Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1118

Archive 1115

Archive 1116

Archive 1117

Archive 1118

Archive 1119

Archive 1120

→

Archive 1125

Query re picture articles

in the picture articles, what kind of edit summary should I put in?  Mohamed mfuu (talk) 02:26, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

@Mohamed mfuu: Welcome to the Teahouse! When you are adding photographs to articles (as you kindly did here), your edit summary could be "Added photo". I don't know what "#WPWP #WPWPARK" means. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 06:26, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

GoingBatty, those hashtags are associated with a Wikipedia editing competition in Nigeria. Prizes are given to editors who add images to articles, and the hashtags are used to keep track of the contributions of the participants. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:51, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Saber mensur

{{Information
|Description=Saber mensur, in German Säbelmensur
|Source=Landsmannschaft Zaringia Heidelberg
|Date=1913
|Author=Felix Geiger
|Permission=Landsmannschaft Zaringia Heidelberg
|other_versions=
}}

Licensing: By Licensing are all members of the Landsmannschaft Zaringia Heidelberg. How can I put the video on Landsmannschaft Zaringia Heidelberg? https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Upload&wpDestFile=S%C3%A4belmensur_der_Heidelberger_Landsmannschaft_Zaringia_und_Cheruskia_1913.jpg Wname1 (talk) 16:19, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi Wname1 and welcome to the Teahouse. From Commons:Licensing; "Wikimedia Commons only accepts media that are explicitly freely licensed, or that are in the public domain in at least the United States and in the source country of the work." If media isn't either specifically licensed, or in the public domain, it can't stay on Commons due to copyright issues. Cheers, Rubbish computer (Talk: Contribs) 16:36, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello Rubbish computer "Wikimedia Commons only accepts media that are explicitly freely licensed, or that are in the public domain in at least the United States and in the source country of the work." It is Licensing like you said. What should I do now? Wname1 (talk) 17:04, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi Wname1, I'm not that proficient at Commons terms. You need to provide said licensing if you upload to Commons; it can be complicated, and it may be easier to ask this question on Commons. It looks like the video was deleted as it didn't have proof of the proper licensing. If there is no specification that the work is licensed, it can be deleted from Commons after a set time period. Rubbish computer (Talk: Contribs) 17:08, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@Wname1: If the photograph was indeed taken in 1913 by Felix Geiger, then provided he has been dead for over 70 years, it will now be out of copyright. So one way forward is for you to provide evidence for his date of death and add that information to Commons when you re-upload the file. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:26, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull:I am currently on the way to find out, when that date Felix Geiger died. Regards, Wname1 (talk) 06:41, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull:Now I have the correct name of the person and when the person died. The name is Dr. Oskar Geiger who died in March 12th, 1923. Is it now acceptable to display these videos? Regards, Wname1 (talk) 17:47, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

@Wname1: That's fine. Make sure you use the Upload Wizard commons:Special:UploadWizard and be very careful to fill in the fields with accurate information such as the source of the file and, especially, when it asks "why you are sure you have the right to publish this work" you take the option "The copyright has definitely expired in the USA" because "First published before 1926 and author deceased more than 70 years ago". Put the exact details in the comments section. Giving the admins on Commons all the information will ensure the file can be retained there. Good luck. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:34, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull:is it possible for you to check here https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:VTS_01_2.webm whether what I have done is acceptable? Thanks, Wname1 (talk) 06:35, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

@Wname1: Yes, that looks perfect to me, although you would have been better to use a more user-friendly name for the file. "VTS_01_2" could be moved to something like "Saber Mensur swordfight". You can use the "request renaming this file" on Commons: it is under the "More" menu top right of the Commons page you reach by clicking on the link you supplied here. I've also added a couple of Commons categories to the file, as that's how people look things up there. After viewing the video I'm not surprised there were men in white coats standing by! Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:03, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull: I sent this to "Commons: File requests" waiting for an answer, I hope this is correct. Wname1 (talk) 11:30, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull:I want to show this video with a length of 00:07:05 minutes, it is on my DVD-RW drive (D :). It is from 1913 and how can I represent it?. Regards, Wname1 (talk) 08:03, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

What is mean by Partner (s) in infobox actress?

Jennifer Lopez have such word in infobox. 2401:4900:52F9:3BF1:EBAE:7480:3C0D:DB98 (talk) 08:25, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

From context, sexual partners that they have not married (read: boyfriends). —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 08:26, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

The Gallery (1973-78)

 Nj1948 (talk) 17:14, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy: The Gallery (1973-78) (which was created on 15 July 2021 without going through AfC). Did you have a question about the article? David notMD (talk) 17:18, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

In a Notes and References section (not a true References section), some are described as "(ea stands for eyewitness of the author)". I recommend either draftify or Speedy deletion. David notMD (talk) 17:30, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

I've moved it to Draft:The Gallery (1973-78). The refencing is a mess, with things such as 25 . Once the referencing has all been converted to an acceptable style, it'll be easier to assess whether the draft meets Wikipedia's standards for an article. Maproom (talk) 08:57, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

References

Question about sources

Hi there. Am I allowed to use a YouTube video as a source? I don't plan on using it as a major source, just as video evidence of a few things in an article and to corroborate it's existence. I won't be using any statements from the actual video or anything, only things I can see in the video itself.

Thanks BakuFromAus (talk) 09:16, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

@BakuFromAus Hello and welcome to the Teahouse! This is a bit like asking "Can I use the internet as a source?" There is a a lot of crap out there. Is it an anonymously uploaded video? Then no. Is it a WP:ABOUTSELF video? Then it can be used per that policy. Is it from CNN:s YT-channel? Then it's as good as CNN elsewhere. More at WP:RSPYT. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:51, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) hello & welcome to the teahouse BakuFromAus! you should avoid using youtube, as [m]ost videos on YouTube are anonymous, self-published, and unverifiable. (source/more reading). but you're free to use say, a verified channel of a reliable news organization, as a source. happy editing!   melecie   t 09:55, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you :@Gråbergs Gråa Sång and :@User:Melecie

BakuFromAus (talk) 10:17, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Actually this is a question close to my heart. For some YouTube videos it's really obvious: the CNN one is a good example of a 'Yes', and my kid's personal video blog is a good 'No'. For others it's not so clear. I have inserted an external link to an Early Music Sources video by Elam Rotem into a WP article, on the grounds that although it's an un-reviewed personal opinion video, it is (1) not anonymous; (2) made by someone with an acknowledged expertise and track-record; and (3) Rotem himself is sufficiently notable to warrant a WP article, so his opinions are not the opinions of a nobody (they embody the current knowledge of early music experts). My personal view is that if you think a YouTube clip is sufficiently weighty and reliable to be a valuable source, put it in (with appropriate edit explanation) and see if others agree. If someone takes it back out again, you can always discuss its merits with them. The question of assessing value of YouTube clips isn't going to go away any time soon. If I'm getting it wrong, I want people to tell me! Elemimele (talk) 11:03, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Redesigning the mobile sidebar / Who to contact

I recently emailed the Volunteer Response Team about redesigning the mobile sidebar. They told me to contact Wikimedia's developers or system administrators about the matter. I'm not sure how to contact them. If you could provide me the email address to use to contact the right people about redesigning the mobile sidebar, that would be great. Thanks, Interstellarity (talk) 21:39, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Hey @Interstellarity, LTNS! Hope you are well. About your question, does WP:PHAB help? Phab is where all the developers are. The list of sysadmins is at WP:Sysadmin, but I don't know if they can do much based on one person's request. Best to just post at WP:VPT to see if others agree with what you want to achieve; if they do, they'll help you contact the right people, obviously. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 03:05, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Interstellarity. I am a dedicated smartphone editor. In my opinion, the best way for individual editors to deal with the many shortcomings of the mobile site is to use the desktop site instead, which is fully functional on modern smartphones. If you scroll to the very bottom of any page on mobile, there is a "desktop" link that takes you away from a bug-ridden mess to a site that actually works well for working encyclopedia editors. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:25, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks all for your help. Interstellarity (talk) 12:06, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Special:BlankPage

Why does this page exist? A very annoying person whom you DEFINITELY SHOULD NOT CHECK OUT (talk) 10:52, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

According to mw:Release notes/1.13#New_features_in_1.13, it's for "benchmarking, etc". There's probably an element of humour mixed in there somewhere. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 11:16, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

@Crocusfleur It's used in a couple of user scripts such as User:BrandonXLF/PortletLinks and User:Awesome Aasim/editrequest. ―Qwerfjkltalk 14:21, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

How to use Rater

I do edit from mobile. And I don't know how to use rater from phone. So can anyone help me regarding this ? Bapinghosh (talk) 22:27, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

@Bapinghosh: Welcome to Wikipedia. Are you asking about User:Evad37/rater script? I am not sure if userscripts work on mobile. If you don't get an answer here, ask at the talk page User_talk:Evad37/rater.js where users more familiar with the tool may be able to help. If I guessed wrong about what you're asking, please clarify. RudolfRed (talk) 22:45, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

@RudolfRed: thank you Bapinghosh

@Bapinghosh User scripts tend to work better on desktop mode (the link is at the bottom of every page). ―Qwerfjkltalk 14:39, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Please help: I found this message scary and a bit threatening

I do not mean physically threatening, but it's just so inexplicable, what with being directed to "Check user" info with a link to WP:CheckUser. I do not even understand what I have done that appears to this person as wrong.

It seems to be something about this change I made on S&P 500: S&P 500 revision history, which if not appropriate, or does not meet with consensus, can be changed by any editor.

These are the messages left on my (well, the IP address) talk page:

• "Identified as unknown user" diff: What does this mean?
• diff "or I'll block you at this time"
• diff adding comment: "For your information, please visit the help page https: WP:IP addresses are not people."
• next

Is it all because I am an IP user who's dared to make a - rather small - edit? Is that still allowed? What on earth have I done to be so singled out? Before making the edit, I explained my reasoning on the Talk:S&P 500#Introductory sentence in lead talk page. I do not expect other editors to abide by whatever I think, as a matter of course. So what did I do to be threatened with being blocked? I try so hard to be congenial and conscientious on WP, but I make mistakes like everyone else. However, this hostile response (even if the hostility is unintended), is hardly warranted. It's quite (surprisingly) distressing. Is this really necessary? I mean WTH did I do? Please advise:

1. What did I do, from this editors point of view?
2. How can I fix it?
3. How to best approach them; or, alternatively, what to do? (Stop editing?)
4. How to stop feeling sick and shaky?

49.177.30.125 (talk) 06:40, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Notes

 49.177.30.125 (talk) 06:36, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

I suggest that you simply delete the posts by user:ExpandD2003 on your talk page and ignore the user. The user seems to have a problem with IP editors, and the posts were completely inappropriate. ExpandD2003 can in no way block you. I will discuss this on that user's talk page. Meters (talk) 06:45, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

I gave ExpandD2003 a level 1 harassment warning, but I'm not going to argue if anyone wants to bump that higher. Pointing an IP to WP:NOTHUMAN is simply offensive. Meters (talk) 06:54, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

@Meters I'd suggest bumping it up to at least a level 2 warning, possibly level 3, for threatening users and pretending to have admin and oversight rights. ―Qwerfjkltalk 07:54, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

It's not clear to me that the user was actually claiming to have checkuser rights, or even admin rights. Just possibly the comment "Or I'll block you at this time." meant that he would have the IP blocked (and even that should have been that he would request a block on the IP). Yes, I'm bending over backwards to AGF here, but the user has been active for six months and has never done anything like this before. I almost gave a level 2, and the more I think about the link to Wikipedia:IP addresses are not people and the rest of those edits the more I think I should have. If someone else wants to give that or whatever, that's up to them. Meters (talk) 08:51, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your response, @Meters. I very much appreciate your efforts.

But, this is the editor's response to your talk page message:

I'm sorry Wikipedia user Meters. But in the article about the S&P 500 index, he said that "it is a stock market index that tracks 500 large companies". So I was replaced on "made up of". In his talk page, he replaced the sentence from his lead, saying that "The S&P 500 is a tool or method to do the tracking, so the index's constituent parts are the data, the processes used to select the data, and the statistical operations applied, not the 500 companies." When he is dared to edit, IP user 49.177.30.125 revised all the time. But, I am NOT an admin. Please, I wish someone wants to block "49.177.30.125". Thx ExpandD2003 (talk) 09:44, 22 July 2021 (UTC) [emphasis added]

I have made a total one edit on the S&P 500 page and one on that talk page. I do not believe we have ever edited the same page before. Might the ExpandD2003 be mistaking me for someone else?

Either way, I feel in a bit of a nightmare, that at some point people will discover I have done some dreadful thing on WP (that I am clueless about. I mean why else would they be acting this way, right?) This level of antipathy toward me for a single edit is making me paranoid. I - in no way, shape, or form - want any direct approach or interaction with this baffling and frightening individual. If they report me or express anywhere else that I should be blocked (without specifying exactly what I have done), I will be asking for advice around where to go for some formal action by the WP community. I do not deserve this. If the user has made a mistake, then it behooves them to double check themselves, before tangling others up in their misunderstandings. Sorry: I myself am surprised by how disconcerting I find this. Thanks 49.177.30.125 (talk) 10:43, 22 July 2021 (UTC) Updated. 49.177.30.125 (talk) 10:53, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

I've asked user:ExpandD2003 to explain. Meters (talk) 08:58, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Hey, it's okay. You have alerted enough of us here and most everyone I have met on Wikipedia aren't just amazing editors but they are pretty great people too. We encourage you to to be bold. If you do something wrong you will be told and you will have plenty of chances to correct it. Very few people are blocked from editing because of a good faith mistake. Meters has left messages on their talk page to explain and I left messages reminding them to assume good faith and warning them not to harrass other editors. You can seek additional action but maybe following what you said on the article talk page would be a better idea. I don't think you should be worried about editing the same articles that this editor does though. If you feel you are still being harrassed you can provide those diffs and there are admins here that can look into it and take the appropriate steps to ensure it doesn't continue. Please keep editing. Your good faith contributions are important and welcome. --ARoseWolf 13:29, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you to all who have made supportive comments or have given their time or effort to assist: @Meters, @Qwerfjkl, @ARoseWolf and @David notMD. Although the little triggering outburst may not seem particularly severe (I can see some conflicts on WP are much more serious), I found myself highly spooked. Looking back, I realise it's the unexpectedness of it, combined with being unable to guess at any reason for ExpandD2003's attitude, that got to me. So I apologise if my reaction did not seem proportionate; just my own idiosyncratic "chink in the armour", I guess, which makes me a not very suitable user on a site such as WP!

As for thinking I may have actually done something untoward of which I am unaware, I tend to approach editing on WP in the "stepping on eggshells" manner, and usually make an initial assumption that someone making a complaint about my actions, actually have something to complain of! I automatically think: they know something I don't. In any case, I really am most grateful for your help. Cheers, 49.177.30.125 (talk) 01:11, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

I don't feel you need to apologise for anything. Your feelings were valid and your response was one of genuine fear of consequences for actions you may not even know were a violation of highly convoluted rules and policies which turned out not to be the case. I would have been more concerned had you not reached out. The fact you did and the fact you were concerned about what rule or policy you may have violated showed me that you are here for the right reasons, something I had assumed all along but was glad to have confirmed. I think most editors are here for the right reasons but sometimes we can get caught up in an overzealous effort to protect the encyclopedia and that can lead to what has happened here. You did nothing wrong and yet a well intentioned editor bit too hard and was unable to explain why they reacted to your edit in a way that was kind, appropriate and educational. I have no doubt that, in their mind, they had a perfectly good reason but sometimes what we view as legitimate is far from reality and it doesn't take long to get there. At any rate, please feel free to contact any of us should you face further harassment or feel threatened. One of the keys to continued quality development and expansion of the encyclopedia is a welcoming atmosphere and a general understanding of how important positive interactions with each other can be to meeting those goals. --ARoseWolf 12:33, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Why would my original post trip the "LTA edit filter"

In a not altogether unrelated issue to the above, why would my post produce this?:

• 06:36, 22 July 2021: 49.177.30.125 (talk) triggered an edit filter, performing the action "edit" on Wikipedia:Teahouse. Actions taken: none; Filter description: LTA edit summary or editing pattern hit (Oshwah) (diff)

Strange, and just a bit too mysterious for me. Disconcerting upon disconcerting. 49.177.30.125 (talk) 01:11, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

A WP:LTA is a long term abuser. That particular filter is a private filter by user:Oshwah to track something he's following. Whichever LTA he's tracking, your post was close enough to that LTA's style to trip the filter. Ignore it. Meters (talk) 03:02, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

I don't expect the details of the filter to be publicised, as that would only help LTAs circumvent it. But looking at the edits, it appears to be a broad net, with no immediately apparent one keyword, etc. As above, I would not worry about it. Everyone hits some filters some times (not that I work with filters but I would expect that you would hit vandalism filters a lot, when you edit for example, LGBT or sexuality topics). Usedtobecool ☎️ 03:25, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

No, nor would I expect - or want - filter details publicised. And sure, hot button topics, but the Teahouse?

I am just freaking out a bit, owing to a short string of minor negatives, which happen to trip my own "edit filters" - as idiosyncratic as any of WP's. (Did I say "eggshells"? Perhaps am fearful of something closer to unexploded ordinance.)

Anyway, thanks @Usedtobecool and once again to you, @Meters. Will do my best to "ignore it", along with the occasional user who jumps out from the bushes and yells 'boo' at me. (Insert a smiley here so you can tell I am attempting a weak joke). Cheers, again. 49.177.30.125 (talk) 06:15, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Another mention

Mentioning that they have been "subjected to 49.177.30.125" (my IP), more as an aside really, in a message about a difficulty elsewhere. Think they are saying here that they are not editing because of being "subjected" to me. Snap: Similar reason for reduction (but not yet cessation!) in my editing. Just keeping an eye out, and noting, for my own peace of mind. 49.177.30.125 (talk) 14:29, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

I would seriously consider taking this to the Administrator's noticeboard for incidents. The original messages they left on your talk page were wholly inappropriate and very nasty, pretending to be an administrator or checkuser and threatening to block another user over nothing is bad enough as is, and their follow up non-apology apology was not really sufficient in my view. These further messages referring to being "subjected" to another editor are also deeply unpleasant, verging on a personal attack. Looking through their contributions and talk messages I'm also getting the distinct impression that there are some serious language based competence issues at work here. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 14:53, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

help in editing

hi guys , i saw a page on bhumihar bhramin [which is a caste in india] it has some serious statement like it says that they are not bhramin and the only source they have given is a book and when you open it you find that author too hasn't given any reference so what to do now ?? like as far as i know they are bhramin and i have many books to support my statement but the problem is it is semi-locked and only some users can edit it so what should i do i have posted my references in the talk page haven't go any response . waiting for ya all's response thanks Gaurav 3894 (talk) 11:37, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

You made comments on the Talk page of Bhumihar on 25 July (today). Volunteers do get to all edit requests, but the response is not instantaneous. Be patient. David notMD (talk) 11:43, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

I will tell you now that your comments will not lead to changes to the article. For a semi-locked article, proposed changes need to be SPECIFIC. This means that you quote wording in the article and then propose replacement wording. Any change to referenced content requires references to support the new content. This is what the replace X with Y instructions mean. David notMD (talk) 11:48, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

You say " i have many books to support my statement" but you have not provided details of a single one of them. Citing your reliable sources is the first step towards your concerns being taken seriously.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 15:01, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Page/section editing issue

Can someone take a look at the Hampton University page? Editing a section of the page now requires editing the entire page, unlike other pages. Thanks. Soulcontroller (talk) 11:06, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

When I looked at Hampton University, each section and subsection title had the expected (edit), so section editing worked. David notMD (talk) 11:40, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

@Soulcontroller: Welcome to the Teahouse. I've heard that section editing in the visual editor works on mobile, but is it possible you pressed the edit link at the top instead of on a section, or a setting has been changed? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:05, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Bug_Bite_Thing Help

Hello!

I'm having trouble getting my article approved after making significant edits. I do not have a stake in this company; I just really enjoy Shark Tank, and this product did well on the show. I think it deserves a little home on Wikipedia :) Have I come to the right place for assistance? I greatly appreciate any guidance or advice (I'm new to Wiki writing and I'd love to be a more active contributor).

Thank you so much for your help.

- ping Pingbruise (talk) 18:39, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Pingbruise Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You're in the right place. Your draft just tells about the product and what it does. Wikipedia articles must do more, they must summarize what reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the subject, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of notability. The sources seem to be press release type stories, and/or promotional pieces for the product. These do not establish notability. What is needed are reliable sources with a history of fact checking and editorial control that have decided on their own(and not simply republish materials from the product makers) to extensively write about it. Please read Your first article. 331dot (talk) 19:38, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy: Draft:Bug Bite Thing. The company website should not be a reference. David notMD (talk) 10:42, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Pingbruise, as a practical matter what you're up against is that the article is about a current commercial product. If you wrote an article of similar size, quality, and dept of reference for (say) a 14th century battle or an island somewhere you might be good to go. But we're (understandably and properly) leery of articles on marginal commercial products. As you might imagine, every single day we have to deal with PR people etc pushing their product. I get that this probably doesn't apply to you and you just find the product interesting, but this is a fast-moving website and as a practical matter articles like yours are going to getting to get snagged in the net. It is what it is.

I also see that CNN and USA Today have sections where they "review" Bug Bit Thing but they get money when people buy it it. Those are ads (and pretend to be "reviews" which is even worse). Can't use. And the presence of these "articles" doesn't help your case, even though it's not your fault. It suggests an active sketchy PR campaign which could include an attempt to get into Wikipedia.

If there was balancing material you could put it (e.g., "Consumer Reports described the product as a scam" or whatever) that'd help. But I couldn't see anybody saying anything bad about the product, really. There's one legit article where the person points out that you have to keep applying it, and it doesn't work when theirs lots of bites (I forget the link). I suppose that could be something.

