use edit requests... but trying to use a back door to bypass the system that's designed to get volunteers to help you earn money does not quite make sense to me. I do not agree with the editor above who suggested that you should do that – you will need to wait for the other people who have participated in the discussion to get back, or for someone else to see the edit request. The discussion and your request is substantial, so it is not strange that it does not attract an immediate reply. --bonadea contributions talk 19:58, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

The reason for the backlog is that Spintendo (who answers practically all requested edits) has not edited here for 12 days. While he is on vacation, you can expect requested edits to take a few weeks / months. I also echo what Bonadea said above, and would recommend against pinging the other editors so much, they'll work throught the pending edits when they feel like it. – Thjarkur (talk) 20:47, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Also, please note that WP:There is no deadline. 84.64.11.216 (talk) 11:13, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Request on 11:29:14, 18 March 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Ianpalmer

Ianpalmer (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Cello Electronics (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello

I have submitted this article which has been rejected twice. It is for a TV manufacturer called Cello Electronics. They have been established for 20 years and are the only remaining TV manufacturer in the UK. They appeared twice on BBC Breakfast and once on BBC One Show in the last 12 months. Cello have made some notable product developments over the years with solar-powered products for Africa being one of the latest interesting ideas. They are well covered in the press with these developments.

I have added citations and references where appropriate, but the article continues to be rejected. I have also been careful with language and tone to make sure it doesn't read like an advertisement.

I wonder if you could help advise me on any specific changes I need to make to the article in order to get it published for the benefit and interest of Wikipedia readers.

Thanks for your help.

Ian Ianpalmer (talk) 11:29, 18 March 2020 (UTC) Ianpalmer (talk) 11:29, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, IanpalmerYour question was answered here Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk, your draft has been rejected, creating an article about your own company is probably the hardest task on Wikipedia and you will find few editors willing to help you. I suggest you find other articles to improve. Theroadislong (talk) 11:36, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

How can I publish this article? What I made wrong?

I am new in Wikipedia and I would like to publish a page in relation with a project in relation with wildfires. This project has funded by public money (HORIZON 2020). — Preceding unsigned comment added by PauCosta2020 (talk • contribs) 10:29, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:PauCosta2020/sandbox/GEO-SAFE,_Geospatial_Based_Environment_For_Optimisation_Systems_Addressing_Fire_Emergencies

I would like to publish this article, but still in a different format from others such as this: https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/LEGO

And it has a different link. What can I do ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by PauCosta2020 (talk • contribs) 10:26, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

For the Archive: 11:37, 18 March 2020 Yunshui talk contribs blocked PauCosta2020 talk contribs with an expiration time of indefinite (account creation blocked) ({{uw-spamublock}} ). If there is anybody reading this, Please dont try to WP:MOVE it yourself. You can ask for specific feedback by asking here or by submitting to WP:AFC. Creating an article about your company is a very bad idea, as you have a Conflict or interest and would need to comply with WP:PAID. 12:02, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Strikethrough in edit history

I removed an unnecessary merge propsal tag on 3 articles. One article shows this removal as a strikethrough in the article's edit history. What does this mean? You can't even see the edit, although the edit was fine, and the tag was removed. The edit occurs in the other 2 articles. There was a merge tag before my edit, and no merge tag after my edit, so what's this about that my edit doesn't show as a regular edit with diff? There was copyrighted text removed, but my edit was not to copytighted text, and my edit staye, and it should be in the history.

21:09, 28 April 2019 diff hist -79‎ Remote sensing ‎ no rationale or discussion attempted

This is the edit. Thanks, Farm lenses (talk) 11:13, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Hey, welcome to Wikipedia! Your revision (the page after your edit) contained copyrighted text, even though you weren't the person that added the text. To protect against copyright claims, all revisions that include copyrighted texts are deleted. This is not a warning or whatever to you, just some maintenance. As you can see, all revisions with the text were deleted, until the edit by Kees08, which is the first revision since the addition of the copyrighted material that no longer includes the text. --MrClog (talk) 11:33, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

I understand the copyrighted text, but my revision was done. I removed the merge tag, and the merge tag stayed removed. My revision did not deal with the copyrighted text. All that's done hy hiding my revision as if it hadn't been made is hiding the history of an actual edit. This is my concern, that an actual accepted edit is hidden. Farm lenses (talk) 12:04, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

There are multiple edits not attached to their editor in the history. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Remote_sensing&type=revision&diff=928435760&oldid=868174959 Farm lenses (talk) 12:08, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

@Farm lenses:, all versions of the page that contain copyrighted text will be hidden when revision-deletion is done. This means all edits, good or bad, to versions of the page that already included copyrighted material will be hidden. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 12:10, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

@Farm lenses: The whole page at the time is displayed below a diff, e.g. in [40]. There is no system to examine whether the diff itself could be displayed without revealing information which should be hidden. Such a system would be complicated and require a lot of work for the editors who make revision deletion, like carefully checking every diff during the time. A diff can be made to any edit and a diff to a blank page would always show everything so a hypothetical system would also have to only permit a diff to the previous revision. But history merges and other events can change the previous revision, and changes to the diff software can cause diffs to display different content, so the diff would have to be "frozen" when an editor has checked it. A lot of work with a lot of room for errors where hidden content leaks out. By the way, I recommend always saying in the edit summary when you add or remove tags, e.g. Remove {{merge to|Remote sensing|date=October 2018}}, no rationale or discussion attempted. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:07, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Useful advice on the edit histories. Why didn't they just remove the copyrighted material? Edit histories matter, and it seems bad form to keep unattributed edits. It's like plagiarizing, you know.Farm lenses (talk) 22:53, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