It may be that this entity is just not suitable for an article yet. I'd suggest you work on other stuff and wait and see if something pops up for this one (some proper reviews or profiles). Herostratus (talk) 15:56, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

My article is not showing in recommend

I made a article on Badhangarhi temple and today it was successfully accepted by Wikipedia ,thanks for that :) But when I search the title of my article on Wikipedia as only Badhangarhi then it was not recommend me my article and showing not pages with this title, I have to write the entire title Badhangarhi temple, after which the article is coming in the recommendation list. And i also have another question when will this article recommend on the Google, because right now Google is not recommending this article. Yakku3 (talk) 06:55, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

For your second question, I think it's either until 90 days have passed it it is reviewed by a New page patroller, though that may not be true for AfC accepted drafts. ―Qwerfjkltalk 07:01, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Qwerfjkl, A draft accepted by an AfC reviewer goes through the NPR process, however if the AfC reviewer has autopatrolled rights, the "article is marked autopatrolled" after it is moved to mainspace. Badhangarhi temple was accepted by an autopatrolled AfC reviewer. However I guess it'd take time to appear in all the feed stuff. ─ The Aafī ^(talk) 10:44, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

@Yakku3:, the article might appear on the Google soon, since it has been marked patrolled. I can't say exactly when that's going to happen. ─ The Aafī ^(talk) 10:45, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Qwerfjkl, the "90-days" is for the articles which are not patrolled by the NPP reviewers and remain in the mainspace for more than 90 days. Autopatrolled articles and "new pages that have been marked patrolled" appear on the Google instantly. Perhaps it could take few hours. ─ The Aafī ^(talk) 10:48, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia does not have an article titled Badhangarhi. However, you could make that into a WP:REDIRECT for it to do what you want.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 10:33, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Badhangarhi temple GoingBatty (talk) 13:40, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Well done, Yakku3 for having your draft accepted. It was on my watchlist from yesterday's Teahouse comments, so I took a look just now. It turned out that the infobox had created an enormous image at the top of the article, which I have corrected. In infoboxes, you just put the image name, without "File" in front...... Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:44, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Mike Turnbull thanks, oh thanks for correction also ,but i edit that for increasing the image size, i don't know any other option for increasing the size therefore i edit like that.

I tried Wikipedia search: if I type "Badangarh" then I get the temple as the second item in the drop-down suggestions (below an unrelated Badangarh that's in Rajasthan). If I type "Badangar" then it's there but further down. So seems to be working now. ⁓ Pelagic ( messages ) 16:36, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

I used to be 12welveon13teen but my laptop broke′

 Fryboy Editor (talk) 16:03, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

@Fryboy Editor, hello and welcome, what seems to be the problem? Do you have any particular questions in mind? If I’m interpreting your question correctly are you trying to retrieve your former account? Celestina007 (talk) 16:53, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Yes I am. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fryboy Editor (talk • contribs) 16:54, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

@Fryboy Editor: Welcome to the Teahouse. Did you associate an email account with your previous account? If you did, there should be a "forgot password" link that you can click on to send an email to your email account to reset it. If you did not, I'm afraid you're going to have to make do with this one. (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.) —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:10, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

@Fryboy Editor I just want someone to block it so I don't get accused of sockpuppeting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fryboy Editor (talk • contribs)

@Fryboy Editor, I think what Tenryuu told you is a good idea. You can retrieve the account if an email is associated with it but if you want to discard that account, and continue with one I think (a link to this thread) should be evidence enough that you aren’t engaging in sock puppetry and that you indeed made this open knowledge. furthermore you can make this known on your current account too. Celestina007 (talk) 17:46, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

@Fryboy Editor: I suggest doing what Celestina007 mentioned, but to be on the safe side, I would declare your previous account on your user page, User:Fryboy Editor, as recommended in this section under Legitimate uses for multiple accounts:

Compromised accounts: If you are unable to access your account because you have lost the password or because someone has obtained or guessed your password, you may create a new account with a clean password. In such a case, you should post a note on the user page of each account indicating that they are alternative accounts for the same person. If necessary, you should also ask for an admin to block the compromised account. You may want to consider using a committed identity in advance to help deal with this rare situation should it arise later.

As the above states, you can ask an admin to block the previous account for you. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:02, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

@Fryboy Editor can you give me a link? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fryboy Editor (talk • contribs)

@Fryboy Editor: A link to what? If you're looking to contact an admin, some that constantly check in on the Teahouse are @331dot and @Nick Moyes. (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.) —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:07, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

• There is no account by the name of "12welveon13teen", perhaps it's not typed correctly here. 331dot (talk) 18:17, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

  I think they meant to say User:12welveon13rteen. Fryboy Editor, are you sure you've tried logging in with the correct username, and tried some passwords? -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 18:24, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

@Fryboy Editor yes I did try. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fryboy Editor (talk • contribs)

@Fryboy Editor: You've done the right thing by declaring the connection between the old and new account. (I do suggest you add a note to User:Fryboy Editor to point to the old account. I am not going to block User:12welveon13rteen as I have no way of knowing (and please don't take this the wrong way) whether this request is genuine, or not. (i.e. it could be a backdoor trick to getting another editor blocked, though honestly I do not suspect that of you). Simply don't use the old account if you later on find you can remember the password, but stick to the new one and you'll be fine. Make sure you associate an email address with this new one so you can retrieve it if the same thing happens again. (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~.) Regards,

Nick Moyes (talk) 19:50, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

blanking - is it appropriate?

Is blanking sections of a BLP that contains many academic citations considered vandalism? If someone claims the piece was written showing some bias, I thought it was best to rewrite rather than delete, so i undid a massive deletion, but I was told that I was wrong. Perhaps more experienced contributors can help clarify? Thanks! SteveCorrigan1970 (talk) 18:53, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

No, as two very experienced editors have already pointed out to you [1], [2] it is not vandalism. --bonadea contributions talk 19:12, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy: Mizanur Rahman (Islamic activist). There exists a lengthy and somewhat heated discussion on the Talk page of the article, and in the article, recent history of edit warring. David notMD (talk) 19:50, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

How do I add attribution?

I used a table from 2021 French regional elections in my draft. Do I need to give attribution to the creator or someone? If yes, how? Excellenc1📞 16:47, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

@Excellenc1: Short answer: yes. See Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. You can't go back and change edit summaries, so I suggest you to leave a short note in the talk page on both the source article and the draft that makes it clear you copied the table. Since someone may edit the table in the source article, you could provide the link to the specific version of the source article that you copied from; this is the permalink to the current revision. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 17:10, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

@Ganbaruby: As per your suggestion, I have added the following message in my draft's talk page:
In revision 1035094394 of this draft, the table in the "Vice-Presidents" section is copied from this revision of article '2021 French regional elections'. See its history for attribution.
and this message in the article's talk page from which I copied:
A table from revision 1035083450 of this article has been copied to Draft:Regional Council of Nouvelle-Aquitaine in a previous revision of the draft. Attribution to the source (this article) is provided in the draft's talk page.
Is this fine/correct? Excellenc1📞 05:25, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

@Excellenc1: Sorry for the late reply, for some reason I didn't get a ping. Yes, that is perfect. Good job! ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 20:03, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Help with cite error

This is my first time editing and am trying to edit “Paul Shaughnessy”. I ran into a cite error and do not know how to fix? Thanks in advance! 2BTruthful (talk) 19:06, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

@2BTruthful The problem is you have added <ref name="Fifth" /> with adding <ref name="Fifth" >[Reference]</ref> above it. ―Qwerfjkltalk 19:55, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Actually, 2BTruthful removed referenced content, including the full ref for "Fifth", breaking the other use of the same ref, and also added unreferenced content. An editor has reverted both of 2BTruthful's edits as not representing a neutral point of view. David notMD (talk) 19:58, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @2BTruthful: To answer your question: you removed a reference that was the "source" of a reused reference; see WP:REFNAME to see what I mean. However, even more problematic is that you added information that isn't written from a neutral point of view without reliable sources. Phrases such as "his indomitable spirit", "motivated to help hire promising new teachers", "years of devoted service", and many others are unacceptable for Wikipedia. Don't "fluff up" a biography to make the person sound better, but instead, just describe who he was as straightforwardly, backed up by sources. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 20:00, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Said better than I did. David notMD (talk) 20:03, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Notability of A Scholar

Dr. Melsa Ararat (Turkish Scholar) Wiki Page Hi! I am writing a new page about a scholar. Yet, my draft is rejected due to lack of notability. I am not sure how to show the notability beside the given references. This is the link of draft page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Melsa_Ararat?action=edit#Melsa_Ararat

Thanks in advance! Anukee (talk) 20:12, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Melsa Ararat

@Anukee: Welcome to the Teahouse! To demonstrate notability, you should be looking for what independent reliable sources say about her (not what she says to the media). You could remove the external links from the lead and Awards sections, and add references instead. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 20:55, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Anukee Take a look at the specific notability criteria for academics at WP:NACADEMIC. -- Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 21:06, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Facebook and images/Videos

How do you make a Facebook account How do you upload images(eg. Ariana Grande) and videos (The Voice American T.V. series) Jessica J 2009 (talk) 21:35, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi Jessica J 2009. You seem to be asking two separate questions. If you want to know how to create a Facebook account, then try going to facebook.com and following the instructions there. Wikipedia is not Facebook and has nothing to do with creating Facebook accounts. Your second question appears to be related to Wikipedia:Image use policy and Wikipedia:Copyrights#Guidelines for images and other media files, but basically you should only be uploading images or videos that you've taken yourself as explained in Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials; in other words, photos or videos that you find online which were created by other persons are most likely not going to be OK to upload to Wikipedia unless the original copyright holder has given their explicit consent to do so. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:58, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Tension between libertarianism and Marxism crowds out progressive views

One thing I have noticed about the NPOV policy is that a topic's top-two viewpoints, as determined in practice by those having the most determined and persistent editor advocates, are given prominent placement, often to the exclusion of other viewpoints as "fringe" or "undue," even when such third points of view have a greater number but less vocal adherents, and in some cases are moderate positions in between the more extreme included views. In political economics and adjacent articles, this is reflected by coverage of both libertarian economics, adhering to strict property rights over individual well-being, and Marxist ideas of generally communist kinds of socialism.

Often excluded are the far more popular progressive capitalist viewpoints, including the consequentialist positions to which nearly every government adheres in practice along with the vast majority of policy advocacy organizations. Such positions are between the two extremes. I've looked closely enough that this appears to be a repeating pattern. I don't think it's a healthy situation, and I don't think it accurately presents encyclopedic information about political economics. Furthermore, I see the same pattern on other topics, for example in the History article.

If I get more involved in editing -- I have done some in the past, but not in a while -- I want to focus on this problem. I am sure I am not the first to notice it, so my question is, who else is working on it? 107.242.121.19 (talk) 22:10, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, IP editor. We recommend that concerns of bias or lack of coverage are addressed on the talk page of an individual article. But if you feel there might be a systemic failure of coverage (based upon Reliable Sources), you may find a general discussion at a relevant 'Wikiproject' would yield some feedback from other editors. I would suggest opening a discussion on the talk page or either WP:WikiProject Economics or WP:WikiProject Politics. If you do so, please link to specific articles, and even to specific edits/reverts if that is possible. I hope this helps (as this is not a topic I have any knowledge about). Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:22, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Getting started translating

Hi! I'm brand new to editing Wikipedia and would like to help with translating articles from Spanish to English as I work as a translator. While I've read the help articles about translation on Wikipedia, I'm a bit overwhelmed with how to get started. There's so many articles needing translation, and I'm not sure which ones are notable enough to warrant being translated into English, or exactly how to actually do it. The first one I clicked on at random barely had any citations either so I didn't think it would be good to translate that one. Is there some kind of community around translating on Wikipedia that could help me get started? Thanks in advance! Noble14 (talk) 00:58, 26 July 2021 (UTC) Noble14 (talk) 00:58, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Try Wikipedia:WikiProject Intertranswiki? —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 01:01, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Getting a new page created

 Courtesy link: Draft:Tetrate
I created a new page on "Tetrate", which is a new company. I have only added 3 sentences initially to show founders, industry and products. All facts for which I provided external publications sources like - "The New Stack" and "Data Centre Knowledge". It keeps getting rejected because "This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia." Because there are only 3 things, I am not sure how to edit it to be any more neutral. Wiki-updates-001 (talk) 01:24, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

@Wiki-updates-001: Welcome to the Teahouse. The most glaring issue is the ad copy talk in the third sentence; unless that's removed you're going to have a problem with it sounding like an ad. This could be a case of too soon if it's a new company. Also, external links are not found in the prose, and the unexplained italicisation in the second sentence might raise a few eyebrows. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:31, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Wiki-updates-001. Please describe your relationship, if any, with Tetrate. Your draft has three references. The first two are to New Stack, which is sponsored by Tetrate, so those are not references to independent sources. The third source quotes company executives extensively and has all the hallmarks of being generated by the company's public relations efforts. What is required is significant coverage of this company in several reliable sources that are entirely independent of the company. Please read Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) carefully. Also, you have three external links in the body of the draft article, which is contrary to the guideline. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:39, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Article was rejected

Hi There,

I am new to Wikipedia article submission and my article was rejected and reason stated was as below:- 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.

Could I please ask for help so that I can improve my article Meenu Makan (talk) 00:02, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

It's exactly as it says in the notice: You need multiple strong, independent sources that discuss the company at length that aren't stuff that would be covered as a matter of course. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 00:04, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

And, as posted on your Talk page, no copying content from the company's website - that's a copyright violation. David notMD (talk) 02:55, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Translation of an article. Article for creation rejected.

 Courtesy link: Draft:ThrustMe

Hello, I wanted to translate the Wikipedia page of the company I work for into English. There is a nice page about the company in French Wikipedia made by an external person. I think this page is nice and was written from a neutral point of view. As I work in this company, I thought I could just translate the page into English to keep this neutral point of view. However, when I published it, it was suggested that I "write about the subject from a neutral point of view in an encyclopaedic way". I don't know how to improve it. Antoinebore (talk) 08:39, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello @Antoinebore! Different wikipedias are different projects with different standards, and I expect, especially with the ones like English and the French, linguistic and cultural differences would mean faithful translations would require further work.

First of all, please disclose your conflict of interest per WP:PAID. This can go a long way toward assuring reviewers that by accepting the draft, they are not enabling WP:COVERT advertising and paving the way for long term disruption on the article (high maintenance cost, not worth it, if the topic is not indispensable; also very difficult to enforce neutral point of view if there are not high quality sources aplenty). With regard to the draft, on a very brief perusal, (a) the second paragraph of the lead is not about the topic; it's a moral/economical argument for the righteousness/rightness of what the company does, immediately following an enticement for potential investors (how big the potential market is). That is what the reviewer is likely referring to by "essay". (b) Awards in Wikipedia articles are only supposed to be notable awards, i.e. those that have their own articles or those that would have by virtue of meeting WP:N if anyone had gotten around to creating them. At the very least, they should have an inline citation each (possibly not good enough anyway in case of paid articles). Also note that, because of the potential issues, including some I mentioned above, companies have stricter requirements to meet than most other topics on Wikipedia (see WP:NORG, which may be different, and likely stricter than its counterpart in the French Wikipedia). Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 03:58, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello @Usedtobecool. Thank you for the remarks. Firstly, I would like to say that I am not being paid to write the article, I simply work for this company and I wrote the draft in my spare time. Maybe I can add an "Connected contributor" template? The purpose of the second paragraph is to present the context of the company. I think it is important to explain why thrusters are important, otherwise the company produces useless products. Perhaps I could keep this part and delete the estimated number of launches over the next decade? Regards. Antoinebore (talk) 08:50, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

@Antoinebore, please make the disclosure in the manner you think best describes your situation. But note that for Wikipedia purposes, you are a paid editor, when you write about your employer, irrespective of what you are being paid for, and even if you are not being paid at all. No, the thrusters being important does not establish that the company is important, not unless it is the sole or the largest producer of such thrusters as demonstrated by independent reliable sources. Even then, it establishes importance, which is not the same as notability. At the end of the day, what matters is whether you have at least three strong sources that meet criteria at WP:NORG. If you do, the draft would be accepted if all it said was "ThrustMe is a company that produces space thrusters.[1][2][3]" And you would not need to worry about what to write, how to write and whether it reads like an advert to the reviewers. What's most troubling about the second paragraph is, it is propping up thrusters but doesn't even establish that ThrustMe is going to be the one at the forefront of it. It says 10K miniature satellites will be launched this decade and thrusters will be a critical part of them, but nothing about what ThrustMe will be doing in all that. Is it going to supply thrusters for all 10K of them, does it already have contracts for 6K of those, or is it just three people in a garage reading theoretical papers about thrusters, and hoping they can build a working model in the next few years and start selling them before they become obsolete? Those would be the things to know about the company. Usedtobecool ☎️ 10:22, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello @Usedtobecool. Once again, thank you for the comments and for your time. I have updated the page and tried to be as neutral as possible. I have removed the whole "economic" part. For the rewards, I'm not sure how to do it. I have removed the less notable awards. However, I think some awards (French Tech Ticket and the CNRS innovation medal) are still notable, especially in France, even if they don't have their own article..) Antoinebore (talk) 09:13, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

how to link another wikipedia page to the page i am creating

I am creating a Wikipedia page for my director in the sandbox and would like to link the page to other important people who already have their pages live. I tried with the function and published it, however, it is displayed in red ink. could you please help? thanks LizKurian (talk) 08:47, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

LizKurian Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. First, please review conflict of interest and paid editing for information on required formal disclosures you must make. Regarding your question, if link is in red type, that means it goes to a nonexistent article. Check to make sure the name of the article is typed exactly correct. Your draft has many correctly done links so I suspect that may be the issue- unless you have a specific example of a problem I am missing. 331dot (talk) 09:28, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy: User:LizKurian/sandbox, a not-yet submitted draft with no references. David notMD (talk) 09:30, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

In case you meant Jacques Servier (User:LizKurian/sandbox) it's because "Doctor" is part of the wikilink, the link must be the article title, see WP:PIPE though.

Adding to what 331dot said, if your article is to have any chance of being accepted, you need to study WP:BLP and learn to include inline citations, see WP:TUTORIAL. Remove everything you can't source to a WP:RS. If you don't have sources that meets the demands of WP:BASIC, write about something else. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:39, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Debashish_Banerji

Hi, I submitted the draft of my article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Debashish_Banerji). First it was rejected because I had youtube reference. Then I removed those references and put new ones and then resubmitted. Then it was declined, questioning the scholar's notability. Then I started a conversation (on the reviewer's talk page) with that reviewer and at the end he/she asked me to point out which criteria of WP:Academic is met for this scholar and how, and I answered that. But there is no reply from the reviewer for about a week now. Please let me know what I should do. Should I resubmit? The last part of the talk which did not get a reply to, is reproduced below:

--Reviewer: Hi AgniForce, I am not finding the rest of the argument sufficient to demonstarte how it meets WP:Academic. My request to you would be to read it carefully and illustrate which of the criteria is met and how. Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 16:24, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

--My reply: Hi Nomadicghumakkad, criteria #5 says, "The person has held a named chair appointment or distinguished professor appointment at a major institution of higher education and research." As I mentioned in the first line that -- Debashish Banerji is the holder of the founder's chair (Haridas Chaudhuri) of a well recognized USA university California Institute of Integral Studies, San Francisco, where he is also the chair of East-West Psychology department. AgniForce 17:52, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

--My another reply: Hi Nomadicghumakkad, you might also like to look at the Foreword to his book (pg xi to xii, available for view on google books) "The Alternate Nation of Abanindranath Tagore". There the eminent art historian Partha Mitter writes: "Banerji... eschews a teleological and temporal narrative in favor of "history as performance," seeking to engage creatively with social forces in order to establish that the past was replete with immanent possibilities... This bold and imaginative approach to an alternative nationalist art history proposed by Debashish Banerji will, and must, generate intense debates on the nature of nationalism, modernity, art, class and identity." Partha Mitter is Emeritus Professor of art history at University of Sussex, England; a member of Wolfson College, Oxford University; and past fellow of Clare Hall, Cambridge University. AgniForce 4:54, 21 July 2021 (UTC) AgniForce (talk) 08:14, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

AgniForce, you say that "The person has held a named chair appointment or distinguished professor appointment at a major institution of higher education and research", and that he is "the chair of [its] East-West Psychology department". It's not at all obvious to me that the California Institute of Integral Studies is "a major institution of higher education and research", and Psychology there seems particularly dubious. -- Hoary (talk) 08:25, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi Hoary - how do you define "a major institution of higher education and research" and how do you show CIIS is not? Btw, he holds the Haridas Chaudhuri chair there which is a named (named after its founder) chair. East-West Psychology chair is a department chair, not a named chair, so two are completely separate. Not sure what you mean by "Psychology there seems particularly dubious".AgniForce (talk) 09:12, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

AgniForce, I don't define such institutions; I expect their fame to impress themselves on me. For California, they'd include (in no particular order), but not be limited to, the University of California (UCSC, etc), Stanford, CalTech. If I wanted to demonstrate that an institution was major, of course I wouldn't depend on my own prejudices: I'd back it up with reliable sources. The APA doesn't seem so impressed by Psychology at CIII; but OK, that's irrelevant to the fact that he's the Haridas Chaudhuri Professor -- but in a school that I hadn't heard of. -- Hoary (talk) 09:56, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Help!

My file is being threatened for deletion because of it being, non-free? Can someone explain and tell me how I can resolve this issue. I hope I don't look like an a**hole asking this... I don't want it deleted, it took me a while for me to edit it.
The file. -Solarrrr... Send a message to Solar? Tappy tap tap! ⏰Time: 22:41, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Also, it might have been the license I chose for it, I want to find the correct one for my image. -Solarrrr... Send a message to Solar? Tappy tap tap! ⏰Time: 22:49, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

@SsSsSølarRadia -75: Welcome to the Teahouse. What are you intending to do with the image? It doesn't seem to be used in any article, and Wikipedia is not a repository for images. As non-free content, it has to satisfy all 10 of the non-free criteria. {{Non-free use rationale}} is a template you can use on the image page to help explain how the image satisfies those criteria. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 23:16, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

• SsSsSølarRadia -75, no, you don't look like what you coyly spell as "a**hole". However, attempting to read up on non-free images would probably have taken you less time than you spent creating your elaborate signature; and I'll point out one comprehensible part of your summary for this graphic: "I'm sorry for hurting your eyes, if it is in any case the image breaks any rules or is too sensitive for your being, then allow yourself to contest it for deletion. This is purely made for fun and entertainment and does not serve any purpose to hate Frozen fans." This is an encyclopedia. If you want to make something for fun and entertainment, please host it elsewhere (perhaps on your own blog): doing so here wastes other people's time. -- Hoary (talk) 02:18, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Now that makes me look like an a**hole because you explained it! ThAnKs sO MuCh. I will put it on deletion. -Solarrrr... Send a message to Solar? Tappy tap tap! ⏰Time: 02:42, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

SsSsSølarRadia -75 Hello SsSsSølarRadia -75, welcome to the teahouse. Just to be clear - what you've created there is called a derivative work: you've taken an image which is copyrighted by someone else (in this case Disney) and modified it slightly. This means that the copyright of the image you uploaded partly belongs to Disney (the image of Elsa) and partly belongs to you (the modifications to the image). Even if you release your part of the copyright Disney would still have a valid copyright claim on the image. Images which are copyrighted can only be used on Wikipedia under very specific sets of circumstances, as laid out in the non-free criteria - for example we can use a single low resolution screenshot of the character in the article Elsa (Frozen) to serve as a means of identifying them. To be blunt for a second - there doesn't seem to be any encyclopaedic use for your image, i.e. it doesn't seem like it could be used in any articles, in which case we cannot host it as it is copyrighted and does not fall under the fair use criteria. Generally images uploaded to Wikipedia should have some kind of plausible use on the project, we aren't a social media site and we aren't a repository for memes. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 11:13, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Help with "References" added to page

I was reviewing my local village Article and noticed a few missing citations Aston Abbotts. I have added them but would appreciate a veteran's feedback on if I have used the markup correctly? Are the sources satisfactory? Anything I could do better.

Constructive feedback appreciated. Martynjsimpson (talk) 12:07, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

I haven't examined the sources, but you have added them as bare URLs so you ought to expand them. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:25, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

@Martynjsimpson Expanded here. ―Qwerfjkltalk 12:34, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

remove entire external section on Antonia di Paolo di Dono?

all links refer to Antonia di Paolo di Dono father Paolo Uccello. not even one of them mention about her. should i remove entire section? Agyaanapan (talk) 09:03, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

@Agyaanapan Based on a quick check and WP:EL, yes you should. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:29, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Does this not beg the question of why the article exists? The refs are about her father, about the nunnery, about paintings not attributed to her, etc. David notMD (talk) 09:47, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång ha... we have docs about everything! yes, you are right. they must belong to article person not other persons (

Some acceptable external links include those that contain further research that is accurate and on-topic,...

. in short time, i will delete it. @David notMD i found other women artist articles, some of them are having a just one paragraph. to answer or guess to your query is simple: they are increasing the articles about women. perhaps one day wp will have equal number of articles about woman and man. (however its offtopic and irrevelant here ;) -Agyaanapan (talk) 12:35, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

I am all for articles about women. Wrote one. What is lacking here are references about Antonia. David notMD (talk) 13:35, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

MOS

 Courtesy link: Draft:February 2021 European cold wave

Need help with a draft that needs copyediting and wp-mos ..can you help ? Pun89 (talk)

Pun89, most of the article is about the effects of the cold in Greece. But Greece is not mentioned in the title, and only briefly in the lead. You need to consider what the article is meant to be about. Maproom (talk) 14:16, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Need a help

Hi I have created a page and that got speedy deletion. Could you please help with that. I even cant find there that page went and no idea how to recover. Apricate your help on this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mdpperera (talk • contribs) 05:42, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia, Mdpperera. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. (It's not a PR conduit.) Yes, Mdpperera, in User:Mdpperera/sandbox, you created an unreferenced, highly promotional piece about "Prasad Perera A.K.A. BuduMalli", from which I quote: At more than few feet, Prasad (BuduMalli) is hard to miss. And that's before he starts to speak. Get him talking on his favorite subject, influencer marketing and strategies on Social Media and you soon realize you're listening to someone who is head and shoulders above most social media experts. (I note that his photograph is your "own work"; perhaps he and you are acquainted?) The speedy deletion was entirely appropriate. What you created should not be improved; it should be abandoned. -- Hoary (talk) 06:12, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback. Could you please assist how to make a new page for that profile? That is something should be on wikipedia for people to know. Apricate you help and I am really clueless how things work here. Mdpperera (talk) 06:35, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Profiles are for social media websites. We want strongly-sourced encyclopaedia articles, not crap he or his associates think is most marketable. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 06:44, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Mdpperera Wikipedia does not have "profiles", not a single one. Wikipedia has articles. "Should be on Wikipedia for people to know" is a promotional purpose. We're not interested in what people should know. As an encyclopedia we only summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a topic, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of notability. Please read about the Five Pillars. As suggested, I would not proceed further in writing about this person due to the conflict of interest you seem to have. If you have additional comment, please edit this existing section, instead of creating additional sections. This is easier for some to do in desktop mode, even on a phone or device(the app and mobile versions do not have full functionality). 331dot (talk) 06:48, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Mdpperera, you say that an article about this man Prasad Perera "should be on wikipedia for people to know". You are free to persuade Jéské Couriano, 331dot and me that this is so. Start by specifying three reliable, published sources (each of these independent of him), that describe or discuss him in depth. (Of course, blogs, PR product, social media, infomercials, etc, don't count.) If you can do this, I (or somebody) will give you further advice. If you can't, then (like the huge majority of people) he shouldn't have an article on Wikipedia. -- Hoary (talk) 08:07, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Hoary, thank you for your professional reply I will let this go as most did not sound like helpful or agreed. I wrote about him since he himself have educated more than 10000 rural local youth on digital media and people search for this kind of characters who work in the filed to minimize the digital gap in the country. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mdpperera (talk • contribs) 08:17, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Mdpperera, there are many people who do good work in the world, but unfortunately not all of them merit Wikipedia articles. Please see WP:NOBLE. Just as some advice, if you just want to tell the world about this person, that's exactly what social media is for, there are also other websites with less stringent inclusion requirements. If you have other contributions you are interested in making, don't hesitate to ask further questions. 331dot (talk) 09:36, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Directory of alternative outlets has some alternatives. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:45, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång You seem to have linked incorrectly? I presume you meant Wikipedia:Directory of alternative outlets. ―Qwerfjkltalk 10:26, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Correct and corrected. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:39, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you all your advices. Could someone advice me how can I grab a copy of the article I published which got cancelled. I checked in my sandbox but couldn't find it. Highly appreciate this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mdpperera (talk • contribs) 10:18, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

@Mdpperera See Wikipedia:REFUND (it was deleted). ―Qwerfjkltalk 10:30, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Hoary, is there a way which I can grab the text of the deleted article? it will be a great help — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mdpperera (talk • contribs)

@Mdpperera: As Qwerfjkl mentioned above, you can ask at WP:REFUND. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:26, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you @Tenryuu and @Qwerfjkl I have made a request.

REFERENCING

How do I add a reference to an article Roselyn jordan (talk) 16:06, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

See Help:Editing#Adding references. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:32, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Which edits are considered?

When I am adding my number of edits to {{Service award progress}}, which group of edits shall I consider: total edits, live edits, edits in all projects or approx edits in English Wikipedia? (edit counter) Excellenc1📞 16:26, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Excellenc1, Please see Wikipedia:Service awards#Exposition on the requirements ─ The Aafī ^(talk) 16:52, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Bradford_Montage_2021.jpg - a petty deletion for a photo

•  Courtesy link: c:Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Bradford Montage 2021.jpg

I mean I don't know how this works but a user on Wikicommons seems to dislike a new montage for Bradford because in their own words "Because its nonsense". The user doesn't appear to be on Wikipedia but I mean I don't see how it hurts to update a lead photo every so often...I made collages for Blackburn, Dewsbury, Halifax and there have been no complaints...but for this one there is...I have commented on it and think because its nonsense as a reason to delete is quite petty and silly...would anyone on here who uses commons comment...it has been changed much still got the city hall, cathedral and skyline present just added the mosque and a well known hall...I can happily readd the other montage but I think my one is not so bad and the authors have been credited...RailwayJG (talk) 16:08, 26 July 2021 (UTC) RailwayJG (talk) 16:08, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

This is, of course, a matter for Wikicommons rather than for enwiki, but I would expect a frivolous nomination like that to be treated with the respect it deserves. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:42, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

FYI

The deletion request has been rejected and the montage kept. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:57, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

How to create fact sheets?

They appear on the right side .. A graph of a person or company PEDFYI (talk) 17:36, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

@PEDFYI, Help:Infobox may be what you're after. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:57, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Clara: Database of Women Artists is archived, is there any tool to replace all at once

Clara: Database of Women Artists is archived. how to change all links at once in various articles? Agyaanapan (talk) 17:59, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Two questions about notability guidelines

I'm hardly a new editor, but I tried to draft an article about the late Philippine journalist Draft:Jose Guevara and was referred to the Teahouse after a swamped reviewer during a busy review drive questioned Guevara's notability. I acknowledge the entry was only cursory -- but then the reviewers' response was even more cursory. He didn't even minimally evaluate the article based on the fact that Guevara is a journalist; he used only the most superficial tests. At least I had spent two or three hours combing the Internet for what I could find about the writer, with only partial success, and then an hour or two drafting something up. But reviewer KylieTastic appears to have spent five minutes threatening the reversal of my five hours. That's not just wrong, it's insulting and it's something that needs to be resolved.

I contribute what time I can to Wikipedia. My reach is broad and I'm not a single-subject expert. Although I've worked extensively in journalism, I don't have a special interest in journalism nor especially in Philippine journalism. I met the subject on a couple of occasions in his home in Manila, and he was and remains a well known figure among the Filipino community. I knew Mike Royko much better: in fact, after Guevara died, someone mentioned to me that he is "the Mike Royko of the Philippines," a perfectly plausible claim despite the lack of online sources, a situation that might exist for any of several good reasons.

I certainly don't have hours and hours to devote to nurturing every page I work on, and yet busy editors shouldn't be punished by having their work threatened. Among the Wikipedia editorial staff, as it were, in this case my claim based on objective experience and personal knowledge that this guy is notable should trump KylieTastic's case based on his brief look, no matter how many sources are on hand at the moment to demonstrate it. There needs to be a way to resolve this larger problem (see below re "likelihood of notability"). In the instant case, I'd like someone with time and the skill to promote the draft into something like a stub article. It should be enough for mainspace at that level, and I shouldn't have to nursemaid this project myself to keep my work and the history of the author from vanishing. That's not what Wikipedia was designed for.

The greater issue is one of generally testing notability. I see so much self-sourced puff on here that it looks like a damned carnival. It's very porous. On the other hand, for many figures and organizations you simply can't level the compass and, for example, get the material from online. Two factors that impact the Guevara article is that he's from the print era and he was a columnist. Another is that the Philippine press is not as visible outside of the Philippines and online as are Western press personalities, where for instance every idiot weather announcer is a local hero. Other issues abound, such as notability in what community of practice? Not every person or organization can be measured by whether they were on the Tonight Show or in the New York Times. How many times did Gaozi appear on those esteemed venues? And yet Alexandra Paul is not really notable for anything except that she was (once, very long ago) a periodic role on Baywatch and her brother got arrested. A test of her notability based on news sources would have a tough go of it. Yet her page is many times longer than that of Gaozi.

Then there's the case, immediately above, of Melvin Poh, who was originally not notable but just got accepted since someone frantically poured a bunch of "independent sources" in and filled the article with superscripts. The fact is that today everyone has a podcast or a blog or a webmagazine, and politicians and entrepreneurs spend at least half their time getting interviewed for these things (some spend all of their time doing this). Thus the sheer number of opportunities for Alexandra Paul and especially Melvin Poh to get so-called "earned media" on any given day is many times more today than it was 20 years ago for Jose Guevara. That's a big factor and it shouldn't be.

I really think there ought to be a rethinking of how basic notability is tested, especially for AfC or stub entryhood. There probably ought to be a measure like "likelihood of notability" that would serve to resist nominations for deletion or blocking an article's preservation. At the very least, if Wikipedia is a living object, then it shouldn't depend on my being alive and pushing for Joe Guevara's resurrection for him to survive to articlehood while people like Alexandra Paul coast right through. At present, if I die or get sick, Mr. Guevara's memory dies with me. That's just really bad policy. Zelchenko (talk) 14:33, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

@Zelchenko: Wikipedia defines "notability" based on reliable published sources, not personal knowledge. However, those sources do not have to be online - you can use offline newspapers and magazines and books as well. See also WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. GoingBatty (talk) 14:46, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty:That so superficially addresses my question that I have to reject it out of hand. If you'd even read what I wrote, you'd know that I know there are many ways to establish notability. But I don't have access to that, nor do I have the time to do it. Are you volunteering to fly to Manila and spend three weeks at a library? Be my guest! But don't try to bully me into doing it! At this point, you seem to be hinting that Mr. Guevara's notability hinges on my ability to make it happen. That's indefensible! Zelchenko (talk) 14:55, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty:Oh wait, it's even worse than that. What happens with explanations like yours is that you achieve exactly what I predicted above: because of the proliferation and availability of Internet media sources for younger and less notable people and organizations, and the corresponding difficulty of sourcing for earlier and historical individuals and organizations, the bar for research is much, much higher for older sources. A bit actress on Baywatch for four years, or a guy who wrote political columns for the Philippine press for 80 years? Which one has a greater likelihood of surviving to articlehood, by such measures? A guy who is already a has-been entrepreneur at 28 can get articles in place like the venerable Vulcan Post, but Jose Guevara's thousands of columns over 80 years are either on a paywall or in a library, so they're unreachable. Boom, there's Wikipedia in a nutshell for you. Thanks, GoingBatty and KylieTastic! Your illustrious pseudonyms will live forever along with Baywatch stars and a billion Entrepreneurs Under 30.Zelchenko (talk) 15:03, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

@Zelchenko: Yes, the draft creator has to demonstrate the notability of the subject of their draft. My goal in responding was simply to provide alternative options. I'm glad you understand Wikipedia's notability requirements, and that you respect the amount of work it takes to create a Wikipedia article. I'm sure you also understand that you don't have to view his columns, but what other people have written about the importance of his work. If you don't have time to do the work, you can use WP:Requested articles to ask that someone else puts in the effort to do all the research, but there's no guarantee anyone else will want to do it, since every editor here is a volunteer who chooses what they want to work on. (Unfortunately, that means that pop culture topics get more interest than journalists.) You can also try posting a request to the Wikipedia talk:Tambayan Philippines, in the hopes that an editor there may have the interest and access needed. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 15:14, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: You know, I'm trying like hell to assume good faith, but you're making it astonishingly difficult. I'll have you know that several days ago I already posted in two places, including Wikipedia talk:Tambayan Philippines, and there has been no response. But did you read what I wrote? I assumed you're all experts in notability guidelines. Did you read my point that the reviewers didn't study the question as it relates to Notability (people)#Creative_professionals? He was a well-known journalist, writing print columns for millions of readers. Do you see that journalist Jose Guevara very likely qualifies under items 1, 3, and 4 of the creative professionals rules? Did you even look at the draft yourself to see that long ago I sourced some citations? Is Teahouse a place for you to practice psychotherapy, or to support editors in their efforts not to waste their volunteer time? I've been editing Wikipedia pages for 15 years, and GoingBatty and 331dot are very, very close to getting me to quit forever! Zelchenko (talk) 15:48, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

@Zelchenko: Thank you for assuming good faith. I'm sorry that my comments were not productive, and that I didn't check you already posted at Wikipedia talk:Tambayan Philippines#Journalist Jose Guevara. Congratulations on having your draft accepted, and I wish you well with your future endeavors. GoingBatty (talk) 20:14, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: Ah, but we're not getting off that easy. Why did the page miraculously get accepted after I raised a stink? Is that the cause? Who intervened, and why? If true, why did it take shrillness and backbreaking rational persuasion to break through the anesthetic clouds of this environment? For future reference and as a corrective to this problem, people ought to know! Zelchenko (talk) 02:10, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

@Zelchenko: Looking at the article history (and the comments below), I see that Cullen328 moved the draft into articlespace. It seems your post here attracted more attention to your draft. GoingBatty (talk) 02:23, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

@Zelchenko: Unfortunately, as this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, inappropriate and poorly sourced articles can and do get by us; this does not mean that more such articles can be created. GoingBatty quite correctly told you that notability is not based on personal knowledge, due to the need for verification. Even if you were willing to sit by a phone for as long as Wikipedia exists to take verification calls, we still need something published to verify. There are other websites with less stringent requirements, such as social media and other wikis, that may be better suited for your purposes. It's disappointing to see your reaction to the help you've been given. I get that you may be frustrated, but please don't take it out on those helping you. Thanks 331dot (talk) 15:07, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

@331dot: What in the world? Did you even READ what I wrote? Is this a dream? I've been on Wikipedia longer than you have. Stop parroting what GoingBatty and KylieTastic wrote, read my message carefully, and address the issue at hand, or step aside and let someone else do it! Zelchenko (talk) 15:14, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

@331dot: Furthermore, you're talking out of both sides of your mouth. You can't first preface with an apology that this is a volunteer project and subject to slips, and then turn around and work like hell to justify how it is that a veteran Wikipedia editor -- with tenure far longer than yours -- is being told by you that an article on a well-known journalist should probably find "social media" or other places with less stringent requirements. I know what you're doing: You're chafed and laughing at me. There goes your merit badge for good faith. Among other things you might be doing, I have a better use for your time and mine: explain to me and the Philippine public why this article can't be admitted as a stub. Zelchenko (talk) 15:55, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

@Zelchenko: Pardon me, I did not consult your edit history to see how experienced an editor you were- as this board is for new and inexperienced users to ask questions, I don't usually check that. I think this discussion is gradually departing from the friendly nature of this area so I probably won't have much more to say- but as a longtime user you are free to create a stub if you wish, but you run the risk of it being nominated for AFD and deleted and/or draftified, especially if there is not a sourced claim to notability. But perhaps if you explained on the talk page, that would help. 331dot (talk) 17:02, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

And no, I'm not laughing. Just trying to help. Guess I didn't, sorry. I'll move on to the people who will hear me out. 331dot (talk) 17:04, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

@331dot: So sensitive! First of all, it was recommended by User:Ken_Tony that I go to the Teahouse for support. Next, where exactly did I not "hear you out"? I heard you and numerous other people (User:KylieTastic User:GoingBatty User:Worldbruce User:Ken_Tony User:Theroadislong) very clearly, and I responded more or less clearly. You, on the other hand, helped cause this problem by not hearing me out and by not digging a little deeper, only parroting policy. I can understand if you're all weary about the proliferation of vanity pages, but you did a disservice to the community and to me when you overlooked the value of Joe Guevara's entry based solely on what I had already drafted months ago. There needs to be a better way to offload putatively legitimate work from the shoulders of a single editor, by preserving it from deletion either in mainspace or in some kind of limbo by some measure like "likelihood of notability." Vacillating from mainspace to draftspace based on whims and explanations on talk pages are not enough. There needs to be policy. Zelchenko (talk) 02:10, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

To Zelchenko and everyone else who commented, Jose Guevara is clearly notable, not only as a journalist but as an art collector. I have moved the draft to main space, added a reference about his art collection, and expanded the article. Google Books show that he is discussed in many books although the brief snippets do not reveal if the coverage is significant. So, I was able to expand the article without traveling to Manila and spending weeks in the library there. Zelchenko, you do not need to use the AFC process and can create new articles yourself, but please try to come up with more than two sentences. This is 2021 not 2007 when the project was vastly less developed. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 18:01, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Cullen328 Thank you Joe for the intervention. Excellent additions and fast work. I think I put in more than two sentences, but I don't think the measure should be quantity -- that's what gets thousands of 25-year-old entrepreneurs immortalized in Wikipedia, whereafter they fast become 26-year-old nobodies. Reviewers have to drill into the content to see the totality of the claim to notability. "Likelihood of notability" is the term I've used in this discussion. The weight of the lede is still essentially based on those relatively low-value Varsitarian and Asea references that I had already mined some time ago. You visited those and saw that there was likely validity to my claim. (My claims should have nothing to do with my status as a veteran editor or with my personal familiarity with the subject; those facts also happened to get me a little longer hearing, which is largely wrong. The basis of my claims could have been seen through a simple critical glance at the key sources, which accordingly you did.) Zelchenko (talk) 02:38, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Zelchenko, my name is Jim not Joe, but that's OK. I only did with Jose Guevara what you could have done in lieu of writing your lengthy arguments above. The best way to show that Guevara is notable is by writing an informative, well-referenced biography, instead of taking cheap shots at people that you, personally, do not think are notable despite the fact that they have received significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. That approach leads to unnecessary conflict and we are (or ought to be) here to expand and improve this encyclopedia instead of tearing it down and arguing. Yes, your draft was just two sentences before I started working on it. It has twelve well referenced sentences now. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:14, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Cullen328 Sorry about getting your name wrong, Jim. But I suspect that's the only thing I've gotten wrong in this situation. First of all, I had at the time reached a dead end on my search. As I mentioned, I spent two hours on it and I'm somewhat notorious for turning up things that others can't. Congratulations on going the extra mile. However, arguments that time can better be spent doing Y instead of X are not tenable. I could have sunk another two hours into searching and editing and once again turned up nothing, and yet still have to face what I think I managed to demonstrate at length was a miscarriage of procedure here. What I put up would have been sufficient for a stub. It appears Guevara is the man who introduced convicted felons Ferdinand and Imelda Marcos. Well, that's a notable accomplishment. Good find; I'd forgotten about that. As to tearing down b-list Baywatch actors and 30something has-been entrepreneurs, so sue me; but I'm entitled to fair comment, especially since they're now self-styled public figures. I strongly feel that it's vanity articles and their willing subjects that cheapen Wikipedia, certainly not I for using self-serving articles as comparisons to justify my creation of a non-self-serving one. Wikipedia has already turned into a Who's Who, and we all know how subjective those are. Zelchenko (talk) 17:14, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Zelchenko I'm not sensitive, just trying to help and keep things friendly but it seems you would prefer to snark at me. I didn't overlook anything and since you seem to know all about it I'm not sure why you needed to come here. Until there is a paid Wikipedia staff here I don't see how things will be different from what you claim there are, but please offer your suggestions in the appropriate forum. Sorry I didn't help you. Good day. 331dot (talk) 07:08, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