The edits are still properly attributed so to speak, they’re just hidden from public view for some reason like WP:OVERSIGHT or WP:REVDEL and can still be viewed by administrators for the most (unless they were really really serious policy violations). The same thing happens with respect to deleted pages; they’re not necessarily gone forever, but rather only hidden from public view and can be viewed by administrators. — Marchjuly (talk) 23:38, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Edits accepted into articles are not the same as deleted articles, and visible only to administrators doesn't make them attributed. ("Yes, I used her work in my thesis, but I attributed it in my head." "I copied large parts of an older book and told my publisher who removed the attributions, so that's okay.") Wikipedia isn't written for administrators. I see what you're doing now; it's not justifiable; these are unattributrd edits. My question had been answered, as bad as the answer is. Farm lenses (talk) 12:12, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

@Farm lenses: Trying to remove the copyrighted material from every version while still displaying the rest of the version and a diff would be even more work with more room for content to leak out. As an administrator I can see that some of the intervening edits were modifying the copyrighted material so those diffs would have to be hidden. Some edits may have changed both allowed and disallowed parts of the article but I haven't checked all edits in the period. I don't know the legal status of the issue but I have never heard an editor complain that the specifics of their edit was not visible after a revision deletion for other reasons. You can still see their username in the page history and a total diff for all changes [41] until the copyrighted material was removed. If they gave a good edit summary then you may also be able to guess which change they made. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:30, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

How to report a article

How to report an article or how to make a correction in it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sajankumar408 (talk • contribs) 11:31, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Sajankumar408, there isn't a central authority here. Unless the issue is illegal content, you should post at the article's talk page, or give us the the link to the article here so we can have a look.

If you want to make a correction to an article, make sure you have a reliable source for the information, then edit the page the same way you edited this one - see User:Nick Moyes/Easier Referencing for Beginners for how to cite your sources. ~~ Alex Noble/1-2/TRB 11:39, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Although, if this about adam's bridge, there have been five attempts to move this page. Wikipedia uses the name most commonly used in English language sources. The page is very unlikley to be moved. ~~ Alex Noble/1-2/TRB 11:41, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy: Adam's bridge, and the discussion at the article's Talk page is clear that in the English Wikipedia, this is and will remain the name of the article even though Rama setu is an older name (as covered in the article). David notMD (talk) 13:24, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Help me

Please help me — Preceding unsigned comment added by Khalidlatif12 (talk • contribs) 13:09, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

The draft you created has been deleted. The reason given: "Unambiguous advertising or promotion." Volunteers here cannot see it (unless they are also Administrators), and so cannot advise on what went wrong. David notMD (talk) 13:29, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

@Khalidlatif12: I can quickly add (having viewed the deleted article) that you tried to write a blog-type post on how to choose the best type of survival knives. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, and definitely not a guidance manual, so that type of content would never be accepted here. I'm really sorry if you were confused by this, and thank you for trying. But it was far too loaded with uncited personal opinion, and only seemed to serve to promote one online commercial site. If you'd like greater understanding on this, please take a look through: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. I would politely ask you not to try to use Wikipedia in this way in future. Many thanks, Nick Moyes (talk) 14:00, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Hexaware Technologies Wiki Page Got Deleted

Hi Team,

I would like to contribute on Hexaware Technologies Wiki page but found that the page is deleted. help me to reinitiate the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Isha2109 (talk • contribs) 05:49, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello Isha2109, the article was deleted via a deletion discussion, on WP:Notability grounds. If you think the discussion missed something and you can provide additional sources that the discussion might not have known of, you can start a WP:DRAFT and submit it via WP:AFC. Please note that such sources should help the subject pass the notability criteria for organisations, as outlined at WP:NORG. Please read our WP:COI, and especially the WP:PAID editing policies, and make necessary disclosures before you proceed. Good luck! Usedtobecool ☎️ 06:00, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Hi Isha2109. The Wikipedia article about Hexaware Technologies was deleted per a community consensus established at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hexaware Technologies (2nd nomination). This actually deleted once before, recreated, deleted once again, recreated again and then deleted yet once again, which means trying to recreate it one more time is probably going to be rather difficult to do; not impossible but rather difficult because there are some major issues which are going to need to be overcome to avoid it being deleted once again. So, my suggestion to you would be to carefully read through Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything, Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies), and do an honest self-assessment as to whether not only should an article be written about this company but also whether any such article is likely to survive another nomination for deletion. If you do that and truly think the company is Wikipedia notable enough for an article to be written about it, you should then explain your reasons to the last administrator who deleted the article (her name is Premeditated Chaos). Premeditated Chaos might not agree to undelete the article right away, but she may give you the OK to work on a draft version of an article that she can monitor to make sure you're not repeating the same mistakes as those who tried to previously create an article about this company. If your draft is a significant improvement over the most recently deleted version of the article, Premediated Chaos may be willing to restore the article as your draft.

Now, if you're connected to the company it anyway (e.g. an employee or representative) then you also need to carefully read through Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure and do your best to comply with both. Being connected to the company doesn't mean you cannot try and create an article or draft for an article about it, but it does mean that you have to be careful in doing so and make sure you comply with all relevant policies and guidelines related to conflict-of-interest and paid contributions. If you don't comply with these policies and guidelines it will not only almost certainly mean you will not be able to recreate the article, but it could also mean your account will end up blocked by an administrator. So, if you're connected to the company in anyway, make sure you clearly state as much to Premeditated Chaos because it will make it much easier for her to try and help you. You can post a message to Premeditated Chaos on her user talk page at User talk:Premeditated Chaos. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:17, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

This has all been explained at length on my talk page. Unfortunately neither Isha2109 nor the IP that preceded them show any signs of understanding our policies. For the record, given the history and the obvious COI, I am absolutely opposed to restoring the content, even to draft, unless there is appropriate high-quality sourcing that indicates notability (which there will not be, or it would've been provided already). Isha2109 is free to start a draft version from scratch if they want, but I will not be providing assistance or guidance. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 14:01, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Improving a draft

hai is somebody here to review the page and hep me to improve https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Kanadikavu_Shree_Vishnmaya_Kuttichathan_Swamy_temple — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kanadikavu vishnumaya (talk • contribs) 05:52, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Kanadikavu vishnumaya, there is too much material that's not supported by reliable sources, drafts not meeting WP:V won't be accepted. Please consult WP:RS and find some sources that qualify, to support the claims therein or remove those claims that can not be supported. The draft reads too reverent for an encyclopedia. Please rewrite it in a neutral language. As far as Wikipedia is concerned, it's just a building or an institution, depending on the scope of the article. You might seek help from members of WP:WikiProject Hinduism and/or WP:WikiProject India; with some luck, you might find someone interested in working with you on it. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 16:04, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Why are these two distinct quirks of articles hosted on different Wikipedias in place?