331dot I said you were sensitive because you suggested you were offended that I hadn't heard you out. Sorry if you felt that way, but it's very clear that I did hear you out, because I responded to your points. I've heard everyone out. Zelchenko (talk) 17:14, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

@Zelchenko: If you have an issue with the reviewer that declined your submission, it's recommended you go talk to them directly, on their talk page, and explain why you disagree. If you are having difficult finding online sources about the subjects you want to write about, you can apply for individual research databases at the Wikipedia Library, or use the resource exchange project to ask for help from other editors. With regards to "probably ought to be a measure like "likelihood of notability" that would serve to resist nominations for deletion or blocking an article's preservation", not only are nominators asked to do a WP:BEFORE, but you can also ask for a WP:REFUND in certain cases. Isabelle ^🔔 17:34, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

@Zelchenko: Your draft article was correctly declined here [3] (ie pushed back to you for more work) by User:KylieTastic when it was two sentences long with no indication of any notability and three sources one of which was a blog (Unreliable). It was subsequently improved by another user and accepted. I don't see what the problem is? Theroadislong (talk) 18:03, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Hungamastart/sandbox

Please can anyone help me Publish my article... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hungamastart (talk • contribs)

Hungamastart, User:Hungamastart/sandbox will not be accepted as an article per WP:NORG, see that link. FB, Quora and what appears to be some sort of webshop is not the sources that are needed. If you read WP:NORG and conclude "Yeah, I have those sources, no problem!", then add those sources to the draft, then you can use this link: WP:SUBMIT. If you don't have those sources, write about something else. Guessing by your username you are connected to this website, and you need to follow the guidance in these links: WP:COI and WP:CORPNAME. A username like "Kim at Hungamastart" is ok if you want the corpname in there. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:55, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

It is against Wikipedia policy to advertise a business or organization since the nature of Wikipedia is nonprofit and educational. I'm sorry, but if you want your article to be published, then may I suggest you try a different hosting site. Besides, Wikipedia is not a blog. New Age Quenya 996 (talk) 18:25, 26 July 2021 (UTC)New Age Quenya 996

Subject Experience

I have done research on the New Age for 20 years and recognize it as an Abrahamic European faith and I wonder: How could I cite my sources if I have experience in the subject? New Age Quenya 996 (talk) 18:14, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

@New Age Quenya 996 Welcome to the Teahouse. Sadly, it’s likely your studies would be regarded as Original Research. Unless properly published, it’s unlikely that we would accept such content. Yours is not an area I know anything about, so I can only answer in general terms. Nick Moyes (talk) 18:28, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

It seems to me per WP:EXTRAORDINARY, that an on-WP claim/statement that New Age is an Abrahamic faith would require very good WP:RS. Anyway, any WP-article is supposed to be a summary of WP:RS on a topic. Anything else is outside WP:s scope. WP:EXPERT may be of help. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:39, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Since I was conducting research to write a guidebook on "Abrahamic New Age," I just need the time. Thanks, guys! New Age Quenya 996 (talk) 18:52, 26 July 2021 (UTC)New Age Quenya 996

Publishing changes for person, living.

Hello, I've been trying to add the cinematographer David Klein to the THE BOOK OF BOBA FETT page and also add this credit to the "known for" section of his page. They've been rejected because I did not provide a citation to a reliable source. The help pages are a bit confusing to me so if you could point me to a help pages for dummies, I'd really appreciate it. Thank you. Dakafett (talk) 19:00, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

@Dakafett: Hello, welcome to the teahouse! Is WP:Referencing for beginners of any help? 192.76.8.91 (talk) 19:03, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

How to write about a person

write about

I just started with wiki. This is the page: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Alekz_Londos&action=history

It's a about this person Alekz Londos who have done much public work in his home town, county district and all over the world. I created a heading like this; and a sub heading:

<draft content redacted>

I get my source information from this news paper: Santa Cruz Sentinel wrote this article

Ny question is how can I do this without violation copyrights, If I copy text from that santacruzsentinel newpaper article then it violates Wiki rules and gets removed. If I make up the text myself then it's not viable because I can't prove it happened.

Another question is after the image for the article was remove: "Santa Cruz Weekly News page1.jpg", I would like to have graphics showing the actual "Car tires" and also the authentic people who where involved. The problem is I was not there to take my own images. So as a newbie on Wiki how do I add the original images without violation anything? Alekz Londos surely have images, how can I use them if he give some to me? Another thing is the "notable" Wiki rule, that a page on Wiki must have notable content. What is more notable then an article in a large newspaper like the one a link to above. ExocetKid (talk) 13:20, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

This isn't the place for draft content. That belongs in the draft. If you copy text from the newspaper article you are violating copyright; you prove it happens by giving a citation to the source. - David Biddulph (talk) 13:29, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

In your own words, then cite the Santa Cruz article as a reference. David notMD (talk) 13:33, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

@ExocetKid: I suggest you don't worry about images until after the draft is accepted. Focus on gathering your independent published reliable sources that provide significant coverage of Londos, summarize and paraphrase what they say, and use those sources as references. There's lots of good information at Help:Your first article. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 15:11, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi @ExocetKid:, you also need to be super-careful that the references say what they should. For example, a reference to Time's 25 most influential teens of 2018 would make a real impact, but unfortunately it doesn't mention Alekz Londos. If you want the article to get published successfully, you need more things like the Sentinel article. In particular, you need independent references: situations where someone unrelated to the subject has chosen to write about the subject and what they do; unsolicited newspaper articles and such like. Also, I'm a bit embarrassed to mention this, but I notice that in section 'Notable works,' you've written "Providing independent humanitarian aid in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina when I was 25, December 2018". This suggests that you might be Alekz Londos. Please, please note, that if you are him, firstly you must declare this (because it's a serious conflict of interest), and secondly, you must be super-careful. It is strongly advised that you shouldn't attempt to write an article about yourself. It's very hard to be neutral. And when you have written it, you will have no special ownership over it. In fact you will have less rights than anyone else, because you will be obliged to post any changes you'd like made on the article's talk page, and rely on others to make them! Anything that gets published about you, good or bad, may end up in that article, and there will be nothing you can do to limit the damage... it's not always desirable to have a wikipedia article about oneself, and if you're looking for a place to publish your own works under your own control, there are much better sites. Good luck! Elemimele (talk) 19:24, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

This is a draft-in-progress when I create my Wiki. But I can search and find the page

This is a draft-in-progress {{draft article}} when I create my Wiki page. But I can search and find the page, so what it the difference from publish?? ExocetKid (talk) 18:48, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, ExocetKid. You can search for Draft:Alekz Londos within Wikipedia, if you know to put "Draft:" on the front. If you search without "Draft:", it won't find it; and more significantly, external search engines should not find it. Does that answer your question, or have I misunderstood?--ColinFine (talk) 20:43, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Campaign links on pages for politicians

 Courtesy link: Beth Doglio § External links

Is linking to a campaign website a form of WP:ADV? A Thimblerigs (talk) 19:10, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

@A Thimblerigs For a politician, I think it's generally considered a reasonable WP:ELOFFICIAL. Sure there's an element of advertising, but that would go for almost any "official website", bio, company, band etc. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:43, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång I did not think anyone was allowed to self-promote on Wikipedia, but the policy for official links certain does allow it. Now I know! Thanks for pointing that out! --A Thimblerigs (talk) 20:37, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, A Thimblerigs. Since editing an article about yourself is strongly discouraged, this is not usually self-promotion! But you're right that linking to the subject's own or official website could be construed as promotion; but in fact it is specifically permitted, just in an infobox or an "External links" section. --ColinFine (talk) 20:50, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Facebook

How do you log in to Facebook (in chrome) if you have entered the password gave your cell phone number and it still does not want to login to the account Jessica J 2009 (talk) 19:01, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

@Jessica J 2009: Welcome to Wikipedia. This help page is for asking about how to use or edit Wikipedia. We can't help you with your facebook account. You will need to contact facebook for help. RudolfRed (talk) 19:08, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Jessica J 2009, you've asked here about Facebook before. Wikipedia isn't Facebook. -- Hoary (talk) 22:43, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

sneaky vandalism

Noticed this ip range that apparently was doing sneaky vandalism for almost a year: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/45.232.94.26/16
Reverted some unnoticed ones, there were that stayed unnoticed for almost a year.
Mostly changes dates of things randomly. Posting here If anyone wants to keep an eye for future edits of it. Tehonk (talk) 21:28, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

@Tehonk: Thanks for the heads up. Reported at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 22:45, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

the family name Licina

Do someone know something about the family name Licina? Whether it comes from the name Licinius? 62.4.57.114 (talk) 22:40, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

That's a question you might ask at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Language. -- Hoary (talk) 22:46, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Are article tips/suggestions OK to ask here?

Hello, I've been working on two draft articles the past couple days but I am hesitant to submit my drafts for review immediately since there are so many rules and I fear I may have missed something or did something wrong in the article creation process.

I think I'm ready to submit them for review but I wasn't sure if I could use Teahouse to get any suggestions/tips in case I missed anything important. Not sure if Teahouse is the place for that? If this is okay let me know and I will share the articles here. Thanks 22:18, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Ooops I forgot to sign in! Spektred (talk) 22:18, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

@Spektred You are an employee of Draft:Tri Counties Bank, so you really ought to change your WP:COI declaration to that described at WP:PAID. You are really pushing your luck to also try to create Draft:TriCo Bancshares. Stick to one; read WP:NCORP and make sure you only use independent Reliable Sources. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:29, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip about WP:PAID, I wasn't aware that that would be better but it makes sense. I have been reading WP:NCORP among many other guidelines, and we are good as far as notability. I have found some Reliable Sources and I tried adding those to each statement, but I'm sure the community will be able to improve the article by adding many more.

Regarding "pushing my luck", I noticed that another bank on Wikipedia who is also a public company like us did this, and it didn't seem to be an issue, so I thought it made sense to do the same? Spektred (talk) 22:54, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

@Spektred: discussion started on draft talk page. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 22:37, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Tim, I saw your comment and responded. You guys move really fast. Spektred (talk) 22:54, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Draft review subsmissions

On submitting drafts for review: When a draft already looks complete and finalized, should I submit it for a review or wait for other changes? Cookiethepug (talk) 23:50, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

User:Cookiethepug - If you have created a draft that you think is ready for review by reviewers, you should submit it. It is very rare that another editor will look at a draft that is in draft space and not submitted for review. If you don't submit your draft, the most likely result is that it will expire on 26 January 2022. If you submit it, and there is currently a backlog drive in progress to review as many drafts as possible, you are very likely to get it reviewed. Is that an answer? Robert McClenon (talk) 00:12, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Alright, got it. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cookiethepug (talk • contribs) 00:16, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Deletion/ Improval of an article.

Hello Wikipedians!! So, I am here to inform any mods/admins that this California LLC has only one line and does not have any citations. Kindly let me know what I can do about this. Thanks in advance!!! Jocelin Andrea (talk) 01:31, 27 July 2021 (UTC) Jocelin Andrea (talk) 01:31, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

You can expand Limited liability company instead. Capitals00 (talk) 02:10, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Someone moved my incomplete draft to mainspace

I was creating a draft on Regional Council of Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur but I wasn't done completing, someone moved it to the article space. What to I do? Shall it move it back to the draft space? Excellenc1📞 03:15, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Excellenc1: Welcome to the Teahouse! You can keep working on the article (unless you have a conflict of interest, in which case you can use {{request edit}} on the talk page). You can also talk with the user who moved the draft on their talk page. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 03:26, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Renaming a Wikipedia page

I just wanted help as to how do I rename a Wikipedia page I just created? Brycedsouza (talk) 04:50, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Renaming is "moving"; therefore, by clicking on "Move" (which is an option under "Edit"). -- Hoary (talk) 05:08, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

I assumed that you meant an article. But perhaps you instead mean Draft:Marius Fernandes. You submit a draft as a candidate to be an article. But please don't do this. Most problematically, your draft currently describes MF as a "festival legend". Such language is vapid and promotional. According to reliable, independent, published sources, what, exactly, has he done? Please summarize and relate this straightforwardly. And then, you can think of submitting your draft for consideration as an article. -- Hoary (talk) 05:15, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Whether and how to flag content "citation needed"

Hey, Teahouse denizens. I'm making a few minor edits to an article and found an opinion statement that isn't attributed to a source. Can you point me to info on what to do in such a case? Haven't found guidance in the MOS. Aredbee (talk) 05:27, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Aredbee: Welcome to the Teahouse. Without knowing which article this is to make a further judgement, if it's a statement that is blatantly an opinion, you could straight up delete it. If you want to err on the safe side, you can put {{citation needed}} right after it. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:46, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Tenryuu 🐲: Thanks! It's in the article on Cab Calloway, under the Music Career heading, in the third graf, the last part of the second sentence: "but they were not up to par with Cecil Scott's band." I'm thinking this is a case for a "citation needed," since if Scott's band was better it may be why the Alabamians broke up. Aredbee (talk) 06:01, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Aredbee: Another editor taking action would find a suitable reliable source as a citation, or delete it. It also lets readers visually see that a statement hasn't been properly cited, and that they should take it with a grain of salt. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:14, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

How to create an article on Wikipedia

How do I create an article on Wikipedia? Americansaintinmexico (talk) 19:44, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

@Americansaintinmexico Just click on a red link and type in the edit box, then click Publish changes. I strongly recommend you read Wikipedia:Your first article. ―Qwerfjkltalk 19:47, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

• Americansaintinmexico Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I would advise a little more caution. Creating a new article is the absolute hardest task to perform on Wikipedia. It takes much effort and practice. You will greatly increase your chances of success if you first gain experience editing existing articles in areas that interest you, to get a feel for how Wikipedia operates and what is expected of article content. Diving right in to article creation without experience often leads to disappointment and frustration as your work is mercilessly edited and deleted by others. I would advise you to use the new user tutorial.

If you do want to attempt to create an article now, please read Your first article and then visit Articles for Creation to create and submit a draft for review by another editor before it is formally placed in the encyclopedia. Then you find out problems first. 331dot (talk) 19:59, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Americansaintinmexico, and welcome to the Teahouse. You have asked one of the most frequent questions we get here. My answer is that for a new editor to try to create an article is like getting apprenticed to a builder and immediately trying to build your own house. Everybody knows what a house looks like, right? So you just have to throw up a few walls and so on. Unfortunately, what the new apprentice probably doesn't know is all the work that has to go into a house before you throw up the walls: surveying the ground and making sure it's stable enough to build on, building the foundations, etc. If you don't do all that work your house is likely to fall down - and any work you've done on the visible part of the house will probably be wasted. A Wikipedia article is just like that - if you don't survey the ground (check WP:notability) and build the foundations {find the required independent reliably published sources), your article may fall down - not be accepted into the encyclopaedia; and if you write so much as a single word before you do that ground-work, you are very likely wasting the whole of your effort. That is why I always advise new editors to spend a few months improving some of our six million existing articles (some of them really need it!) and learning how Wikipedia works, before they try to build a house. --ColinFine (talk) 21:00, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

@ColinFine You have asked one of the most frequent questions we get here maybe we should create a template: Hello, [[User:{{{1}}}|]], and welcome to the Teahouse... ―Qwerfjkltalk 07:51, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Account blocked?

Hello. Am wondering why my account suddenly appears to be blocked, or "not exist". Possibly I'm missing something. Can someone help? Thanks. -- Motke MotkeKhabad (talk) 01:11, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@MotkeKhabad: Welcome to the Teahouse! Your account isn't blocked (see the block log) and still exists (as you were able to post here). What are you seeing that led you to think your account is blocked or "not exist"? GoingBatty (talk) 01:15, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@MotkeKhabad: Did you try to edit Wikipedia while using a VPN or similar? If so you probably got caught in an IP block. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 01:25, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

{{|192.76.8.91}} @192.76.8.91 Not that I recall, but it's possible my VPN was left on by mistake, tho I use it infrequently. If there's an IP block, what can I do about it to resolve the issue and remove it? Thanks. MotkeKhabad (talk) 01:41, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@MotkeKhabad: If you need to be able to edit from blocked VPN's (e.g. if there are firewalls wherever you're editing from that you need to get around) you can request an WP:IP block exemption, however these rare and are only granted if you have genuine need for it. If you have tried to edit the site with a VPN on by mistake then turn off your VPN and try again. If it still won't let you edit then either wait 24 hours or clear your browser's cookies. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 01:50, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

• You have to tell the name of the blocked account you are talking about. Capitals00 (talk) 01:57, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty @192.76.8.91 @Capitals00 Thanks for your help, all MotkeKhabad (talk) 02:06, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi and thanks for your quick reply, @GoingBatty. Sorry, I'm newish to WP: how do I reply to your reply? I don't see an indication online or in WP as to how to respond. Thanks and sorry to trouble you re basic stuff. -Motke MotkeKhabad (talk) 01:30, 27 July 2021 (UTC) MotkeKhabad (talk) 01:30, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Just mention the name of the concerning user in your message. Capitals00 (talk) 01:59, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

As GoingBatty said: What are you seeing that led you to think your account is blocked or "not exist"? If you saw that the page User:MotkeKhabad says "Wikipedia does not have a user page with this exact title" then it merely means your account hasn't created an optional user page. You are not blocked and you don't need a user page to edit. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:06, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter Thanks for your help! MotkeKhabad (talk) 02:09, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@MotkeKhabad To reply to other users, use either {{ping|Example}} or [[User:Example]] to notify them. ―Qwerfjkltalk 07:56, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Legacy articles for our parish of Boyton, Wilshire

Could Wikipedia include in their existing article on the parish of Boyton, three articles on the parish which have legacy value, with more such articles probably to come sometime in the future? 2A00:23C7:A00D:2F00:41AC:8E2A:6DC4:CD1C (talk) 09:54, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

From Alex Saunt.

Do you mean at Boyton,_Wiltshire#External_links? If they are self-published, probably not. You can find guidance at WP:ELYES and WP:ELMAYBE. Depending on what kind of articles this is, one possibility is to add a "Further reading" section. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:59, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Creation of the page Veronika Matyunina and admitting it into the English Wikipedia as a page

 Courtesy link: Draft:Veronika Matyunina

Hello. I'm Adam Daniel. <redacted> I'm from Malaysia.<redacted> Other than my native language, Malay, and English, I'm very interested in various languages such as Chinese, Ukrainian, Bulgarian, Croatian, Polish, Czech, Russian, Serbian, Macedonian, Belarusian, Persian, Arabic, Urdu, Hindi, Bengali, etc. I'm actually an editor of Wikipedia in various languages since 2018. I would like to plead to you for this thing:

I recently created a new English-language Wikipedia page titled as Veronika Matyunina, where the page is from the Ukrainian-language Wikipedia page Матюніна Вероніка, she's a Ukrainian table tennis player, whom she is born on August 10, 2006. I would like to create a page about her in English actually. Could you please admit my created page titled Veronika Matyunina into the English Wikipedia, and let the page that I created share together with the Ukrainian-language Wikipedia page Матюніна Вероніка? Thank you.

Could you also please help me how to credit the editors when I translate the page on Veronika Matyunina from Ukrainian to English?  Adamdaniel864 (talk) 06:13, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Adamdaniel864: Welcome to the Teahouse. Your draft has been moved to draftspace, as it has barely any information, and there are no references whatsoever. You can take material from the other wikis, but just be aware that not everything will make it over due to a difference in policies and guidelines. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:18, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Note also that while the Ukrainian article on her has a number of sources, you must credit the editors there when you translate that page (if that's the approach you are taking). See WP:Translate for guidance on this, Adamdaniel864. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:16, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

help with proper articles to reference in /Draft:Noise_militia

i'm not sure why and which referenced source is good and what should be done in references . if they need to be deleted, then which one. very confusing please assist--thank you 613codify (talk) 01:08, 27 July 2021 (UTC) 613codify (talk) 01:08, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@613codify: It appears that references #2-5 are from blogs, and reference #6 is a press release by the artist. GoingBatty (talk) 01:13, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks GoingBatty, that was my thought process in the decline. Bkissin (talk) 12:58, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

thank you as that was helpful.but i want to ask something. references #3-5 represent music review sites of which some of the info in the article is referenced and i'm not sure if they are 'blogs' per se.perhaps i need the definition of 'blog' again please assist====

An article deletion

How to remove deletion from An article that is correctly written Roselyn jordan (talk) 10:43, 27 July 2021 (UTC) Roselyn jordan (talk) 10:43, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Roselyn jordan Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The answer depends on what form of deletion you are talking about and what article; from your edits I assume you are referring to Khaleed which has been nominated for deletion. If you object to the deletion, please comment on the discussion, linked to in the deletion notice(and I'll put it directly; Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Khaleed). 331dot (talk) 10:47, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Okay thanks 331dot can you Help me remove the deletion I would love if this article I wrote to be on search engines — Preceding unsigned comment added by Roselyn jordan (talk • contribs) 10:59, 27 July 2021 (UTC):Roselyn jordan I've said what you can do about it, please comment there. 331dot (talk) 11:06, 27 July 2021 (UTC) Okay thanks a lot — Preceding unsigned comment added by Roselyn jordan (talk • contribs) 11:22, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Roselyn jordan, your task is to show how the article does meet Wikipedia's requirements. You may point out (coolly and politely, of course) that the reasons people are presenting for deletion are mistaken. Simply declaring that the subject of the article merits (or even needs) an article will have no effect. -- Hoary (talk) 12:24, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Hoary, Okay thanks a lot so how can this be done is there any direct link that I can send an appeal to. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Roselyn jordan (talk • contribs)

Yes, you make your case at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Khaleed. Note the links under New to AfD? Read these primers!, they can be helpful. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:33, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Roselyn jordan You need to go to the link you were given (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Khaleed) and explain why you think the article meets Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. The issue here is that people do not think this musician is notable - i.e. he doesn't pass the tests in WP:NMUSIC or WP:GNG. You need to find substantial, reliable, independent coverage of this musician that demonstrates that he meets Wikipedia's definition of a notable person. The seeming consensus at the AfD discussion is that the only source that comes close to meeting our requirements is the vanguard piece, and even that seems to be promotional. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 12:37, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Roselyn jordan: Since you uploaded some of the photos as your "own work", it appears you have a conflict of interest to disclose on your user page. See the note on your talk page for more information. GoingBatty (talk) 12:58, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

No pictures on a Shinkansen when there should be?

Howdy. I'm a huge fan of the Shinkansens of Japan, and so is my girlfriend. I was researching the variants of the 700 & N700 Series when I noticed there doesn't seem to be any pictures of the new N700S-3000 variant owned by JR West. I would've tried to remedy this myself, but it appears there are no images of the N700S-3000 series anywhere on the internet, and I haven't even mentioned how I'm afraid I would screw up the formatting somehow and be made a fool of on Wikipedia. I recognize that this isn't particular to any sort of Editor, but I just wanted to bring this issue to light.

And since the tutorial says I should post the URL of the page, here it is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N700S_Series_Shinkansen MB-15NavalCommander (talk) 11:15, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@MB-15NavalCommander: One issue with no images of the N700S-3000 series anywhere on the internet is that even if such images were available Wikipedia respects copyright and hence only images that are freely licensed can be uploaded to Commons for use in articles (there are a limited number of WP:NONFREE exceptions). Hence it is helpful if editors can take and upload their own photographs, as in the infobox for that article. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:38, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

EDIT: Of course, I answered my own question there. Many thanks, Michael. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MB-15NavalCommander (talk • contribs) 11:46, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

If these new Shinkansens are being tested on regular railway lines, I'd be surprised if there weren't enthusiasts taking pictures of them. Maybe you could write a message at https://www.facebook.com/japan.shinkansen/ asking about copyright-free pictures? Maproom (talk) 12:51, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

And I assumed this was about some sort of smartphone... Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:59, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

This Indian Olympian article has to be updated

Hiii, C. A. Bhavani Devi is an Indian Sabre who yesterday created history by becoming the first Indian fencer, who appeared in Olympic and won first match against Spanish world number 4. Lots of arti are available on internet that can be used as source of information. And one problem is that the sportsperson's first name is Bhawani Devi and Sundararaman is her fathers name. It's Tamil , these folks don't write their surname instead they use thir father's, Grandfather's, Great Grandfather's name respectively before their first name. Isn't it strange but they do that. Paste a tag or Templet at the top of article so readers not get confused. Huge Earth (talk) 06:40, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Huge Earth, there are thousands of Olympics-related articles that need to be updated. This will take some time, a few months judging by past experience.

If the title needs to be changed, see WP:MOVE for guidance. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:04, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Huge Earth: Welcome to the Teahouse! You may suggest edits and provide reliable sources on the article's talk page: Talk:C. A. Bhavani Devi. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 13:03, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Dhorkë Orgocka

FYI

 – Added section header GoingBatty (talk) 13:21, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Dhorkë Orgocka

Why my article is not accepted? Wikiiiicontributor (talk) 13:08, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Wikiiiicontributor: Welcome to the Teahouse! At the top of your draft, it states "This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article." Hopefully you can rewrite sections such as: "her performance was qualitative. Orgocka was known for her naturalness, she was dynamic on stage, lively and full of energy with a warm word and interpreted with temperamented". Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 13:23, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello

FYI

 – Added section header GoingBatty (talk) 13:38, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

I’m a writer and I have a client who would like a Wikipedia Page created for him. I would be appreciative of some assistance as to how I go about doing so for my client.

My contact details are below:

I look forward to hearing back from you most propitiously.

Kind regards

Avril Bunton-Williams 2A00:23C4:771D:8901:5C94:1B12:1602:F816 (talk) 13:35, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Avril! Creating a new article is one of the hardest things to do on Wikipedia, especially if you don't have Wikipedia experience and if you have a conflict of interest (COI). COI editing is strongly discouraged on Wikipedia, and requires that you disclose your conflict on your user page - see WP:DISCLOSE. You would also have to determine if your client meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, called "notability". If so, then you would put aside everything you know about him and gather independent reliable sources and summarize what they say. There's lots more information at Help:Your first article. GoingBatty (talk) 13:44, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello! Start with reading WP:GNG and WP:BASIC. Per those links, do you have 3-5 sources that are at the same time reliably published (WP:RS), independent of your client and about your client in some detail? If not, give up. If you conclude "Yeah, I have those sources, no problem!" move on to WP:YFA, WP:COI and WP:PAID. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:48, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Although not an absolute requirement, creating an account is recommended. Stressing need to understand WP:PAID, and thus declare same on your User page ((Wikipedia frowns MIGHTILY on undeclared paid editing). In addition to general notability, there are additional guidelines if your client is an artist, musician, academic... Consider naming the person here, and perhaps a Teahouse host will do a quickie search on the name, and express an opinion as to potential for notability. David notMD (talk) 14:47, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Avril, being a writer is barely relevant. I'm not a writer, but I've created several Wikipedia articles. The difficult bit (almost impossible for inexperienced editors, it seems) is reading, understanding, and following Wikipedia's various guidelines and policies, particularly regarding notability.   Maproom (talk) 15:07, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Advice on reliable sources

Hello, I'm currently editing a draft for an article about the specific kinds of transphobia that are aimed at trans men. There are pages on nonbinary people's struggles and trans women's struggles, so I thought I'd add the page for trans men to complete that little trifecta. I've had the page sent back to me to edit some more and one of the reasons was unreliable sources. I had sourced from JK Rowling's transphobic essay and from scientific papers and studies about trans men, but I'm wondering if it sourcing and quoting from books by trans people about transphobia face by trans guys will be what Wikipedia is looking for? E.g. sourcing Transgender Warriors by Leslie Feinburg or from Trangender History by Susan Stryker etc. I want to make this article the best it can be so it can help other trans guys like myself! Thank you for any guidance, -Vulture /Transandrosupport Transandrosupport (talk) 16:18, 26 July 2021 (UTC) Transandrosupport (talk) 16:18, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Transandrosupport. I don't think the reviewers are looking for any particular type of source here (providing that the sources are reliable per WP:RS), but rather for you to reference sources for the parts of the draft that are currently lacking them. For example, you've written: "Transphobia specifically directed at trans men and transmasculine people mainly takes two forms: that which is derived from misgendering them as women and thus heavily rooted in misogyny and that which is derived from a specific predjudice towards men taken out on them and thus is heavily rooted in misandry". Is this based on a source, or is the idea of two forms of transphobia your own? If it's the latter, then I'm afraid this is original research, which isn't allowed on Wikipedia. Cordless Larry (talk) 16:30, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Transandrosupport Hello, welcome to the teahouse! There are three main problems with your draft - firstly there are entire sections that seem to have no sources, secondly many of the sources you have used are not reliable, and thirdly you seem to be combining sources and drawing conclusions that are not explicitly stated by any of them. Looking through your draft the sections like "Medical Abuse", "Misandristic Abuse", "Abuse Denial" and "Transition pessimism" have no sources at all - these sections all need references to show where the information in them has come from. Advice on what kind of sources are considered reliable can be found at WP:Referencing for beginners and WP:Reliable sources. Social media like twitter are almost always unusable as sources. Sites like Tumblr and medium are self published blogs and are generally unusable unless the person writing them is a recognised expert in the field. Opinion pieces and personal blogs can only be used for attributed opinions, e.g. you can use JK Rowling's site as a source for JK Rowling's opinion (i.e. "Writing on her website, JK Rowling stated that ...") but cannot be used as a source for facts, and certainly cannot be used in the method you've used them where you've linked attempts to get puberty blockers banned to a specific post on a blog (see WP:Synthesis and WP:Original research - you need a reliable source that makes that specific connection, you cannot make it yourself). Hope this helps. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 16:46, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

I'm a bit concerned that Transandrophobia has been prematurely published (pinging Transandrosupport and Timtrent). I don't say that because I object to the article existing, but I'm worried that without better sourcing, it might become a target for deletion nominations. I'm also slightly worried that the word transandrophobia returns zero Google Scholar results. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:04, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

On the topic of Google Scholar results, I wonder if transmisandry is actually the WP:COMMONNAME. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:06, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

@Cordless Larry (edit conflict) I understand your concerns. As you can see from the article, "Transmisandry" is synonym and it might be a better title. If you feel strongly I will not stand in the way of your sending it back to Draft space. I took the view that it has a better than 50% chance of surviving immediate deletion process. As you know, that is our guidance at WP:AFC. I was as cautious as I felt necessary. I am content to be guided by you in this matter. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 20:13, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

I'm going to call on Cullen328, who might be so kind as to give us a third opinion. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:17, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

@Cordless Larry please feel free to take any action without asking me. I think it behoves me to be steadfastly neutral over this, and supportive of any consensus you determine Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 20:24, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Transandrosupport, please note that a statement such as "Transandrophobia was coined in 2017 by a trans man who goes by the username Saint-Dionysus on his blog" can't be sourced to the blog alone. The blog establishes that the term was used, but not that it was coined by the blog; that claim requires a secondary source. You can make original claims like this in an essay but not in a Wikipedia article, I'm afraid. Wikipedia articles can only say what can be supported by reliable sources - nothing more by way of interpretation. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:44, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

An acceptable Wikipedia article should summarize what published, reliable sources say about the topic, and should contain no original research and no content that cannot be verified. A blogger using an anonymous handle is not a reliable source. WP:NEOLOGISM is relevant to the title of the article. Currently, the article has a lot of "citation needed" tags, and either all that content should be removed or references to reliable sources that verify the content should be added. My recommendation would be to move the article back to draft space until these issues can be addressed. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:40, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, Cullen328. I've moved the article back to draft so that these issues can be resolved without the risk of deletion. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:25, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Cordless Larry Following your advice I've removed the section on the blogger. I got in a little over my head yesterday so I appreciate you preserving my work. I've sourced everything now, nearly every sentence- I hope it's alright to ask but could you give it a onceover to see if I've missed out anything vital before I submit it again? As you can probably tell, the topic means a lot to me, being a trans man. And a significant number of transmasculine people I know have expressed interest in such an article existing. The last thing I want to do is scupper the whole article. Many thanks and thank you for bearing with me (I'm still quite new to wikipedia, the last time I made an article on an old account was 2018)

The draft is getting better but there are still some original research issues where you're citing sources as examples of an argument that you're making, rather than summarising just what the source says. I've tried to explain this at Draft talk:Transandrophobia#Need for secondary sources. Cordless Larry (talk) 16:01, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Can someone help get the article to a "neutral" pov?

 Courtesy link: Draft:Presearch

Carrabre (talk) 23:56, 26 July 2021 (UTC)Carrabre

My article Presearch has been declined. I work on the team, would love the communities help in getting a page up! Carrabre (talk) 23:56, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

User:Carrabre - Well, as the declining reviewer, I will say that some editors are not interested in providing free help to an editor who is editing in the course of their employment. (But another editor might help you, maybe.) Robert McClenon (talk) 00:07, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Carrabre: Conflict of interest editing is strongly discouraged on Wikipedia. Please disclose your COI on your user page with the {{UserboxCOI}} template. GoingBatty (talk) 01:09, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Carrabre: Oops! It appears the {{paid}} template would be more appropriate. GoingBatty (talk) 01:18, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Carrabre (talk) 17:27, 27 July 2021 (UTC)Carrabre understood on the not wanting to help piece, but it would probably be less work for you (albeit less fun than watching me struggle on my first article) to help get it up to wikipedia's standards.

Are museums acceptable references for articles?

I am doing research ahead of potentially creating my first new article. The subject is the GE 25 ton switcher. Hundreds of this locomotive were produced over more than 30 years, so I believe it meets requirements for notability. There are several books that cover it in detail, but I would need to order them or borrow them from a library to use them as references. However I have also found some information online. My question is, are webpages of museums considered acceptable references for articles?

I've found information on the locomotive here [4], here [5] and here [6]

The second webpage seems unlikely to be a good reference based on my understanding of the requirements, but what about the other two? One would imagine museums are a decent source; after all, not anyone can change this information. I want to make sure I have a sufficient number of good references before I create the article so it doesn't end up being deleted.

Thanks! Trainsandotherthings (talk) 16:06, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Generally, museums are ok, especially large ones. The 2nd ref is more questionable (if the most detailed). If applicable, double them up where 2 say the same thing. To demonstrate notability, if challenged, books might be necessary. Johnbod (talk) 16:18, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the swift response! I went ahead and created a draft using the museum webpages as references, and I'll submit the draft to AFC once I have a chance to look at one of the books that covers the topic. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 18:18, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Archives for talk page

Hello Teahouse hosts. I return regarding assistance with archiving my talk page, this page which you can see HERE. Using a template, I added Cluebot III, and I am uncertain what happens at this point. I've read various pages of information regarding archiving but end up rather confused. I'm uncertain as to move old material into the archive at this point. I deeply appreciate any assistance one might have for me. Kind reagrds, Hu Nhu (talk) 17:22, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Hu Nhu: Hello, welcome to the teahouse! It looks like you've set up the template correctly, so you don't need to do anything else at this point. The bot will start automatically archiving your talk page next time it runs (which could take up to a few days). At this point you just need to wait! 192.76.8.91 (talk) 17:31, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you 192.76.8.91 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hu Nhu (talk • contribs) 19:55, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Ingeborg Kindstedt and Maria Kindberg

In 1915 Ingeborg Kindstedt and Maria Kindberg participated in the first ever cross country automobile trip for a cause; woman suffrage. Kindstedt, age 50, served as the mechanic during the 10 week trip; Kindberg, aged 55, owned and drove the car. Both were Swedish immigrants who had settled in Providence, RI. The trip was launched by Alice Paul and the Congressional Union for Woman Suffrage, and the women drove from San Francisco to Washington DC. It was covered extensively in the press at the time and in suffrage histories since. When they arrived in DC they met with Congress and also with President Wilson.

Despite their considerable contributions to this trip, Kindstedt and Kindberg have often been "othered" or even ignored entirely by historical accounts, in part because they were middle-aged, spoke English with an accent, and didn't fit the CU's mold of being young, native born, well-educated, and well-connected. There was tremendous anti-immigrant and anti-labor sentiment in the US at the time, and Kindstedt was also a member of the Industrial Workers of the World.

Full disclosure- I wrote a novel about this trip ("We Demand: The Suffrage Road Trip") in which they are the main characters. Part of my intent was to give them the credit they deserve and have never really received. I think they deserve their own Wikipedia page. Do you agree? Bluecando (talk) 17:49, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Bluecando: Welcome to the Teahouse! Wikipedia's standards for inclusion, called "notability" depend on significant coverage from independent reliable sources, and not original research. Those sources don't have to be online, so press coverage from the time and suffrage histories could be used. GoingBatty (talk) 19:13, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Bluecando. It sounds interesting, and if you found enough material to base a novel on, then it's quite likely that they meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability and there could be an article on them. I would caution you to stop thinking in terms of "they deserve an article": nobody and nothing in the entire universe "deserves" or "merits" an article, because nobody and nothing has an article, and a Wikipedia article is not in any way for the benefit of its subject. The question is not whether they "deserve" an article, but whether Wikipedia, as a project which summarises material already reliably published, would benefit from an article about them.

If your research turned up susbtantial amounts of material about them that was both reliably published (as opposed to unpublished or self-published) independent sources (so, not based on what they said about themselves, or what their associates said about them) then you can certainly write an article about them. It's not clear whether you would be regarded as having a conflict of interest (it certainly would be if you wanted to cite you own work, but since that is fiction it seems unlikely that there will be anything suitable to cite), but I suggest it's best to be up-front about it on the article's talk page and your user page. I'm guessing that in writing your novel you made various interpretations of the sources, and perhaps theorised about the events or what people's motives were for their actions: you need to be very careful to avoid such extrapolation in the article, however convincing it appears, and stick to what the sources actually say. You shouldn't even mention any controversies about them (for example) unless there has been published discussion specifically of the controversy.

I'll add to this my standard advice for new editors considering creating an article: you are in the position of a new apprentice builder who decides to build a house. The obvious bits of building the house look within your skills, but you may not have thought about what goes on below the surface, in surveying the ground and building the foundations. (I'm aware that you are an experienced writer, so this may have less force than for other new editors; but creating a Wikipedia article is different from most other kinds of writing). I therefore always advise putting aside the project for a few months and working on improving some of our six million existing articles, and thereby learning how Wikipedia works and what we're looking for. --ColinFine (talk) 20:52, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Draft of translated article

I'm working on a draft of a translation from Portuguese Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Antonio_Peticov

It's been rejected again due to a lack of reliable sources. It cites, among others: the Jornal do Brasil, one of Brazil's oldest newspapers (official archive of a print copy); a recent book published by a major Brazilian publishing house; an article in VICE Magazine Brazil, which is supported by the aforementioned book; a video interview on TV Cultura, a major Brazilian network (which was conducted by the late Antônio Abujamra, a well-known actor, director, and TV personality); the official website of São Paulo's metro system; an arts and culture website created by the government of Brazil; an interview in Domingo, an arts and culture magazine published by the Jornal do Brasil; a blog entry from the University of São Paulo; the government website for the city of São Paulo... it is objectively better sourced than the PT Wikipedia version.

I'm not seeing any indication that the article was reviewed by someone who speaks Portuguese and could properly verify the sources, so at this point, I'm genuinely at a loss as to what else I can do to bring this translated article's sources up to the standards of EN Wikipedia. Whatever issues one could have with the article, I'm surprised that veracity of sources is one of them. Actionactioncut (talk) 05:15, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Does pt.wp have an equivalent standard to WP:Biographies of living persons? Because I get a sense that BLP sourcing requirements are part of the issue. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 05:34, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Jéské Couriano I mean, the PT version only cites the subject's website and reads like a love letter to him: "Fruit of his incessant curiosity, Antonio was discovering and learning, experiencing different scenarios and assimilating colors, aromas, flavors, sounds and putting together a balanced rational and emotional archive of all this" as just one example. While it does have an equivalent, it was not rigorously enforced in this instance. I've aggressively rewritten the EN version to remove all purple prose, maintain a neutral POV, reduce the length, make it read more like an article than a resume, and include proper citations and formatting, all of which the original lacks. Actionactioncut (talk) 05:46, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

I do speak Portuguese and I agree that the article would very likely survive a AfD. It passes WP:GNG and easily (in my point of view) passes WP:ARTIST. Being in-depth profiled by Jornal do Brasil and by Folha de S. Paulo alone would, likely, grant him notability. His profile at Enciclopédia Itaú Cultural doesn't grant him notability per se, but it's a big indication that he is respected by his peers.--SirEd ^Dimmi!!! 06:31, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Perhaps Locomotive207 could comment here. -- Hoary (talk) 06:10, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Actionactioncut and Locomotive207, the section "Posters, book, and album covers" is unreferenced. It should be referenced. This section aside, the referencing is not perfect. However, this is not a "Good Article" (let alone "Featured Article") candidate; so while the referencing must be good it does not have to be perfect. I am surprised by Locomotive207's verdict, and look forward to reading their comment. -- Hoary (talk) 12:36, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Since the issues I had with the draft have been fixed and issues cleared up by other editors here, I will now go ahead and accept the draft if nobody has any objections. Sorry for the late reply.--🌀Locomotive207-talk🌀 21:52, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Advice on Wikipedia Article

 Courtesy link: Draft:United States Stove Company

I am trying to get an article approved, but I am hitting road blocks. I am wondering if my article has too much fluff content. It is titled "United States Stove Company." Is it better to keep articles short? Or, is it better to include as much information as possible as long as the content is reliable? ChattWiki423 (talk) 20:09, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Having whole sections with no independent sources isn't good. I've removed a couple. References to sources based on press releases, or on what employees have said, generally leaves a poor impression and should be avoided if possible. Maproom (talk) 21:53, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Created new page but there is a version in Spanish too

Hello. I created an English Wiki page for Australian actor Luke Cook but noticed that there seems to be a Spanish version on the ES wiki site. What is the protocol here? Do they merge or stay separate? https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luke_Cook

Thank you Grapepinky (talk) 19:26, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

They stay separate. I did notice that the Spanish article cites sources that are not considered reliable here at the English Wikipedia. The English article also has an unreliable source: Amazon.com which indicates it's content comes from IMDb which is generally not a reliable source. A helpful resource when considering source reliability is Reliable source/Perennial sources explanatory supplement. Gab4gab (talk) 19:47, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Grapepinky Hello! I'm not quite sure I understand your question, but here goes: That several WP:s in other languages have their own article on a subject is very common, and sort of the point. Luke Cook also has articles in French, Italian and Portugese. What you can do is to check is if any of the others have any good sources you haven't used. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:56, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you bothGrapepinky (talk) 20:23, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Grapepinky: Speaking in general, each language's Wikipedia operates independently and each community therein has its own rules and guidelines, so what is considered acceptable on Spanish Wikipedia isn't necessarily so on English Wikipedia, and vice versa, so it is wrong to assume that any material on one wiki would transfer easily to the other. But the rules shouldn't be so divergent that a well-sourced article in one language couldn't be usable as a guide to the creation of a corresponding article on another language. --Finngall ^talk 22:12, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Follow-up to New Article

Moving an article out of the Sandbox

Need help to move an article out of my Sandbox and have it published.