I've noticed two distinct quirks that apply to articles hosted on different Wikipedias in general:

Arabic script Wikipedias (not limited to Arabic Wikipedia) - Why are foreign names, even abbreviations, in Arabic script? Here's an example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PCSX-Reloaded (the English Wikipedia article for PCSX-Reloaded) and https://ar.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D8%A8%D9%8A_%D8%B3%D9%8A_%D8%A5%D8%B3_%D8%A5%D9%83%D8%B3 (the Arabic Wikipedia equivalent)
Russian Wikipedia - Why are people's names laid out like this?: Doe, John (or Доу, Джон in Russian) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Childishbeat (talk • contribs) 14:27, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
Childishbeat, Teahouse is for asking questions about editing the English Wikipedia. Questions like yours are better asked at the Reference Desk. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 16:07, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

@Childishbeat: Each Wikipedia language decides their own policies. I don't know the policies of the Arabic or Russian Wikipedia, or the conventions of those languages in general. The English Wikipedia writes surname last in article titles but sorts by surname in categories. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:26, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

How does search engine indexing work?

I just wrote my first article for Wikipedia, so I'm very new to it. After publishing it, it was showing up in Google search for about a week, but no longer shows up when I do a Google search. Can someone tell me why? I was expecting a wait time, but not expecting it to show up right away and then disappear, so I'm curious.

my article:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lela_Murray — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nmchamber01 (talk • contribs) 16:43, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi Nmchamber01, welcome to the Teahouse. New articles don't allow indexing by external search engines like Google for 90 days or until they have been reviewed by a user with a required right. Lela Murray sounds like an unusual case because a reviewer marked it patrolled and then unreviewed a minute later.[42] They also edited the article that minute.[43] I think indexing was allowed for one minute and Google examined the page there because they monitor edits to articles. About a week later they must have come back and discovered that indexing was no longer allowed. It will be allowed in 82 days or when somebody reviews it again. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:10, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

It would be unusual in that google would have to have caught it right that minute and then not checked back for a week. However, what the reviewer did is something that happens all the time. The reviewing toolbar allows tagging the page for problems but automatically checks the "review" button while tagging; when the reviewer only wants to tag the page for problems, they don't always notice the checkmark or remember to uncheck it. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 17:21, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Google actually catches new pages immediately and doesn't check them again until a few weeks later. I think it's disregarding the nofollow on Special:NewPages or something. This is a problem on other wikis that allow indexing immediately, attack pages show up right away in Google and stay there. – Thjarkur (talk) 19:54, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

It's inaccurate to say that the articles or Wikipedia don't allow indexing. We provide search engines with an ability to distinguish between reviewed and unreviewed articles, it is completely their prerogative whether to disregard it. It just so happens that google defers to us on what to index. Usedtobecool ☎️ 17:29, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Our software deliberately adds noindex to the html of unreviewed articles for the sole purpose of asking search engines to not index them. Search engines are not required by law to obey it but I think all major search engines respect noindex. Otherwise they will get a lot of junk which isn't meant for readers of a website. We also do it in many places outside articles. See more at Wikipedia:Controlling search engine indexing. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:47, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Citation difficulties

Greetings!

I'm a citation-newbie who likes a specific style of citation, but I don't know how to use it in certain cases.

Let me specify: I added a citation on suffragettes in British Union of Fascists (The first in the paragraph, currently it's [22]) and everything worked rosely.

Now I'm trying to add one to Blockade of Germany, but it doesn't work. What I did was:

Added this in text:
- In March 1919 Winston Churchill told the House of Commons: "We are holding all our means of coercion in full operation or in immediate readiness for use. We are enforcing the blockade with vigor. We have strong armies ready to advance at the shortest notice. Germany is very near starvation. The evidence I have received from the officers sent by the War Office all over Germany shows first of all, the great privations which the German people are suffering, and secondly, the great danger of a collapse of the entire structure of German social and national life under the pressure of hunger and malnutrition. Now is therefore the moment to settle."^[1]

Added this under ==References==
- ^[1]

Added this under ==Further reading==
Fuller, J.F.C. (1993). The Second World War, 1939-45 A Strategical And Tactical History. Da Capo Press. ISBN 978-0306805066.

It seems to work here but it doesn't work there. I would be very grateful if anyone corrects me.Kuiet (talk) 18:25, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

References

^ ^a ^b Fuller 1993 harvnb error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFFuller1993 (help): "As regards the second point, it should be remembered what Mr. Winston Churchill said in the House of Commons on 3rd March, 1919-namely: 'We are holding all our means of coercion in full operation or in immediate readiness for use. We are enforcing the blockade with vigor. We have strong armies ready to advance at the shortest notice. Germany is very near starvation. The evidence I have received from the officers sent by the War Office all over Germany shows first of all, the great privations which the German people are suffering, and secondly, the great danger of a collapse of the entire structure of German social and national life under the pressure of hunger and malnutrition. Now is therefore the moment to settle.'" p. 19

Welcome to the Teahouse, Kuiet. I would put the full reference in the body of the text (not under References or Further Reading) and use the {{Cite book}} template to do so. Are you trying to have your explanatory footnote and citation share the same footnote? --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 18:48, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Kuiet, first of all, please note WP:CITEVAR may apply when you try to introduce citations to an article after your own preferences. Also, "Further reading" is generally for listing sources that are not used to build the article but may be useful to the reader as further reading material on the subject. For accommodating short footnotes, I think some combination of notes/references, references/works, references/bibliographies, etc. are used. With that out of the way, I think, in this specific example, technically, this should work (practically, you may need to seek consensus before implementing into an article that doesn't already use the style):

Body.<ref name="Fuller 1993">{{harvnb|Fuller|1993|p=19}}: "As regards the second point, it should be remembered what Mr. Winston Churchill said in the House of Commons on 3rd March, 1919-namely: 'We are holding all our means of coercion in full operation or in immediate readiness for use. We are enforcing the blockade with vigor. We have strong armies ready to advance at the shortest notice. Germany is very near starvation. The evidence I have received from the officers sent by the War Office all over Germany shows first of all, the great privations which the German people are suffering, and secondly, the great danger of a collapse of the entire structure of German social and national life under the pressure of hunger and malnutrition. Now is therefore the moment to settle.'"</ref>

References

{{reflist}}

Bibliographies

*{{cite book |last1=Fuller |first1=J.F.C. |date=1993 |title=The Second World War, 1939-45 A Strategical And Tactical History |publisher=Da Capo Press |isbn=978-0306805066 | ref=harv}}

should render as

Body.^[1]

References

^ Fuller 1993, p. 19 harvnb error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFFuller1993 (help): "As regards the second point, it should be remembered what Mr. Winston Churchill said in the House of Commons on 3rd March, 1919-namely: 'We are holding all our means of coercion in full operation or in immediate readiness for use. We are enforcing the blockade with vigor. We have strong armies ready to advance at the shortest notice. Germany is very near starvation. The evidence I have received from the officers sent by the War Office all over Germany shows first of all, the great privations which the German people are suffering, and secondly, the great danger of a collapse of the entire structure of German social and national life under the pressure of hunger and malnutrition. Now is therefore the moment to settle.'"

Bibliographies

Fuller, J.F.C. (1993). The Second World War, 1939-45 A Strategical And Tactical History. Da Capo Press. ISBN 978-0306805066.

Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 04:48, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

@Tenryuu: Thank you kindly for your help, could I further impose on you to look concretely at the page Blockade of Germany to show me how exactly to implement your proposal? What I'm trying to do is to have the reference show the full quote from page 19, but also a "reference" (I'm not sure if my terminology here is correct) to the full details of the book as given under Further reading. The same thing I did in suffragettes. And could you also tell me why what I initially tried to do (as described in the first post) works here but not there? (There I'm given the "not defined error". I hope I'm not overusing your willingness to help. Thank you in advance, Kuiet (talk) 10:39, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

@Kuiet:, it appears I misspoke somewhat. I've never used that parameter before, but it appears the {{cite}} series has a |quote= parameter that you can append quotes to, so that they can go with the citation without using a secondary template.

Before I go any further, are you using the Visual Editor or the Source Editor?--Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 12:28, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

My apologies, I didn't notice your post. I'm using Source Editor.Kuiet (talk) 17:33, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Kuiet, Looks like Usedtobecool has addressed your question already. Let us know if you have any more questions. :) --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 22:51, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

@Usedtobecool: Thank you too most kindly for your exhaustive reply, the 'CITEVAR' warning and the 'nowiki' hack. But could I implore you to check Blockade of Germany to teach me how to proceed in this concrete example? Because there already is something under ==references== but it's not a reflist, so I'm not sure how to proceed. And if you could also tell me why my attempt at citation worked here, but gave me the "not defined error" in the original article. I hope I'm not overimposing in my plea for assistance. Thank you in advance, Kuiet (talk) 10:39, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

@Kuiet: it's no trouble at all; you are free to ask as many followups as need be, I have no problem being called to help in the article itself. However, you have not edited Blockade of Germany; obviously, I can't help you fix an edit that's not been made. As to what you've given above, I wouldn't say it has worked here; it has generated two citations when the intention is clearly to make one. I have already provided what I think is the correct way to do it. It doesn't matter what is in the section titled "references", what matters is whether there is a section which has the reflist template which in this case is "Notes", so that's not an issue. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:52, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Huh, you're right, it didn't work here either. My apologies. So the suffragettes stand as the only working example. After editing the Blockade in Germany and hitting 'Show preview' I've noticed the error so I didn't dare publish it. But I'm doing so now, please look at it if you will.Kuiet (talk) 17:27, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Kuiet, I have edited your edit to match that of the fascists article. Is that what you intended? Usedtobecool ☎️ 18:12, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Yes, @Usedtobecool: that's precisely what I wanted and now I see how to do it. Thank you ever so much for correcting me!Kuiet (talk) 20:52, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Validity of Structural Biochemistry/ Kiss Gene Expression as a article title

Is Structural Biochemistry/ Kiss Gene Expression a valid article title? Per WP:SUB, which states Except in the main namespace (article namespace), where the subpage feature has been disabled in the English Wikipedia, subpages are pages separated with a "/" (a slash) from their 'parent' page, this shouldn't be allowed. So why is there a slash? Should the page be moved? Thanks, ~ Tridwoxi (talk) (contribs) 00:22, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Tridwoxi. Yes, I think you are right to be concerned by this title. Just as Structural Biochemistry/ Apoptosis Inducing Factor is now a redirect to Apoptosis-inducing factor. Personally, I'd raise it on the article talk page and propose your move rationale and see what other editors say. But you'd be justified, I feel, to 'WP:BEBOLD' and move it first and see if anyone objects, and then you could discuss it. Good spot! If you could improve the article itself, that'd be really fantastic. Nick Moyes (talk) 00:55, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Why is my contribution to "Coronavirus disease 2019" constantly being deleted?