How do I do this? Vedlagt  (talk) 21:26, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Vedlagt, if you mean Draft:David Provoost, it is already out of your sandbox and has been submitted. To greatly improve its chances of success, what you might do is ensure that Provoost's major claim to notability is presented in the first sentence. As it is, the first sentence is about his baptism. (Reading this, I think "Should I care?") The second paragraph starts "He was an important figure in early New Amsterdam", which is promising. I expect the rest of the paragraph to justify the claim of importance; however, it doesn't start to do so. Indeed, the entire draft currently reads like an entry in a genealogical compendium of some kind; NB this is a well-acknowledged example of what Wikipedia is not. (What Wikipedia is, is an encyclopedia.) -- Hoary (talk) 22:57, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Creating an article

Hello Teahouse hosts. I have created a number of articles, but I am uncertain if I should include categories when I submit it. I've not done so in the past and others come later to add them. May I include them when I first write the article? Kind regards to all,Hu Nhu (talk) 22:18, 27 July 2021 (UTC) Hu Nhu (talk) 22:18, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Hu Nhu: Are you creating your articles in draft space or a user sandbox? If so then you can add categories as you write the article, but you should disable them by adding a colon at the start of the link (e.g. write [[:Category:Foo]] instead of [[Category:Foo]]). When the page is moved into article space the AFC script will automatically enable the categories. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 22:29, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

I will do exactly that. I appreciate your continued help. Kind regards,Hu Nhu (talk) 23:36, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Consensus on County Durham (district) article

I for one think the article has enough good stead to be a solo article from the ceremonial county and council articles for two reasons...

1. It is formed of seven former districts and boroughs which were once separate but now merged. 2. The council article doesn't really cover notable towns and Durham well in the article and as a result the article covers the wider unitary authority and it satisfies WP notable for geographical reasons...

Can we try to reach a consensus on the article...

Article is here County Durham (district) and debate is here [7]

RailwayJG (talk) 01:50, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Rejected draft follow up

Draft:Geoffrey_Leonard - This article got rejected due to poor sources. I was just wondering if someone could explain what is wrong with the sources please. Thanks DreamlessGlare (talk) 02:36, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Don't worry about it, I ended up getting help on the IRC DreamlessGlare (talk) 04:07, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Signature but no question

 Arun Khatauli (talk) 05:52, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

What is the meaning (-1) and (+3) in contributions list?

When i check my contribution than some points like (-1), (+3) or (0) are written against my edited pages. What does that mean i need to know about it. As per my assumptions it is the change in size of the file after edit done by me. Please elaborate my point of concern. Manojipandey (talk) 06:30, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Manojipandey:, you are correct, its the change of article size in Bytes. If you made the page bigger, it will be green, if you made it smaller, red, and if you didn't alter the size of an article, it will be a gray zero. When the size change is over 500 bytes, wether positive or negative, that number will be bold. Note that bytes aren't exactly equal to characters, while most characters like a or B only take one byte, certain special characters and in particular emojis can take up to three. Victor Schmidt (talk) 06:41, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Users on mobile inadvertently adding "tel:" in front of anything that their autocorrect thinks might be a telephone number

See this diff . This is not the first case I have seen – I have to confess to assuming IP editor vandalism first time it happened. Aradd1, can you say anything about what set-up you have that may have caused this to happen? John Maynard Friedman (talk) 21:13, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

@John Maynard Friedman: Sounds like phab:T116525, see also phab:T256758 AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 21:22, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

@AntiCompositeNumber:, yes, that looks to be it. I guess someone will have to construct a bot to search the entire project for each instance and remove it. <expletive deleted> Apple whizz kids who bought into the fatuous 'move fast and break things' mantra. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 21:27, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Perhaps not as serious as Excel screwing up gene names!. --ColinFine (talk) 21:59, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Excel won't screw up gene names if the user knows how to use Excel properly. By default it looks at the data being pasted in, and guesses the data type from that. People who paste data into Excel, or use Excel to open text files, need to learn how to apply the "text" format to a column or a range of columns. This is user error, although it's a frequently seen error. (I hope I put this comment in the right place.)73.127.147.187 (talk) 07:31, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

I have a hunch that the majority of Wikipedia Users--or at least the ones who visit the Teahouse--are too young to remember "expletive deleted." Full disclosure. I first heard of Nixon when my parents explained to me that Eisenhower would retire soon, and the Nixon was running against Kennedy. Uporządnicki (talk) 22:31, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

As usual, we have an article for that: Expletive deleted. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 22:39, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

@John Maynard Friedman There's a discussion on this at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical). ―Qwerfjkltalk 07:14, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

How reliable are magazines like L'Officiel, ELLE, Forbes etc.?

Hello, I'd like to ask about the reliability of magazines about fashion/lifestyle like L'Officiel and ELLE and a business magazine like Forbes. Are they eligible to be considered third-party sources to prove one's notability? Jchauofia (talk) 02:44, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Forbes is actually a special case: Articles written by staff are OK, but articles written by authors described as "contributors" are not due to not being subjected to the same editorial process staff articles are. See WP:FORBES. ELLE is considered reliable per WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard discussions. I cannot speak to L'Officiel's reliability as a source. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 03:33, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Based on L'Officiel I'd say it can be used, of course context matters. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:53, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

cash a check from Spencer strasmore vista

 2600:1700:1D21:1FAF:614F:9B01:98B4:B235 (talk) 08:58, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Exactly what problem are you encountering while attempting to edit Wikipedia? -- Hoary (talk) 09:01, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Greetings and Love to all

How to Create a wiki page? Hi and greetings to eveyone. I hope that you are doing good.

Can i Create a page for myself, friends, family members, companies i have worked in or other companies? What are the things that i need to take care while i write an article? i saw people add links too as references section so what type of links are acceptable? SheilaChan83 (talk) 05:50, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, SheilaChan83. You have a conflict of interest about "myself, friends, family members, companies i have worked in" and are strongly discouraged from editing in those areas until you thoroughly understand Wikipedia's policies and guidelines and are fully prepared to disclose your various conflicts of interest. Are these people and companies that you want to write encyclopedia articles about truly notable, as Wikipedia defines that concept? Articles should summarize what referenced reliable, independent sources say about the topic. Plese use the Articles for Creation process to review draft articles whenever you have a significant conflict of interest. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:04, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Short version of Cullen328's answer: No you can't. Oh, and be careful while making other kinds of edit. In your very first edit (summary "Fixed Grammatical Errors in 1st Paragraph"), you fixed no grammatical errors, you introduced one grammatical error (by removing the copula "is"), and you introduced one orthographic error (changing "Its national dish is [...]" to "It's national dish is [...]"). -- Hoary (talk) 09:09, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Feedback

Hello,

I would need assistance in regards to receiving some feedback in regards to the following page:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:H.IKEUCHI_-_The_Fog_Engineers.

I have tried to improve it to implement words that are more neutral and that the article is perceived as a an encyclopedia article, however I don't have a lot of experience in this and would really need some assistance, please.

Any feedback and idea is appreciated.

Thank you. NinaMon. (talk) 10:22, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@NinaMon.: Your draft was immediately deleted by an administrator as it was a copied from elsewhere. I can't see the draft now it has been removed but you must not just copy material you find elsewhere on the Internet. You may use reliable sources but you must put them into your own words and add citations to show where the facts can be verified later by other readers. Writing articles on Wikipedia is quite difficult for beginners and you would be best to start out by improving some of the more than 6 million articles already here. Mike Turnbull (talk)

Do my external relationships create a COI? Does any COI forbid direct editing of affected articles?

Hello,

From WP:COI:

While editing Wikipedia, an editor's primary role is to further the interests of the encyclopedia. When an external role or relationship could reasonably be said to undermine that primary role, the editor has a conflict of interest (similar to how a judge's primary role as an impartial adjudicator is undermined if they are married to the defendant.)

Any external relationship—personal, religious, political, academic, legal, or financial (including holding a cryptocurrency)—can trigger a COI. How close the relationship needs to be before it becomes a concern on Wikipedia is governed by common sense.

I have external relationships with the University of Alaska system. I am a current student at the University of Alaska Fairbanks and an alumnus of the same university. I was until the fall of 2019 an employee of the University of Alaska system.

Do these external relationships trigger a COI which prevents me from editing the article on Pat Pitney? Pitney, since the summer of 2020, has been the interim president of the University of Alaska system. I am currently the top editor on that article, as seen at https://xtools.wmflabs.org/articleinfo/en.wikipedia.org/Pat_Pitney.

I chose to interpret WP:COI as saying that my external relationships created the appearance of a COI to a reasonable third party, even though my personal common sense doesn't think the relationships are close enough to be of concern on Wikipedia. Consequently I put a COI declaration for this article on my user page, but continued to edit the article directly.

Have I acted correctly? Or alternatively:

- Was I mistaken in thinking that a reasonable person would see my external relationships as a COI?

- Is my common sense mistaken in thinking that these particular external relationships are not of concern on Wikipedia, and that I can continue to edit the Pitney article directly?

Thank you. Dieter.Meinertzhagen (talk) 21:43, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Dieter.Meinertzhagen, and welcome to the Teahouse. I would say that they do trigger a COI, but others may disagree. I would suggest putting an Edit request on the article's talk page, rather than editing it directly. --ColinFine (talk) 10:38, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Article on Anna Tenney

 Courtesy link: Draft:Anna F. Tenney

Need Help getting arrticle published on Official Anna Tenney , She is a verified Amazon Influencer, TikTok Influencer, Social media influencer on all social media platforms, An Actress,and song writer. please help get my article published please Fianaarmstrong1 (talk) 00:19, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Fianaarmstrong1: I wonder whether you used your own knowledge of Tenney to write this draft, or if you are Tenney. Per the multiple comments on your draft, you need to find multiple independent reliable sources that provide significant coverage of Tinney, and summarize what they say. Delete everything that is not sourced. Carefully review the comments on your draft and click on each link to the Wikipedia guidelines, and read the guidelines completely. Continuing to submit a draft that is not adequately sourced risks having the draft rejected (instead of declined). GoingBatty (talk) 00:43, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Fianaarmstrong, and welcome to the Teahouse. It looks as if you have a (very common) misunderstanding of what Wikipedia is: you think it is social media, where it is appropriate to tell the world about something. It is not: that is called Promotion and is strictly forbidden. Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources.

My advice to you is:

1. Put Tenney aside for a few months, while you learn how Wikipedia works by making small improvements to some of our six million existing articles.
2. Throw away the text you have written - most of it is nothing at all like an encyclopaedia article, and I doubt if it is salvagable.
3. Read about notability, and find the (at least three) sources that are reliably published, wholly unconnected with Tenney, and contain significant coverage of her.
4. If you can't find such sources, abandon the project. (I think people have found that it is often difficult to find adequate sources for social media influencers; but you may be lucky).
5. If you find the sources, forget everything you know about her, and write a neutral summary of what the independent sources say. --ColinFine (talk) 10:56, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Mirrors

 Eye ay en (talk) 05:33, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

What about mirrors, Eye ay en? -- Hoary (talk) 08:49, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Your edits at Jeremiah Arkhams were reverted because the editor stated that some of your references were not considered reliable sources, as they were using content sourced from Wikipedia articles (hence, "mirrors"). You have since added content ref'd to fandom and Wikis, so the question of reliable sources may occur again. David notMD (talk) 11:28, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Debashish_Banerji and C5 of WP:Academic

Hello, I am struggling with determining notability of this person. Please see my existing discussion with creator here: [8]. C5 is not a familiar criteria for me and hence bringing it here. The subject is a named chair. But C5 also says Major institutions, for these purposes, are those that have a reputation for excellence or selectivity. Named chairs at other institutions are not necessarily sufficient to establish notability. - how to determine this? Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 01:30, 28 July 2021 (UTC) Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 01:30, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Ah. I don't think it's major. (See here.) While most WikiProjects seem to be more or less moribund, that on Higher education is a welcome exception. Nomadicghumakkad, I suggest that you ask about this matter at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Higher education; you're sure to get informed responses. -- Hoary (talk) 02:47, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

I see it's already discussed then Hoary. One way I thought one could evaluate if institute was significant or not by the amount of well cited research it was producing on the concerned subject. What do you think? Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 11:43, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Nomadicghumakkad, I have my own opinion about that; but again, I suggest that you ask about major-or-not at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Higher education. -- Hoary (talk) 12:11, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Can an article be replaced be another?

Can Regional Council of Pays de la Loire be replaced by Draft:Regional Council of Pays de la Loire since the draft give more citations and information? Also, the article was created today, that is, while I was making my draft. (Also, how to prevent users to create articles while another user is creating a draft on the same topic?) Excellenc1📞 17:06, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

It should probably be merged. ―Qwerfjkltalk 17:42, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

That may be too simple an answer. Jazerty268 (the same editor who earlier moved one of your drafts to mainspace without asking), created an incomplete and unreferenced article in mainspace a couple of hours before you posted your draft. A simple solution could be to copy content from your draft into the article, and then ask that your draft be deleted. Any opinions/solutions from experienced Teahouse hosts? David notMD (talk) 18:50, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

I would copy and paste the contents of Excellenc1's draft into the article overriding the existing article, leaving an edit summary like "Replacing article with draft version, see the history of Draft:Regional Council of Pays de la Loire for attribution." then turn the draft into a redirect to the article to stop it being G13'd. Basically treat it like you would if you'd re-written the article in a user space sandbox. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 19:31, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

I have given a merger proposal in the talk page of the article. Excellenc1📞 03:28, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

You might want to preserve the history of the draft. ―Qwerfjkltalk 07:30, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Qwerfjkl: Is it possible for you to accept the proposal? Excellenc1📞 12:10, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Excellenc1 If there's no opposition, then you can be bold and do it yourself. ―Qwerfjkltalk 12:30, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. ―Qwerfjkltalk 12:31, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Qwerfjkl: Please check Draft:Regional Council of Pays de la Loire and Regional Council of Pays de la Loire, I have a strong feeling that I have messed up. Excellenc1📞 13:05, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Excellenc1 Looks fine to me. ―Qwerfjkltalk 13:31, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Restoring Autoblog's main article

Autoblog had a main article starting in 2007, along with all of the other Weblogs Inc. properties. Somewhere along the way, someone decided it would be better to redirect auto blog to spamblog and refer to autoblog.com as a subsection of the Weblogs Inc. page. Given that Autoblog.com is a top-10 automotive website, and other sister-sites such as Engadget still have a main article, it would make sense to restore the old page (removing redirects) and allow it to be edited to reflect current information about that site. 2600:4040:400A:4F00:8DAA:4809:A15C:C439 (talk) 19:39, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello IP, the article Autoblog (website) was deleted in 2016 per this discussion, which determined that the website was not notable. Then, a separate discussion decided that "Autoblog" should be redirected to Spam blog. If you feel like after 5 years the website is now notable, you are free to create a new article for it through the same channels as creating any other brand new article. You may want to read WP:YFA for instructions about how to create such an article, and also WP:NWEBSITE for further information about the notability for websites. Also note that "other stuff exists" is almost always not a convincing argument. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 20:12, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

I was thinking things should be as simple as creating a new page, except I'm unclear on how that new page would live under /autoblog, like the old one. 2600:4040:400A:4F00:8DAA:4809:A15C:C439 (talk) 21:03, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I don't understand what you're asking. Creating a new article is not "simple", especially for newcomers. I don't know what you mean by "/autoblog"; subpages are disabled in the article mainspace. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 21:17, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

What I should have said is /autoblog.com which refers to the wikipedia URL - which used to be http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autoblog.com The main article should belong there, but with redirects, I don't even know how that would be done.2600:4040:400A:4F00:4072:4BB7:85CD:C4E9 (talk) 17:07, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Question about a rejected article Amhara organizations vs Black-owned business

Hello on June the 2nd, a page Draft:List of Amhara organizations was rejected by a user citing Pointless list as there can be multiple Amhara organisations across the world in different sphere and they cannot be incorporated into one list. Yet here on wikipedia you have Category:Black-owned companies of the United States & Black-owned businesses. Only notable companies/organizations that made news coverage can seriously be added to the article, i don't understand this double standards towards Amhara organizations. Dawit S Gondaria (talk) 06:42, 28 July 2021 (UTC) Dawit S Gondaria (talk) 06:42, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi Dawit S Gondaria, I'm afraid you are comparing a list article to a category, which is an entirely different thing. See WP:CATEGORY for more information.

Welcome to Wikipedia. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 10:52, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Roger (Dodger67), thank you for your response, and fair enough on the categorization. But there are also lists of companies, for countries and also in subdivisions, for example the United States. List of companies of the United States by state, Dawit S Gondaria (talk) 19:08, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Creating a page on Leadership Initiative for Earth and/or the LIFEboat Flotillas

As described at http://www.jeffreygibbs.org/getting-a-life LIFE was a Vancouver environmental organization which organized several environmental conferences on tall ships. Hundreds of young people took part. Would it be suitable for me to create a page on either of these topics, relying on Gibbs' page as a reference along with others in the standard Wikipedia style? Ilnyckyj (talk) 03:11, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Please read Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). This starts off by saying that "[a]n organization is generally considered notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources." The website of Gibbs's is not independent of this. If hundreds (even tens of thousands) of people took part, this doesn't contribute to notability, as the term is (perversely?) understood hereabouts. What matters is what has been written about it all, in reliable, independent, published secondary sources. -- Hoary (talk) 05:05, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for that guidance. I think the issue may be more timing than the level of journalistic interest, since not a lot of outlets have coverage from the late 1990s available. I will see if I can find anything in news databases.

Ilnyckyj (talk) 20:04, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

A 26 February 1997 Canada NewsWire article entitled "All Aboard! Lifeboat Flotilla" stating that it "will carry 200 youth and some four dozen educators aboard 13 large sailboats and heritage ships through the islands and waterways of BC's Gulf Islands."

A 25 June 1998 Canada NewsWire story reported: "Leadership Initiative for Earth (British Columbia) The Flotilla is a large-scale ocean expedition about sustainability combining the elements of adventure with hands-on learning for young Canadians."

A 13 March 1997 Globe and Mail article is all about the Flotilla "Vancouver Teens learn to tackle environmental problems."

Canadian Newsstream also contains 13 articles that reference the LIFEboat Flotilla: https://www.sindark.com/NonBlog/ProQuestDocuments-2021-07-27.pdf

Ilnyckyj (talk) 20:10, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Ilnyckyj, a quick look suggests that you have enough material for an article on the "flotilla". NB cited material does not have to be online, and a Wikipedia article (or draft) mustn't link to a web page, file or whatever that appears to violate copyright. While I don't want to judge the status of the anthology ProQuestDocuments-2021-07-27.pdf, it looks very iffy (however convenient it may be). -- Hoary (talk) 23:19, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

I made that PDF purely as a demonstration that the flotillas got media coverage, not as a reference to link.

Ilnyckyj (talk) 20:08, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Featured list

If I think a Featured List does not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines should I nominate it to be delisted or should I open an AfD? TipsyElephant (talk) 15:38, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@TipsyElephant: Hello, welcome to the teahouse! I would reccomend that you start by sending the list to WP:Featured list removal candidates for delisting. While you can nominate featured content for deletion you'll find that any AFD you open will be flooded with "Keep. This is a featured list." type comments that don't actually address the notability concerns you have. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 16:03, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@192.76.8.91: thank you! That's a really good point that I hadn't considered. TipsyElephant (talk) 16:13, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@TipsyElephant: in special cases, AFDs do stand a chance of succeeding on an FL, but it would be astonishing for an article to meet the FL criteria and not be appropriate as a standalone list. So FLRC and then AFD could work. Notice that notability is not quite the same as what a list needs to have—see Wikipedia:Stand-alone lists. What is the list? I'm guessing it was promoted pre-2010 when standards were a lot lower. — Bilorv (talk) 17:44, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Bilorv: the article is Hugo Award for Best Fancast, which was promoted in 2015. However the editor had 15 or more articles on the other categories of the award promoted around 2010. Here is what may argument will be, let me know if I'm missing anything obvious or if you think it will immediately be rejected or anything like that:

The article appears to have significant notability issues. According to WP:FLCR, featured lists should “cover a topic that lends itself to list format and ... meet the requirements for all Wikipedia content.” Most of the sources currently being cited are not reliable and independent secondary sources. Some of them don’t even mention the words “fancast” or “podcast” such as Guardian article. The only result on Google News for “Hugo Award for Best Fancast” is this trivial mention by Locus Magazine. Searching for “Hugo Award” “Best Fancast” gets some hits on Google News, but it’s all extremely WP:ROUTINE even for demonstrating notability of the award itself rather than this category specifically. Google Books and Google Scholar yield even fewer results with nothing that contains in-depth or significant coverage of this specific award category. I don’t see how this specific category of the award is independently notable from the Hugo Award and even if the Hugo Award is notable this category does not WP:INHERIT that notability. The subject of the article is very specific and I don’t think it’s appropriate to have a stand alone list per WP:SALAT. I also noticed while assessing the article that there are quite a few other “Hugo Award for Best …” such as Hugo Award for Best Fanzine and Hugo Award for Best Fan Writer (it appears the same editor got at least 15 award categories promoted to featured), but claiming that this article should not be deleted or not be delisted because similar articles exist would likely be considered an example of WP:OTHERSTUFF. The article was promoted to a featured list in 2015, but there doesn’t appear to be any discussion about the article’s notability during the nomination. I think the article should either be merged with the award or deleted, but before opening an AfD I figured I should nominate it to get delisted.