I believe the following is factual, non-emotive and fair. Given the importance of the topic, I am struggling to understand why it would not meet Wikipedia's guidelines and would appreciate review/advice. Citations were provided in numerous places but don't show up when pasted here:

On 16 March 2020, advisor to the French Government on COVID-19, Professor Didier Raoult, announced that a trial involving 24 patients from the south east of France supported the claim that chloroquine was an effective treatment for COVID-19. 600mg of hydroxychloroquine was administered to these patients every day for 10 days. The drug appeared to be responsible for a "rapid and effective speeding up of their healing process, and a sharp decrease in the amount of time they remained contagious". The study also suggested that taking chloroquine in combination with the antibiotic azithromycin - which is known to be effective against complications from bacterial lung disease - led to even better outcomes. Professor Raoult said the results showed there was "a spectacular reduction in the number of positive cases" with the combination therapy. At 6 days, among patients given combination therapy, the percentage of cases still carrying SRAS-CoV-2 was no more than 5%. The French Health Minister, Olivier Véran. was reported as saying that "new tests will now go ahead in order to evaluate the results by Professor Raoult, in an attempt to independently replicate the trials and ensure the findings are scientifically robust enough, before any possible decision might be made to roll any treatment out to the wider public". The French media also reported that the French pharmaceutical company Sanofi had offered French authorities millions of doses of the drug for use against COVID-19. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rhadamanthis (talk • contribs) 07:54, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Rhadamanthis Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The best thing for you to do- which you were asked to do in at least one edit summary- is to go to the article talk page and explain why you feel that your edit is necessary. Other editors will discuss the issue with you so a consensus can be found. 331dot (talk) 07:59, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi Rhadamanthis. Have you tried discussing the changes you'd like to make at Talk:Coronavirus disease 2019? Generally when there disagreements among editors about article content (like what seems to be the case here), the best place to try and resolve things is on the article's corresponding talk page. Sometimes when there are lots of editors simultaneously working on article about a subject that's receiving lots of coverage at the moment or is otherwise contentious, there can conflicting sources or conflicting information being reported even by reputable reliable sources which means that it might be better to be WP:CAUTIOUS than WP:BOLD when it comes to editing. One of the most important things to remember in such cases is to try avoid anything that might be considered edit warring no matter how right you think you are because that's not productive to anyone involved. Right now, there are multiple editors challenging the changes you're trying to make to the article who are asking you to discuss things on the article's talk page. My suggestion to you is to follow Wikipedia:Dispute resolution and discuss things with these other editorst because continuing to try to force your changes through will not only not get it through, but it will also likely lead to your account being blocked. Pursing discussion on the article talk page is the best thing you can do to try and sort this matter out. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:10, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Can I write about a college in Kenya offering Social Transformation training?

The college is a non-profit catholic owned university that people marvel when they get to hear about it and visit it since they know little about. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kennedy Tangaza (talk • contribs) 08:26, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

‎Kennedy Tangaza Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You may write about any subject that has significant coverage in independent reliable sources, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of notability. In this case, it would be the definition of a notable organization. If you want to promote the school, that will not be permitted. This is an encyclopedia where articles must have a neutral point of view. If you work for this school, you must read and formally comply with the conflict of interest and paid editing policies.

Be advised that successfully creating a new article is the absolute hardest task to perform on Wikipedia. If you dive right in without understanding the process, you might feel bad afterwards, which I do not want to see. I suggest you first spend time editing existing articles in areas that interest you, to get a feel for how Wikipedia works and what is expected of article content. However, if you still wish to attempt to create an article, please read Your First Article, use the new user tutorial, and then you can use Articles for Creation to create and submit a draft for review. Any draft must only summarize what independent sources state- that does not include press releases or routine announcements, but is in depth coverage that sources have chosen on their own to give to the school. 331dot (talk) 08:32, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Brilliant. This is great insight for me. I'll begin by editing exist articles in order to contribute appropriately to the Wikipedia community. Thanks alot. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kennedy Tangaza (talk • contribs) 08:38, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Reliability of the contents

Hello

I notice that many of the contents of the articles are based on rumors or tweets or unrealistic not published research , so i wonder if there are mechanicm for verifying such contents

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by A.GZ11 (talk • contribs) 08:48, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello, A.GZ11. You raise an important point. In principle, everything in Wikipedia - every statement or claim in every article - should be sourced to a reliable published source. (It's not always obligatory to cite the sources - see WP:PEREN#Require inline citations for everything - but reliable sources must exist.) In practice there is much that does not.

There are various things you can do when you spot something which is not properly sourced. If it is not verifiable from a reliable source, then anybody may remove it; but that's not always the most helpful thing to do. Ideally, we would make the effort to look for reliable sources, and either cite one, or remove the statement. Another possibility is to tag it with a template such as {{citation needed}} or {{unreliable source}}: this is sometimes referred to as "drive-by tagging", because it's quick and leaves a warning to readers, but doesn't fix the problem. Another approach is to bring the issue up on the article's talk page, and see if you can reach consensus with other interested editors about what action to take. --ColinFine (talk) 10:19, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Adding to Eugene Ulrich page

Could someone please add to the site for Eugene Ulrich that is translated the book of Amos for the Modern English Version Bible translation? www.modernenglishversion.com

Synoptics — Preceding unsigned comment added by Synoptics (talk • contribs) 08:50, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Synoptics. I'm not clear what you're asking. You seem to have added that information to Eugene Ulrich yourself . If there is more information that you want to add, you'll either need to do it yourself, or persuade somebody else to do it. In any case, the best place to discuss this is the article's talk page, Talk:Eugene Ulrich. --ColinFine (talk) 10:28, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

My Image isn't showing

An Image I uploaded of the Regions of Ethiopia is not showing, and says "Sorry, this file cannot be displayed".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regions_of_Ethiopia#/media/File:Ethiopian_Region_Map_with_Capitals_and_Flags.png https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ethiopian_Region_Map_with_Capitals_and_Flags.png

I had this same problem with a different image last year and the answer was given to me on teahouse to fix it, but I forgot how I did fix it and can't find the solution anywhere in any archive or in my contribution history. I do remember the problem was on my side, because other people said they could see the image just fine.

Thanks AvRand (talk) 09:42, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

I have no idea what happens, but there is indeed some technical problem here. On my browser (Chrome 80 / Win10), https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/74/Ethiopian_Region_Map_with_Capitals_and_Flags.png displays fine, but the preview of commons:File:Ethiopian_Region_Map_with_Capitals_and_Flags.png is broken. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 11:09, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi AvRand. MediaWiki is unable to resize the image for some reason so only the original file can be displayed. Try uploading a slightly different version with "Upload a new version of this file" at commons:File:Ethiopian Region Map with Capitals and Flags.png#filehistory. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:35, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Introducing quotes with "As ... said"

Can we discuss removing the use of "As so-and-so said" when introducing a quote? It appears to be endorsing the speaker's point of view, which is usually unintended on articles.—Naddruf (talk ~ contribs) 20:19, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Naddruf, welcome to the Teahouse. Are you seeing this anywhere in particular? Tonal style varies across articles depending on who edits them. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 23:08, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

In general, see WP:INTEXT: either there is consensus among the reliable sources and we report a thing under Wikipedia's voice, or there is not and we must neutrally attribute each statement to its author. I tend to agree that "as X said" implies we agree with X. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 11:44, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Deleting Sandbox and History

After experimenting with Sandbox, I'd like to erase it and also to erase the revisions history. How can I reset everything into a clean beginning stage? (I'm using Visual Editor) --Dranoel26 (talk) 21:22, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Just put {{db-u1}} at the top of it. It's a speedy deletion request for a user page. - X201 (talk) 22:04, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Just noticed the mention of Visual Editor. Can't offer advice how you do it using that, I've never used it. - X201 (talk) 22:05, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

I've never used it either, but I just tried it out on the main sandbox. It appears that you can hover your mouse over the top of the editing window, click the + Add Paragraph button when it appears, and then copy and paste the code that X201 shows above. It should render as a large pink box requesting deletion for the page. Then publish changes. CThomas³ (talk) 22:25, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

I entered the code, got the large pink box, but the View History was not deleted. Should I do anything else to remove the View History? --Dranoel26 (talk) 10:22, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

The pink box is a notification that you have requested deletion of the page – it has not yet been deleted, but as soon as that happens, the history will also be gone. Only administrators can delete pages. --bonadea contributions talk 10:29, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

@Dranoel26: Something went wrong. VisualEditor apparently mishandles copy-paste of {{db-u1}}. It adds the expanded code of the template itself but without the categories required for administrators to detect the request for deletion. Try using the source editor or use VisualEditor's own method for adding templates on the "Insert" menu. I'm an administrator and can delete the page if you ask me directly but try adding the template in the VisualEditor way to learn it and see if it works. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:06, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter: I now entered the code into the Source Editor. Pls reset the Sandbox. (I'm not sure how the second suggested method with the template insert should work - is it described somewhere? Which template should I use?)--Dranoel26 (talk) 13:20, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

@Dranoel26: You added the code correctly this time and another administrator has already deleted the page. "Insert" is the name of a menu at top of VisualEditor. It would use the same template but only given by its name db-u1. The curly brackets is syntax for the source editor. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:29, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

See more at Wikipedia:VisualEditor/User guide#Editing templates. The template does not require any parameters. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:32, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

many thx everybody for assistance :-) --Dranoel26 (talk) 14:06, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Article rejected on the basis of a point of difference regarding neutrality?

Hi,

I'm looking for help with my contribution on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Elizabeth_Ford Sam 2727 rejected it on the basis that it used emotive language such as 'she passed on her sense of colour to her students'.

Firstly, this was the only reason given for rejection; secondly, my statement was factual; thirdly, the editor's statement smacks of gender differences in writing. As an academic, I am really surprised by this, especially given the emphasis on trying to correct the gender imbalance in Wikipedia: both in contributions and in the writing up of women in their respective fields. Further, neutral writing for art is not the same as neutral writing for computers and my academic training makes me better qualified for this than this comment might indicate - which was perhaps based on one loose reading, at best. Further, in my mind, one rather arbitrary edit is not equal to one rejection. Please help.

Regards,

Mem271 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mem271 (talk • contribs) 03:25, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Mem271, welcome to the Teahouse. Taking a read of the draft, I have to agree with Sam-2727's assessment that the tone could be less charged for an encyclopedia article as it should should always remain formal, impersonal, and dispassionate (Wikipedia:Writing better articles#Information style and tone), regardless of content, and right now it seems too passionate. Most of the tone issues that I noted were under the Art Style, Contemporaries and Students heading. What jumped out at me was They include a list of painters dominated by men (emphasis mine) which makes me think about the list a certain way. Another paragraph (Drysdale-Green) went a little too much into detail on Ford's work in my opinion. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 04:22, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Mem271, check out some of the specific advice I gave at [44]. I apologize that the template message that appeared was so abrupt; I should've chosen a different one that explained my reasoning more and provided more explanation behind my choice. Sam-2727 (talk) 04:26, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

@Mem271: You might want to read our advice to expert editors. Wikipedia editing guidelines feel more natural to those from academia than to the general public, but it is still quite an entirely new exercise.

neutral writing for art is not the same as neutral writing for computers and my academic training makes me better qualified for this (...) Please understand that Wikipedia has specific style guidelines that might differ significantly from that of others (be them museum curators or software manual writers). Furthermore, one's credentials do not matter on Wikipedia, because (1) there is no process to verify them so no special weight is given to editors with credentials, and (2) 99% of Wikipedia content can be edited without any knowledge of the topic matter, just by reading what reliable sources say and writing an article using that (but of course, finding "reliable sources" in a topic you do not know can be difficult). Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 11:27, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