TipsyElephant (talk) 19:48, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@TipsyElephant: Hmm, interesting. I can't tell from a first read what my opinion on this would be, but I think it would be reasonable to go to FLCR with that rationale and then AFD if it gets delisted. — Bilorv (talk) 20:09, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Infobox photo doesn't show up in edit mode

Hi. There is a picture misplaced in the infobox of the article on Ubeidiya. I'm talking of [[File:Tel Ubeidiya.JPG]], a small greyish mound. It must be removed, as the archaeological site described in the article is NOT the tell in the photo. It's like placing a photo of Washington, DC in the infobox of the article on Washington state. I don't know what template has been used, because the name of the file is not appearing when I go into edit mode. It must be some automatic connection to Wiki Commons or something else i don't know. Came across the same problem on German Wiki, where the infobox photo doesn't show up in edit mode either. Anyone? Thanks! Arminden (talk) 15:30, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

The image is taken from Wikidata and should be changed there. Ruslik_Zero 18:47, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

@Ruslik0: hi and thanks! Obviously, I'm not good with that, otherwise I would have figured it out already, so could you please do it? If you have the patience to explain me how, I'd be grateful for next time; for now, removing the wrong photo is my first priority though. Thanks! Arminden (talk) 04:35, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

PS: I've fumbled around, have "fixed" the Wikimedia Commons name: nothing. Next I've fully removed the Wikimedia Commons line: nothing. Finally, I've added into the infobox |image=|image_size=|caption= (and left them empty), and the photo has disappeared! I don't know why, so I'm not sure if and in which situation it will work again in the future, nor if I've taken away smth. important by removing the faulty Wiki Commons line. So if you could give me at least a hint, I'd still be grateful. Arminden (talk) 04:55, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

On the page in Wikidata linked above, you can see the image and 'edit' link right to it. Click on it and you will be able to change the image. Ruslik_Zero 20:25, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Ruslik0 & everyone else: I don't know what you mean by "change the image". I do not have any image for Ubeidiye; I just don't want the Tell Ubeidiye image to show up automatically. The problem is, I don't understand the mechanism through which the image pops up by itself. If you can clarify that for a technical zero like me, fine and thanks. If not, maybe somebody else has a minute. I have no idea what the long sausage of data on the Wikidata page means. I have solved the problem on the article page by fumbling blindly, I hope I didn't remove anything otherwise useful, but now it's only about learning and understanding. But I can live without. Arminden (talk) 13:14, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Well, you solved your problem. The details about Wikipedia-Wikidata relationship can be found in Wikipedia:Wikidata#Infoboxes. For instance, {{Infobox_ancient_site}} fetches the default image from Wikidata if no image is specified. Since you specified "null image" by inserting the empty parameters nothing is shown currently. Ruslik_Zero 13:26, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Arminden Every Wikipedia article has a Wikidata entry associated with it. Wikidata is a database that can hold various bits of information, and these can be reused in articles. Certain templates (like that infobox) will load information from wikidata if you don't specify a default value. Assuming you're on the desktop site the link to get to the Wikidata item for any article in the sidebar on the left - it's the link labelled "Wikidata item" in the "tools" section. In this case the entry is https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2660882. The article is automatically loading the image from the database entry on wikidata - to fix it go to wikidata, scroll down to the image property, click the "edit" button then click "remove". 192.76.8.91 (talk) 13:33, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Ruslik0, thank you very much! Great, I can now look into that. It's not a nice feeling improvising in the dark, and it won't be the only time I'll came across this. Cheers, Arminden (talk) 13:39, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Ruslik0, hi. Your explanations were excellent, I've learned a lot. Now, the problem goes deeper. The entire connection between the Wikidata entry (item Q2660882) and the article Ubeidiya is WRONG. Q2660882 is titled "Tel Ovadia" (Hebrew for Tell Ubeidiya), and deals with a tell (archaeological mound) some 400 m away from the site dealt with in the article. The tell isn't even excavated and is of relatively little interest, is one among many Bronze & Iron Age tells in the region. Whereas Ubeidiya is the second-oldest site with traces of humans outside Africa. A difference of some 1,4 million years, 400 m, and a huge one in magnitude of scientific importance. How can we now decouple/disconnect the two? Tell Ubeidiya is only mentioned as a sideline on the Ubeidiya page, and is there just because the confusion is so common and because the tell doesn't have a page of its own as an archaeological site, although it does have one as the core location of the depopulated Palestinian village of Al-'Ubaydiyya. Maybe it should be connected to that article? Which already has the item number Q4702134... Not my field, big mess, maybe you can do something. Thanks again! Arminden (talk) 16:21, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

I think I've managed most of what I intended to do; for the rest I've left invitations to others on the talk-pages. Thanks for putting me on the right track! Arminden (talk) 20:41, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Drafting new article in AFC

Drafting new article Drafting new article in AFC and do not know how to save my work so I can start again at a later date. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Roxiegrossman (talk) 21:35, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Appears you discovered that "Publish" means "Save." W uses Publish because it wants editors to know that anything saved within W can be seen by other editors by looking at the editor's Contribution history. David notMD (talk) 21:41, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

HELP

--Crystalnewbold2021 (talk) 23:26, 28 July 2021 (UTC) Crystalnewbold2021 (talk) 23:26, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Crystalnewbold2021: This is a page for asking about Wikipedia. We can't help you with any personal issues, such as you describe in your sandbox. User:Crystalnewbold2021/sandbox Should an admin redact the personal info that has been shared there? Sorry for the Streisand Effect. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 23:35, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

We can't help you with your issues. Contact the relevant local authorities. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 23:49, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

WikiFauna for advanced technical editors

There is the WikiGnome, WikiDragon, WikiKnight, etc. But I would like to know what fauna in the wiki space relates to editors that are advanced and often technical, cheers 180.251.151.92 (talk) 06:27, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

I'm not sure if I understand your question correctly but if you wish to find editors who are knowledgeable in some technical area, then the best way is probably to go via the WP:WikiProject_Council/Directory/Science portal and click through to the topic you are interested in. These usually have lists of interested editors. Another method is to look at the category pages: for example I'm listed in Category:Wikipedians interested in chemistry. Whether people in such categories are competent in that topic is another matter! Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:09, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

I worded my question incorrectly, sorry. So, for example, WikiDragons are users that edits articles in massive differentials, WikiGnomes edits in small amounts. So, the Wiki- for advanced technical users is…? 180.251.151.92 (talk) 07:03, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Ah, I see... you want a suitable neologism we could start to use. WP:WikiGeek perhaps? The idea is that you would write a humorous essay on that topic and then add a brief summary to the WP:WikiFauna article, as others have done. Good luck! Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:38, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks! 180.251.151.92 (talk) 23:56, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Help me post the durable crystal

Hello, I have a couple articles to post and the the process looks intimidating. I don't know how to set up a page or anything, would anyone like to help me? I'll tell you what it's about. First on the page durability there could be a heading, "Durable Crystal." The page should also be led to by "Durable crystal under types of durability, durable crystal, durable substance, imperishable, imperishability, imperishable crystal, imperishable substance and expansion elements." Then I have a regular page outlined history, applications, process etc for about four pages. I have a second page, "Creation" and a paragraph under gravitational Singularity entitled, "Theory." If you like, you may view the pages on my website; Azapizzazz dot com/durability. Should I just post here in questions? This looks easy. Good.  Azapizzazz (talk) 01:20, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@Azapizzazz: Welcome to the Teahouse. Unfortunately, Wikipedia does not do original research. If there are reliable sources that significantly talk about "durable crystals", then it might merit an article. There are tangentially related pages on here, like Durability, that you might be able to add to with reliably sourced information. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:37, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Help me semi protect the Philippines women's national volleyball team article

There has been a lot of vandalism happening on the article Philippines women's national volleyball team mostly coming from unregistered users. To avoid possible future vandalism, please help me semi-protect this one. Thanks. Volleybae (talk) 01:32, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@Volleybae: Welcome to the Teahouse. You're going to want to go to Requests for page protection to make such a request. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:38, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Edit removed

When I edited a page, added a new section and added references the next day my edits were removed. Can someone explain why? 2502renegate2502 (talk) 14:22, 28 July 2021 (UTC) 2502renegate2502 (talk) 14:22, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@2502renegate2502: Welcome to the Teahouse. Assuming you're talking about the edits made at K. Shanmugam, your edits have been reverted for [...] unsourced addition, citation placed wrongly, possible copyvio: you added material that was not sourced, the material you did source was cited improperly, and the material may have violated copyright, which is not allowed on Wikipedia. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:26, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Tenryuu Ok, thanks for your answer. Now how do I find out if I did the citation correctly or if I did a copyright violation? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2502renegate2502 (talk • contribs)

If you copy/pasted the content from another source exactly or only slightly paraphrased, then - voila! - copyright violation, even if you referenced the source. David notMD (talk) 16:26, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@2502renegate2502: Check out WP:EASYREFBEGIN for how to properly cite content, and make sure you're not copypasting content, extensively close paraphrasing, or excessively using quotes to avoid copyright violations. (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.) —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:29, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Tenryuu Ok and how do I cite correctly? 2502renegate2502 (talk) 19:11, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

The first link I provided has details. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:53, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@2502renegate2502: You could also discuss this directly with the editor who reverted your change, Justanothersgwikieditor, by leaving a message on their User Talk page.--Gronk Oz (talk) 01:55, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Gronk Oz, thanks for the ping. I started the conversation over at 2502renegate2502's talkpage. Thanks!

Post-Move bot

I just did my first page move, and got a template listing the stuff at WP:POSTMOVE.

Honestly, most of the stuff there seems like it'd be way more efficient and not too technically challenging for a bot to do, and possibly more reliable too.

Thoughts? Intralexical (talk) 19:04, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Intralexical: well, there's Wikipedia:Bot requests if you want to write up a proper description of the tasks that you think could be automated, and where people might have more expert views on what parts of the edits could go wrong if done by bot. I think fixing the double redirects by hand is not really necessary per Wikipedia:Double redirects as a bot does retarget these within a few days. There could be some practical and useful automation, so it's a reasonable idea. — Bilorv (talk) 01:57, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Template creating

Somebody please help me to create a template on {{Indian Administrative Service Officer}}. Please.... Shaji issac (talk) 02:17, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

COI

I have been asked to avoid writing articles about myself, my family, friends, colleagues, company, organization and competitors.

Why is this? Why can't I write an article about these things in a neutral style? SacrificialPawn (talk) 20:32, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

SacrificialPawn Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia article are typically written by independent editors, who take note of a subject in independent reliable sources and choose on their own to write about it. They summarize what those independent sources say, demonstrating how the topic meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability.

Please review, if you haven't already, the conflict of interest policy as well as this plain language explanation of it; I think it will answer many of your questions. It is often difficult for those with a COI to set aside what they know about the topic and any materials put out by the topic and only write based on what others say about it. Note, however, that policy say "avoid", not that it is absolutely forbidden. If you truly feel that you can set aside what you know about the topic for which you have a COI and only write based on what others say about it, you may submit a draft using Articles for Creation for review by an independent editor; keep in mind that if such a draft is accepted, you would be limited to edit requests afterwards. Please read Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 20:44, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

331dot, Thank you for clarifying that I am not forbidden from writing about my company or family. I have already read the conflict of interest policy but I find the WP:COIPAYDISCLOSE section to be quite vague in regards to employees of notable companies and unnecessarily presumptuous in relation to our motives for writing here. If another editor finds something I've written to be false, I would expect them to flag it in their review, and I will make the required corrections. SacrificialPawn (talk) 21:07, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

If Draft:Owkin is about your company, you must declare your paid relationship on your User page. Undeclared paid editing can lead to being blocked. All the other examples are COIs, and also need to be declared. And understand that there is no ownership. Within certain limits, anyone can edit any article. As in directly, not via review for you to act upon. David notMD (talk) 21:33, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

David notMD I have declared my COI on my User page. Please can you explain COI in relation to family member? Do I have to reveal my identity publicly for that? SacrificialPawn (talk) 21:54, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Yes you would have to declare a COI to edit an draft about a family members of yours, this declaration does not need to be specific enough to state the actual relationship only that one exists. This relationship could simply being a friend of the subject. McMatter ^(talk)/_(contrib) 22:22, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@SacrificialPawn, hey, I’m very impressed you are disclosing a COI. Okay, everything that has been said to you about COI is very much apt so I wouldn’t re-echo what has been said, but If you have read the room so far what is being said to you is “yeah (technically) you can and it’s not (necessarily) against policy, we are mandated to tell you the truth, whilst that is true please my advise to you would be not to create the article(s) you have a COI with, the reason is this, a COI makes WP:NPOV very difficult. Furthermore have you read our notability threshold? If not, please read it, and if you have, do you see the requirements there? Look at the wording, specifically this: In-depth significant coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject any COI article you create would be made to pass through that test to the latter(the scrutiny would be very thorough) and may cause you stress when it is critiqued thoroughly so whilst “yes” you can create COI articles, please do not, there is “the truth” and there is “reality” if you want to see an article created you can use the WP:RA method, also, and as 331dot told you, you might also use the WP:AFC method, the afc method is good but believe you me the scrutiny is extremely thorough. Furthermore and theoretically speaking, if writing articles for friends and family is what brought you to Wikipedia then in time you’d realize what Wikipedia is WP:NOT. As I said earlier there is “truth” and there is “reality“ Celestina007 (talk) 22:47, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

At Draft:Owkin, the first and third refs are company generated; the 2nd and 4th confirm fund-raising for the venture, which establish existence, but not notability in the Wikipedia sense of the word. David notMD (talk) 02:22, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

HELP

I NEED ASSISTANCE Can someone please help me I would like to create a Wikipedia page for "Molding Messengers"? It would be hugely appreciatedUgochukwu75 (talk) 01:12, 29 July 2021 (UTC) Ugochukwu75 (talk) 01:12, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Ugochukwu75, you first should carefully read the criteria for corporate notability and verify whether your business meets the standard. If it does, then find around 3 reliable, published, independent, secondary sources which cover your business in depth. If you find the sources, base your article on the sources, forgetting what you know about your company, and avoiding any promotional language. Don't copy/paste from your sources into the article, as that will violate copyright. Follow the instructions and advice at Your first article, and submit your finished draft at Articles for creation. Good luck.--Quisqualis (talk) 04:02, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of Mrinal Dev Burman and Murari Lal Gupta for speedy deletion.

Hi there!,I would like to nominate Mrinal Dev Burman for speedy deletion as the subject is not notable enough and fails WP:MUSICBIO. Also, there has been no resources cited.

Also, Murari Lal Gupta has been nominated for speedy deletion by me. Pls let me know if I have made any mistakes.

I have posted the message on the article's Talk page. Thank you. Jocelin Andrea (talk) 13:37, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Jocelin Andrea, I can't see the former article anymore as it's been speedily deleted (but I guess that's strong indication that you did it correctly) and the latter article has been tagged correctly (in terms of the technical process) so far as I can see. I think you missed a signature on this talk page notification but otherwise it looks right. Thanks for your edits! — Bilorv (talk) 14:50, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank You then! Yea will sign them right away Jocelin Andrea (talk) 15:05, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Jocelin Andrea: You didn't actually tag Murari Lal Gupta for speedy deletion; you proposed it for deletion, which is a different process. If you want to tag it for speedy deletion, replace the prod template with the appropriate CSD template. Deor (talk) 17:15, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for the information, have tagged it for Speedy deletion now. Jocelin Andrea (talk) 00:36, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@Jocelin Andrea: I notice that in Talk:Murari Lal Gupta, you contested the deletion, saying "This article should not be speedily deleted..." This seems to contradict your comments above and later in that Talk page post. If you think it should be deleted, you should fix that. Or if not, remove the comments about not being notable. Either way, it should be consistent.--Gronk Oz (talk) 01:51, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for informing, have removed the comments now. Jocelin Andrea (talk) 04:29, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi, I'm very new to this. How do I make a Wikipedia page for an educational institution?

Hi, is it possible to make a Wikipedia page of an educational institution in Malaysia? I've checked and searched, so far it does not exist. Am I allowed to make the page if I'm an employee? Thank you. RadhiMIT (talk) 02:27, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@RadhiMIT: Welcome to the Teahouse. Regardless of your affiliation, you should read Your first article; creating an article is one of the hardest things a new user can do, and you are strongly encouraged to edit preexisting articles first to understand how to use Wikipedia (the interactive tutorial may help out here). With that said, you must disclose your paid relationship on your user page, User:RadhiMIT (the red link means that the page hasn't been created yet) before anything else. If you are able to establish the institution's notability as Wikipedia defines it from reliable sources, you can start a draft through the Articles for creation process.
If the draft is accepted upon review, you are strongly discouraged from editing the article once it is in mainspace (without the Draft: prefix), and are recommended to submit edit requests in the article's talk page. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:06, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Help

A few days ago I had created this user page to use Disam Assist. How can i use this to fix Disambiguation link? Please help me. Thank you ! Fade258 (talk) 02:04, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@Fade258: You’re better off asking at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical), as the script suggests. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 05:48, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your guidance.Fade258 (talk) 05:56, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

POV allegation on several articles around same topic

Hello. I have been using Wikipedia as a regular guest as a relatively reliable knowledge source for years. Unfortunately, I have noticed that certain several articles revolving around same certain subject are biased toward a certain viewpoint. I don't know if this is a work of an individual or not, but I wonder if I can request an NPOV evaluation or something of the sort encompassing several articles at once, perhaps by category grouping. Of course, I can just discuss my concerns on the articles' respective talk pages, but the number of articles is somewhat large and it might be impractical to complain on all of them. Thank you for your attention. Tsubasanomura (talk) 07:01, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Tsubasanomura, and thanks for getting involved in helping to improve article content. There's a specific forum for discussing this issue, which is Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard. I suggest raising the case there. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:32, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Please can someone explain why my ip was seen editing on a page i never visited

Hi there, today I noticed I had messages on Wikipedia (which is something I never knew you could get) I clicked on it and noticed that I was banned in January for editing an article I had never visited before, I also had a message from this month about editing the same article? keep in mind that at this point I didn't have a Wikipedia account and didn't and still don't have any interest in editing Wikipedia articles, could someone explain why or how this could happen? thanks. JDFtrains (talk) 08:47, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

JDFtrains IP address can be used by multiple people, for various reasons. If you were not responsible for the actions that led to the block, you have nothing to worry about now that you have created an account. 331dot (talk) 08:51, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Sources

Hello, i'm currently working on a draft for the Italian politician Pietro Amendola. However, i couldn't find a lot of sources for Pietro Amendola. Another thing, the best one i could find was from the Associazione Nazionale Partigiani d'Italia ("National Association Partisans of Italy") but it was marked as WP:SELFPUBLISHED. Why was this the case?

The National Association Partisans of Italy is recognized as a charitable foundation. And Pietro was a member of the organization. Besides, the National Association Partisans of Italy have also been cited in several other articles.

Does anyone have any sources on Pietro?

And why is the source by National Association Partisans of Italy not valid? Khalif Ali Husain the Third (talk) 10:02, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Khalif Ali Husain the Third: Even the Italian version of Wikipedia only has one source (see it:Pietro_Amendola) which suggests to me he is a minor figure who will not pass English Wikipedia's notability requirements. I suspect the reason the NAP of Italy is not a good source for showing he is notable is exactly as you say: he is a member of that organization. The source may be valid for other articles (for example to verify some simple fact). Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:53, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Khalif Ali Husain the Third Welcome to the Teahouse! I checked the 2 sources in your Draft:Pietro Amendola (sounds like an interesting man). ANPI may not be a glaringly awful source on history in general (I can't really say), but the problem with both sources is that they are writing about their own member, which leads us to the independent part of WP:BASIC. Basically, organizations tend to write about their own members in a mostly positive way. Those sources may not be useless for some basic facts per WP:ABOUTSELF, but they don't make a case for WP:GNG.

On more sources, perhaps you can find something useful at [9]. La famiglia Amendola looks promising. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:23, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull: Pietro Amendola does pass Wikipedia's notability requirements. Since he was a politician who served as a deputy in parliament. And according to Wikipedia :

"The following are presumed to be notable:

Politicians and judges who have held international, national, or (for countries with federal or similar systems of government) state/province–wide office, or have been members of legislative bodies at those levels. This also applies to people who have been elected to such offices but have not yet assumed them.

Major local political figures who have received significant press coverage."

In this context, a "deputy" is a member of the lower house of the Italian Parliament, equivalent to a member of the House of Commons in the UK or a member of the House of Representatives in America. Apologies if I am telling people things they already know. Pete AU aka --Shirt58 (talk) 09:19, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Visual editor "1 notice" popup?

Using the visual editor, there seems to always be this popup that says "1 notice" and "Find sources:".

It is quite annoying. Is there any way to disable it from being shown by default? Intralexical (talk) 19:22, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Intralexical, hello and welcome to the Teahouse we apologize for the delay in answering your question, the problem is your question appears to be vague and a little hard to understand, could you expressly state what the problem is? Celestina007 (talk) 23:07, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Intralexical: I assume you're referring to the black triangle with the white exclamation mark in it next to the blue 'Publish changes' button in the top right of the screen in desktop view. If so, it hardly seems intrusive, and one simply needs to avoid clicking it. However, perhaps you're editing in 'mobile view' and are seeing more prominent notices than I am. I think it's there as a prompt to encourage readers of articles which have few references to go and find more to add and improve the page. I'm not aware there is a way to stop them showing, though others might know of a way. If the problem is with mobile view, try editing in 'desktop view' instead (which is what I do) when on my phone. Sorry I can't offer you a better solution. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:19, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you two for the replies! The ⚠️ icon is indeed what I was talking about. I believe the behaviour I described was due to the article I was editing being in the Draft namespace. It would always pop open even if I didn't click it, hence why I found it annoying. Anyway, I guess it's not so bad if it won't show up most of the time. Intralexical (talk) 00:00, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@Intralexical @Nick Moyes I previously had this problem, where the notice appeared in all articles. I recommend using the 2010 wikitext editor instead. ―Qwerfjkltalk 09:28, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Will I destroy everything?

Will I destroy everything? 106.213.77.0 (talk) 07:29, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Probably not but please try to be constructive when you edit here on Wikipedia. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:18, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

If you mean "Life, the Universe, and Everything", see Phrases from The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, and please, don't. David notMD (talk) 11:23, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Public Statues and Sculpture Association

I need help with editing the page on the Public Statues and Sculpture Association page. Our edits have been rejected twice, and we don't understand why. The user name is Edgar Boehm and (redacted). Edgar Boehm (talk) 09:48, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy: Draft:Public Statues and Sculpture Association, declined twice, with reasons given by the declining reviewers. Given the connection to the now defunct Public Monuments and Sculpture Association, perhaps renaming and expanding that article can be made to work. Hyperlinks are not allowed in articles (a flaw of the draft), and all added content must be verified by inline references. See Help:Referencing for beginners. David notMD (talk) 11:34, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

On second thought, my renaming suggestion is bad advice. Articles about no-longer-existing companies and organizations are meant to be kept. Perhaps you can use that article as a model for what the draft should look like (no hyperlinks, needs refs, etc.). David notMD (talk) 12:02, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Chagam and Chagum

There are two articles Chagam and a recently created a copy of it "Chagum". I have added the redirect of Chagum to the respective article, but it still does not do so. What can I do?