ATT: Sam-2727 re-Elizabeth Ford Draft

Sam-2727, Your extended comments were more helpful and I have edited the page according to your criticisms although I'd happily debate some of this with you (another time, perhaps). I hope that I've done enough here to satisfy. How do I get help with some of the formatting? I actually thought that this occurred progressively on Wikipedia, but if you need it done prior to acceptance, please let me know how to do this as I find it quite difficult navigating the site. Mem271 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mem271 (talk • contribs) 06:20, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Fixed formatting. Also cut two sections (group shows, her art in collections) that in my understanding were too much detail for what an artist's article typically contains. Look at articles about other artists and decide if I am right or wrong. David notMD (talk) 10:15, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

@Mem271: I've made this a subsection of your original thread above. Also, if you want someone to be notified that you have replied to them, use {{Re|UserName}} in your reply. Please sign your messages on talk pages by adding a space and four tildes to the end of the last line of your message, like this:

This is the last line of the message. ~~~~

The four tildes will be automatically converted to a signature that contains your linked username and a timestamp, which helps keep conversations organized. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 11:31, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Pinging Sam-2727 as Mem271 presumably intended. Reading the current version after David's edits, I think it is ready for mainspace, even if there might be some minor formatting aspects left (e.g. "W.A. abbreviations, likely for "Western Australia"). Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 11:36, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Mem271 this updated version is much better. I still think there are still some areas where the language could be improved (see Worldbruce's comment on the page as it stands), but as Tigraan said, this is probably acceptable for the mainspace at this point. I see that you have resubmitted it the AFC. It is generally my personal policy not to re-review the same article (best to have different opinions after all), so I'll defer the ultimate decision to another AFC reviewer. Sam-2727 (talk) 14:48, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Can you create Tobais Jesso Jr. page?

Yes!--Adelaide1234 (talk) 15:17, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

To clarify, the article Tobias Jesso Jr. has been here on Wikipedia for more than 5 years. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.197.27.39 (talk) 15:21, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

My submissions to 'Self-Checkout' page ('Disadvantages' Para.) have been deleted twice without any communiocation in a seemingly arbitary way.

Please advise why my submissions to

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-checkout

have been deleted. Also what I need to do to correct (if the issue is some format problem) Admittedly I'm an infrequent contributor, but I've made financial contributions to Wikipedia in the past & I'm a little unhappy that I'm being treated in this 'let him find out' way. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JamesJHG (talk • contribs) 01:19, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

JamesJHG, Wikipedia does not handle tips. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 01:23, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Now, if you were able to find sources that mention about how they're breeding grounds for microbes and word it as such, that'd be a different story, but that's virtually every public surface. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 01:26, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

JamesJHG, There was communication in the History for the article. It was noted that the info was Not Encyclopedic. If you disagree with why your info was being deleted you can also visit the Talk page for the article at Talk:Self-checkout--Davemoth (talk) 20:37, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello JamesJHG, editing Wikipedia is like visiting a foreign country, it's extremely confusing when you start out but you quickly get used to it. Feel free to write here on the Teahouse with any question you have about editing. All of us are volunteers. The issue with your edit was that it was not neutral, did not cite sources, was not written in an encyclopedic tone, and was not compliant with how we write about medical information (rules regarding medical information are more strict than others). Getting used to all of these norms just takes some time, and all of us make errors in the process. If someone reverts you, you should almost always start a discussion on the talk page of the article in question to discuss whether you can form a consensus about your addition. We also try to keep the atmosphere collegial, there's absolutely no need for edits like these. – Thjarkur (talk) 20:43, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

I think I'm filing a sockpuppet investigation correctly but I'd appreciate some help?

I'm attempting to file a sockpuppetry investigation, but I find the textbox included above the input confusing, and I'm not quite sure that I'm doing it right.

When I hit preview, the {{checkuser}} template input doesn't preview, and I don't know if this is a feature, or just that I've put it in wrong. I also don't know if {{checkip}} is the right template to use for requesting CheckUser for IP addresses? I know it's trivial, but going through Wikipedia bureaucracy can be confusing, and I'd really appreciate some help. Thanks! --Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) 15:07, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

The easiest way to do it is to turn on Twinkle in your preferences, then you do the following: Open the sockpuppeteer's user page, click on TW > ARV, select "Sockpuppeteer", and fill in the information. Your seem to have found your way though, your report came out correct. – Thjarkur (talk) 21:06, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your help anyway, though! I'll be sure to keep this in mind if I have to file one again :) --Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) 01:57, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Why my user page is deleted?

I just posted something on my user page and added a link of it in [45]. It implies, I didn't violate anything related to copyright provision as it is my own data. So why the content on my user page was deleted. Kanishk1901 (talk) 00:40, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

You were provided with a reason: "...because the page appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time." David notMD (talk) 02:05, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

musical notability criteria

What is musical notability criteria and how can I use it to create the article for Finneas' song "Let's Fall in Love for the Night"? Beatleswillneverdie (talk)

@Beatleswillneverdie: Welcome to Wikipedia and thanks for wanting to add to it. See WP:NMUSIC, then head over to WP:YFA to learn about creating an article and there is a wizard there to help you create a draft for review. RudolfRed (talk) 03:17, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

How to add protection layer on Articles saving from vandalism

There are so many articles which are being vandalised by some newly registered users and some non login users. I want learn that how to put editing locked from new and non login users. The article should be edited by verified user by admin and neutral thinker.

Kindly tech me. I am new user, I know that if I or any admin put lock/protection on Article, I can't edit that anymore. But still want to lock some articles as they can be vandalised. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheChunky (talk • contribs) 03:27, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

@TheChunky: Only admins can add protection to pages. If you see a page that is being constantly vandalized, you can request protection at WP:RFPP. RudolfRed (talk) 03:56, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Help please!How to convert a page from a draft to an open one?

Good afternoon, tell me, my leader needed to make his page not only in Russian, but also in English, I created it but it is in a draft stage, I need to lay out an open page, tell me how to do it, it is absolutely necessary!
thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Krutovaksenia1997 (talk • contribs) 07:48, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Krutovaksenia1997 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You must read and comply with the paid editing policy and conflict of interest policy since you say you are here for your leader. Users new to the English Wikipedia cannot directly create articles, they must submit a draft for review. I will add the appropriate information so you can do so. Please know that just because an article is on the Russian Wikipedia does not mean it is acceptable for the English Wikipedia. We have different rules than the Russian Wikipedia. I do not know if your draft would be accepted; your leader must get significant coverage in independent reliable sources showing how he meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person. Your draft reads as a social media type profile and not an encyclopedia article. Please read Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 08:39, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Ksenia. I suppose the article you created (Draft:Litvinov Dmitry) will have to be moved to another name, if it gets accepted. Please note the English language Wikipedia uses a different order of names – compare en:Alfred Nobel and ru:Нобель, Альфред. Anyway I doubt it will meet notability requirements. --CiaPan (talk) 09:26, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

MY ARTICLE WAS REJECTED

Hello! i published a draft about Elmeyor Premier Hospitality and Tourism Business School article, but it was rejected. Please can you let me know how to get it approved. Thanks!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Itprocity (talk • contribs) 10:13, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Per your Talk page, your draft rejected (stronger than declined) and you are blocked until you comply with the instructions there on how to change your User name. David notMD (talk) 10:27, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

May I cite a source whose complete form can only be accessed by payment?

I am currently working on adding citations to a page. A trustworthy news website containing the information I need hosts an article about it, but it is very brief. The entire article can be accessed if I subscribe to the website, but I don't know how I will cite it or how it will show up to people who haven't subscribed to the site. Any help and input will be appreciated. Thank you in advance for your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MrsDucky (talk • contribs) 04:03, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

@MrsDucky: Welcome to Wikipedia, and thanks for adding citations. Cite the source like you would normally. It is not an issue that it requires payment to access. See WP:PAYWALL. RudolfRed (talk) 04:09, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

MrsDucky To add to that, it is not required that a source be free or easy to access, only that it be publicly available and possible to access. Sources purely in private hands unavailable to the general public could not be used here. 331dot (talk) 08:50, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

@MrsDucky: I wouldn't expect any problem here. It's the same case with many books – not all of them are available online and free, not all are in libraries, either, so when you want to see the book's contents you have to buy it. That is: pay for it. Wikipedia does not require the source available always, for everyone and free. Wikipedia requires the source published and reliable. --CiaPan (talk) 10:06, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

@MrsDucky: the above is correct, but (at the risk of saying something obvious): only cite sources that you could access and have checked yourself. If you know that the source says X because you read elsewhere that it says X, say where you read it (i.e. the source would be "Foo, cited by Bar"). Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 10:38, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

How to add alexa ranking in infobox

Hello anyone, how to add alexa rank in infobox? Eeskaay (talk) 12:17, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

We need to know which article and which type of infobox before we can give you an answer. - X201 (talk) 12:28, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy link: Draft:Qproperties. 331dot (talk) 12:28, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi Eeskaay. Draft:Qproperties uses {{Infobox company}} which does not have an option to add an Alexa rank. An Alexa option was opposed at Template talk:Infobox company/Archive 9#Add Alexa rank and Template talk:Infobox company/Archive 10#Alexa. {{Infobox website}} has the option. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:21, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Replacing pictures on Wikipedia pages

Hello. I have one simple question.

If I believe that a better image exists for an image on a Wikipedia page, how do I recommend that this different image should replace the current image?

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by USCG PTC Developer (talk • contribs) 13:27, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

USCG PTC Developer Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. If you just want to propose the use of a different image, you can discuss the issue on the relevant article talk page. If you want to upload an image, please follow the instructions at WP:UPIMAGE, making sure that they copyright of the image permits its use on Wikipedia.

I notice that your username seems to be that of a position(I assume in the US Coast Guard); please change your username to be identifiable as used by a specific individual(your real name is not required) as accounts cannot be shared or be associated with a position that a successor might have. Please change your username at Special:GlobalRenameRequest. 331dot (talk) 13:31, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

[1] Source:Pick a Draft at AfC

[2] "D. P. Burma Memorial Lecture Award | SBCI".

[Fuller_1993-3] Fuller 1993 harvnb error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFFuller1993 (help): "As regards the second point, it should be remembered what Mr. Winston Churchill said in the House of Commons on 3rd March, 1919-namely: 'We are holding all our means of coercion in full operation or in immediate readiness for use. We are enforcing the blockade with vigor. We have strong armies ready to advance at the shortest notice. Germany is very near starvation. The evidence I have received from the officers sent by the War Office all over Germany shows first of all, the great privations which the German people are suffering, and secondly, the great danger of a collapse of the entire structure of German social and national life under the pressure of hunger and malnutrition. Now is therefore the moment to settle.'" p. 19

[Fuller_1993-4] Fuller 1993, p. 19 harvnb error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFFuller1993 (help): "As regards the second point, it should be remembered what Mr. Winston Churchill said in the House of Commons on 3rd March, 1919-namely: 'We are holding all our means of coercion in full operation or in immediate readiness for use. We are enforcing the blockade with vigor. We have strong armies ready to advance at the shortest notice. Germany is very near starvation. The evidence I have received from the officers sent by the War Office all over Germany shows first of all, the great privations which the German people are suffering, and secondly, the great danger of a collapse of the entire structure of German social and national life under the pressure of hunger and malnutrition. Now is therefore the moment to settle.'"

[1]

[1]

[1]

[1]