Thanks in advance!!! Jocelin Andrea (talk) 13:00, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Jocelin Andrea, Redirects to other namespaces, in this case Drafts, are not allowed in Mainspace. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 13:30, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you then, I see that the article Chagum has been deleted. Is there anything that I can do? Jocelin Andrea (talk) 13:41, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Jocelin Andrea, If it definitely is the same place, you can improve the Chagam article. It desperately needs a few sources to verify the content. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 14:20, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

1916 Election

I was wondering why the 1916 election page has two random US senators as running for president as opposed to Hughes and Wilson. I think someone might have mucked with the page because the table with the main details seems to be wrong? Connorhird (talk) 14:06, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

(1916 United States presidential election) Vandalism. Now reverted. Thanks for spotting and alerting. - X201 (talk) 14:21, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Does this rewritten draft meet the neutral POV requirement?

I first submitted this page and got a response saying it was rejected because it didn't meet the notability criteria. In trying to address that issue, I ended up making the page not have a neutral point of view. I then tried to fix the tonal problem but failed abysmally. The latest comment cites notability as an issue again, although commenters have said it does meet the notability criteria (academics). I've since gone over the guidelines with more attention and rewritten the article. I just wanted to make sure this is okay as I don't want to aggravate people even more by submitting something that's not good again.

Thank you for your help! Whatevergb (talk) 18:03, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Whatevergb, hello and welcome to the Teahouse, I see both Bkissin and Hoary both of whom are editors well versed in policy have accessed the article. I find it more helpful if you initiate a dialogue with either of them, they’d tell you what and where the problems are and if addressed they’d accept the article. Bringing this to the Teahouse is a good move but an even better approach is what I just said. Celestina007 (talk) 23:15, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Whatevergb, I wish that the draft said rather more about what was written in the reviews of his books, but this can be added later. The man seems notable and the description isn't promotional. If you submitted this again and I noticed the resubmission, I'd convert it to an article. -- Hoary (talk) 07:06, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@Celestina007 and @Hoary: Thank you so, so much! I'll get on it! Whatevergb (talk) 14:27, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Article improvement verification

Hello, I recently submitted a project that was accepted on ThrustMe. This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality scale. In the near future, I will try to improve this article. However, I might make some mistakes, especially on the neutral point of view aspect as I am related to the topic of this article. Is there a way to submit changes, like submitting a draft, to ensure that the changes do not conflict with wikipedia rules? Antoinebore (talk) 09:40, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Antoinebore. Another editor has left messages in a section of your talk page explaining the correct way to handle your conflict of interest: thanks for being upfront about this in relation to the article. Basically you need to follow the guidelines linked from those messages, which means only adding suggested new content (using the edit request template) on the Talk Page of the article (Talk:ThrustMe), giving specific details along the lines "please change X to Y" or "please add Z", with citations to relaible sources. Other experienced editors will check these requests and act on them. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:16, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Michael D. Turnbull, thanks for the clarification. I have another point I'm not sure about: should I also use the change request template for minor changes, such as grammar, spelling, writing style? Antoinebore (talk) 12:05, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@Antoinebore: Strictly speaking you should ask before making any change but if the change is "minor" in Wikipedia's rather narrow definition of that term (WP:Minor, which includes undoing vandalism of the article but not tone/grammar changes), I don't think anyone would object, especially if you again mention your COI in the edit summary. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:50, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

My first article

Could someone please look at my draft article and point out any glaring errors?

My hope is to add important detail on all the most influential Courtiers in the UK Royal Family.

Thank you! UKRoyalFan (talk) 14:08, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

I was surprised there wasn't already an article about Edward Lane Fox (there is currently a redirect to an article on the Royal households) as he is automatically notable as a holder of the Royal Victorian Order (a type of knighthood). Your draft is currently short but on the right lines, I think. Make sure you follow all the advice about biographies of living people and you should be fine, UKRoyalFan. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:03, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Mike Turnbull. I will do more work on it! UKRoyalFan (talk) 15:21, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

to publish the article

I have completed the edit, can I publish it? or should it be reviewed by any experienced contributors? if so, can someone help in reviewing it? LizKurian (talk) 13:29, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Assuming you mean the draft currently in your sandbox, you have not submitted it for review and I would caution against doing so until you have addressed many issues with it. You need to read the advice about writing articles very carefully. For example, direct external links in the body of the article are not allowed: they must be converted into citations. The WP:tone is currently far from encyclopaedic (too much "takes pride in" phrases which we call WP:peacock) and many of the references are bare URLs rather than proper citations for weblinks. Some of the references are unreliable (see WP:RSPS for a discussion: Youtube is rarely useful). You need to convince the reviewers (I am not one of them) that this person is notable in Wikipedia's somewhat strict sense. Apologies if all of this is disheartening but writing acceptable articles here is difficult for newcomers and you would be better trying to improve existing articles before you tackle that task, LizKurian. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:45, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Adding pages

Hi! Can I know if I can add pages without it being reverted? NataliaNutella1226 (talk) 21:44, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@NataliaNutella1226? hello and welcome to the Teahouse, it isn’t an anomaly for editors to make good faith edits and have it reverted if it appears not to be constructive, in order for you not make edits that don’t get reverted you have to familiarize yourself with some of our policies, practicing in your sandbox and “starting slowly”, such as correcting spelling errors. In time you would be able to make perfect edits that would not get reverted. You may want to see WP:TUTORIAL and WP:CTW. Celestina007 (talk) 22:05, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

More than 20 of your edits to Characters of the Marvel Cinematic Universe were reverted. You could ask on the reverting editors' Talk pages why. David notMD (talk) 02:31, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@NataliaNutella1226:, having a quick look, I think you've been over-linking. Generally it's best only to turn critical words here and there into wiki-links, the sorts of words that a reader is likely to find unclear, and for which they're likely to need additional explanation. For example, in a hypothetical film-character description "Tom, who suffers from extreme atelophobia, first appears in series 2 of 'The hideaways', before reappearing briefly in a cross-over episode in the 2019 prequel series, where he's played by James Smith", you might choose to put square brackets around 'atelophobia' on the grounds that an average reader might not know what it is, and it's presumably critical to Tom's role. You wouldn't put them round "Tom", "series 2", "cross-over", "prequel", or even "The hideaways"; you might put it round James Smith if he's a notable actor, but even in this case, you would do it only once, on the first instance of James' name in the article. You also wouldn't do it in any situation where it creates a red link (i.e. there is no Wikipedia article corresponding to the person or concept) unless you are utterly sure that there ought to be a Wikipedia article and you can envisage someone (yourself?) writing one in the very near future. Basically, if you just put square brackets round everything, you'll get reverted a lot. Elemimele (talk) 16:14, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Charles W Taylor Jr of Rice University is a Member of the Senior Executive Service of the United States, as documented on June 25, 1990. Where can his certificate be sent for verification?

I'm new to this site and I'm simply trying to add some content. I am a former Presidential Appointee of President George H.W. Bush. I became a member of the Senior Executive Service on June 25, 1990. How do I send verification of that? Charles W Taylor Jr (talk) 15:41, 29 July 2021 (UTC) 15:41, 29 July 2021 (UTC)Charles W Taylor Jr (talk) Office of Personnel Management (OPM)

You have asked this question at a number of locations, for instance see the replies here [10] Theroadislong (talk) 15:50, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Charles W Taylor Jr. Anyone can add content to Wikipedia but please don't do so on pages where you have a conflict of interest owing to your (former or current) occupation. No-one here is interested in verifying who you are: we assume good faith in our editors. Please familiarise yourself with how things work around here before you make major additions and especially before you try to create a new article. Some general advice is at H:INTRO and WP:YFA. Mike Turnbull (talk)

@Charles W Taylor Jr: Hello, welcome to the teahouse! To be added to that list you need to meet wikipedia's definition of a notable person and have had an article written about you (the two people on the list without articles have had their articles deleted but no-ones got around to cleaning up yet). Wikipedia articles are written on the basis of publicly available sources, like news reports, books and websites, we cannot use your personal documents as a reference. Finally please review our Conflict of interest policies - writing about yourself is very strongly discouraged. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 16:16, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Abuse of administrator rights in Ukrainian wikipedia

Hey, my account: "Пушинко" was block indefinitely on Ukrainian wikipedia by user:Yakudza because he decided that I used open proxies. However, I have never used them. The real reason I was blocked is that I started a discussion in local teahouse about abusing of checkuser rights by one of the checkusers of Ukrainian wikipedia. And right after seral hours I was blocked. That is a direct violation of Wikipedia rules. I demand truth and justice. Please review my case and my account and you will find I didn't do anything wrong. --Пушинко (talk) 16:04, 29 July 2021 (UTC) Пушинко (talk) 16:04, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@Пушинко: Hello, welcome to the teahouse! Each language project is completely independent, so unfortunately our administrators cannot help you with a block on the Ukrainian wikipedia. You will need to follow whatever instructions you were given on the Ukrainian wikipedia to appeal your block. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 16:10, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

thanks, but I wasn't given any instructions. I cannot edit my talk page or send emails. Can you advice me how I can appeal to global stewards ?--Пушинко (talk) 16:28, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@Пушинко: Yes, removing talk page access and email access at the same time does seem rather over the top. Perhaps try contacting an administrator through IRC or their social media sites to request access to your talk page? On most wikis you can also appeal to the Arbitration Committee, but I cannot see a contact email address on the Ukrainian wiki. The users that have administrative rights across most sites are called stewards, and requests can be made on the various Steward requests pages on meta, but they don't involve themselves with local blocks for the most part. Apologies if any of those links are wrong, I don't speak Ukrainian.

If you do have evidence that checkusers are misusing their tools then you'll want to get in contact with the Ombuds commission, who investigate these things. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 16:57, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Uplift, Inc Wikipedia Page

Hello, I have submitted a page to Wikipedia for Uplift (https://www.uplift.com) which was denied and swiftly deleted (my first time writing an article here and obviously have a lot to learn!) but now also see that a page request has also been made on behalf of the company as well. I just asked a question in my talk page and some of the feedback was COI related as I work at the company and also that some of the articles submitted as references may not be enough. Is there any way I can add more references or articles written about our company to support the page being created? Or do we need to just wait for initial feedback from the community editors and if not approved at that time - what can we do? We certainly don't want a page to "promote" our company, but just to exsist on Wikipedia as a credible one and acknowledge our existence as a company. Any suggestions or insights into how to best assist the cause and adhere/help the Wikipedia guidelines is appreciated! RachelAnderson72489 (talk) 16:37, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@RachelAnderson72489: Welcome to the Teahouse. The glaring issue here is references or articles written about our company to support the page being created. Reliable sources should be independent from the subject; that is, articles or other items that talk about the company significantly but isn't affiliated with them. If you can't find those I'm afraid you're out of luck.
Also, please disclose your paid relationship with Uplift on your user page, User:RachelAnderson72489. You may use the {{paid}} template to do so. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:21, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

pinging

I've noticed that if I go back and edit a comment and include something that would normally ping a user it doesn't notify me that the user was pinged. Why is that? Do I have to include four tildes for a ping to go through? TipsyElephant (talk) 17:31, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@TipsyElephant: Hello, welcome to the teahouse. You are correct - the ping templates will only send people a notification if your comment includes a signature. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 17:34, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Also the signature and the template have to be added in the same edit, it doesn't work properly if you go back and add a ping template to an already signed comment. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 17:35, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

WP:PINGFIX has some info. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:37, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Need help with the tone of an article

 Courtesy link: Draft:Michael Adams
My first article, on Michael Adams (lawyer) was rejected as not having an encyclopedic tone. I tried to copy the tone in similar articles and would welcome some suggestions or specific feedback on sentences that need to be rewritten or other improvements I can make. Thank you! Hudson165. Hudson165 (talk) 16:52, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@Hudson165: I just fixed a lot of the glaring syntax errors. You say you copied other articles for tone, but somehow you missed that none of the articles use the big syntax to enlarge the entire article. Also, you don't need to bold the section titles - the title code does that automatically. That was the easy part. The hard part will be fixing the tone. You should read WP:COI since it's obvious you know the subject, if you aren't him yourself. Unsourced statements like Adams was instrumental in highlighting the organization’s emphasis on policy advocacy and promoting legislation that promote the ability of LGBT+ adults to age with dignity and respect. and He was extremely successful at attracting government and private support for SAGE’s programs; the organization’s budget has increased ten-fold under Adams’ leadership. aren't encyclopedic. Neither are Under his leadership, SAGE has undertaken a multi-year project to embed racial equity in its external work and within the organization as part of a long-term commitment to build racial equity and contribute to the dismantling of white supremacy. or Adams also has a strong interest in international issues. That's just for starters. After dealing with the mandatory COI disclosure, you need to forget everything you know about him, and instead only paraphrase and summarize what independent third party sources say about him. If it can't be sourced, don't write it. You could also check out Help:Your first article for more general info. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 18:54, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

How to create subcategory page

Hello, I would like to create a subcategory page "Agriculture ministers of Malawi" to Category:Government_ministers_of_Malawi, but I can't find a good guide anywhere as to how. Thanks in advance! DirkJandeGeer (talk) 20:08, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@DirkJandeGeer, Help:Category has basic info. Pretty much all you need to do to create a subcategory is create a category page and then categorize the page itself under the parent category. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 20:48, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

reliable sources

I have prepared an article about International Society for Porous Media (InterPore.org). The submission has been rejected because "it is not adequately supported by reliable sources." The references used in my article are given below. It is not clear to me why these are not reliable, and how I should improve them. It'd be great if anyone can help me in this regard.

https://www.interpore.org/news/
https://www.interpore.org/activities/institutional-members
https://www.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/en/
https://www.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/en/institute/team/Helmig-00008/
https://www.interpore.org/activities/national-chapters
https://www.interpore.org/activities/institutional-members
https://www.interpore.org/interpore-foundation Smhfba (talk) 20:40, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:International Society for Porous Media  Courtesy link: Draft:International Society for Porous Media (InterPore) Two submissions with slightly different names. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 20:46, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@Smhfba: You need to find sources that are not connected to the subject. See WP:RS. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 20:47, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@Smhfba: Hello, welcome to the teahouse! The issue isn't that these sources aren't reliable, the issue is that they aren't independent of the society (The declining reviewer used the wrong message there, they should have used the one that says the sources do not demonstrate that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article). The test for whether something has sufficient Notability to qualify for an article is "Has the subject of the article received substantial coverage in multiple, independent, reliable sources?" Have a read of WP:GNG. All of these websites are either by the society, or are from a university associated with the society. Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of the article says about themselves, Wikipedia articles are written on the basis of what people with no connection to the subject have chosen to write. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 20:55, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

James C. McWilliams: odd formatting now

I was working on James C. McWilliams to clean up issues that were flagged on the page, but I am now confused by a change made by an IP address. The format of the citations is somewhat odd as everything has been changed to a list of DOIs and none of the links are 'clickable' within the body of the text. I am not sure what the protocol is, nor am I clear why this was done as it does not seem like a common Wikipedia format. Any thoughts would be appreciated. --DaffodilOcean (talk) 00:48, 30 July 2021 (UTC) DaffodilOcean (talk) 00:48, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

DaffodilOcean, it looks to me that an inexperienced editor with a little knowledge of Wikipedia and a lot of knowledge of McWilliams tried to edit his article. I reverted that edit and left the IP a message.--Quisqualis (talk) 05:24, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Question about an article declined

 Courtesy link: Draft:Praise Matemavi
I wrote an article about Dr. Praise Matemavi the first female Zimbabwean transplant surgeon which was denied despite me having a lot of references and citations. This article is very similar to others in the same category, therefore I do not see why it was denied. I don't know if there is bias of some sort there but I wanted to get another opinion and what I can do to improve it. The first African woman to be trained in a challenging discipline of liver, small bowel, pancreas and kidney transplant as well as hepatobiliary surgery I think is notable for a page. Thank you for your help. Fadzi02 (talk) 02:08, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

African born, but practicing in the U.S., which reduces notability. David notMD (talk) 03:53, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

@Fadzi02: There are too many poor sources in there, mostly university publications (institutions that have some connection to the subject, and are therefore not independent). See Wikipedia:Golden rule for an overview of what is required. What three sources in that list do you consider the most significant and reliable? ~Anachronist (talk) 06:39, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

@David notMD: Thank you very much. That makes sense to me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fadzi02 (talk • contribs)

How to "find" vandalism?

I know this question sounds wrong but where do vandalism reverters find vandalism? Excellenc1📞 03:24, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Vandalism#How_to_spot_vandalism Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:31, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Excellenc1. I recommend adding every article that interests you to your watchlist, and check your watchlist frequently. Learn who the productive experienced editors are in the topic areas you follow, and ignore their edits because the risk of vandalism is low. Learn to look for something suspicious in edit summaries. For example, sometimes you will see an edit summary that says, "Fix typo" and you see that the edit added a lot of characters. View the diff. It might be vandalism with a lying edit summary. Not all IP editors are vandals, and not all redlinked accounts are vandals. But the likelihood of vandalism is increased somewhat, so it is reasonable to view the diffs if you have the time. Do not be quick to conclude "vandalism!" because an incorrect edit made in good faith is not vandalism. As time goes by, experience will inform your "spidey sense" or your ability to detect something that "looks fishy". Look into those edits, revert when necessary, warn when appropriate, and report to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism when the problem is repeated and ongoing. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:58, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Help creating an article

I am trying to create a wikipedia page for my company. I had submitted an article but was declined. I need to know what can be improved and what else is required for an article to be accepted. Would require help for the same. Analytics 123 (talk) 06:45, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

If you're referring to Draft:Unomer, it comes across as a marketing web page. It doesn't explain why the company would be considered notable, it's full of lists of inline external links that violate the WP:NOTDIRECTORY policy, it has no inline citations except to a couple of LinkedIn profiles. It gives a strong impression that you are attempting to use Wikipedia as a publicity platform (violating WP:NOTPROMOTION policy) rather than conveying content about a notable topic.

Please read Wikipedia:Golden rule to get an idea of what is expected. ~Anachronist (talk) 06:58, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Analytics 123, your draft includes these two unreferenced sentences, Unomer helps the market researchers, brand managers and consumer insight leaders to reach the tough segment through the right targeting. Creating surveys that are interactive, these are then distributed with our app partners who embed the same as an advertisement or banner on their UI or channel. That passage violates all three of Wikipedia's core content policies, Verifiability, the Neutral picture of view, and No original research. This is the exact opposite of good encyclopedia article writing. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:25, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

If you are writing about your company, you need to read about conflict of interest, and make the mandatory declaration of paid editing. --David Biddulph (talk) 07:29, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

What are reliable sources?

I have read WP:RS many a times, but each time I fail to understand what exactly reliable sources are. As of now, I consider notable and self-published sources reliable (although that might be false). Can someone brief it up (probably with examples too)? Excellenc1📞 17:13, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@Excellenc1 Notable does not necessarily mean reliable, OpIndia and Facebook are notable, but generally unreliable. WP:SPS can be useful in very limited circumstances. At WP:RSP you can find a long list of potential sources and the on-WP current view on them (like everything else around here, it may change). There's even a fr-WP version. Scroll through that, it may give you an idea. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:35, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@Excellenc1: A good rule of thumb for determining the reliability of a source is to apply a three-prong test: Does the source discuss the subject at length? Is the source independent of the subject and their direct surrogates? Does the outlet have a competent editor in chief or someone who fills an equivalent role in fact-checking, disclosure, and retractions? If the answer to any of them is "no", assume the given source isn't reliable for the purpose you want to use it for. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 19:22, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Discussion of a subject at length relates to determining notability rather than reliability. Reliable sources that are very brief can reliably support portions of an articles content. Gab4gab (talk) 20:36, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Absolutely. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:41, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Requesting to change the title of an existing page

What is the procedure to change the title of an existing Wikipedia page if it can confuse the readers of another page that has the same name? Case in point, The Wikipedia page of Sega's The Dreamcast gaming console, which has a direct name conflict with 'Dreamcast', a Virtual Events Platform based in India. Kindly let me know how to go about doing it, as there is no 'Move' functionality on the page, & efforts to rename the title & the inside text of the page have been disapproved. DCFrontlines (talk) 08:20, 30 July 2021 (UTC) DCFrontlines (talk) 08:20, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

You can use a hat note to direct readers to the other article (assuming it actually exists). Example: {{About|USE1||PAGE2}} would appear as follows:

This page is about USE1. For other uses, see PAGE2.

See Wikipedia:Hatnote. Zudo (talk) 08:25, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

If an article about the other subject is produced (perhaps by getting a draft approved), the disambiguation can be handled at that time. The reason that you can't see the move functionality is that your account is not autoconfirmed, so you don't have the experience to perform a move. --David Biddulph (talk) 08:31, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Questions for Removing the Caution on the top of Our Wiki-page

1. I want to know what is the "subject" in the Phase "A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject. (August 2012)" and how to improve it and remove the caution? (from RIB_Software)

2. I wonder what would happen if the article contained a lot of buzzwords? How do I remove this warning？ （This article appears to contain a large number of buzzwords. (January 2018) from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RIB_Software） 103.99.75.85 (talk) 06:40, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

The statement means that a company representative, or otherwise someone with a conflict of interest, has made substantive edits to the article. The article should be cleaned up to remove promotional content and buzzwords before the tag is removed. If the article comes across as a company brochure, with details that aren't relevant to readers, then it needs cleaning up. ~Anachronist (talk) 06:52, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

That article actually says "RIB's iTWO is a cloud-based Big Data BIM 5D enterprise solution" which may be the most vapid string of obfuscating jargon that I have seen in a long time. Whoever writes in that fashion has absolutely no idea how to write a neutral encyclopedia article, which would explain that gobbledygook if it actually means anything. It must have been written by a paid junior PR person of some type. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:16, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

The article was created in 2013 by an editor who did no other successful editing, then at times expanded by three other editors who only edited this article. And now an IP ask about why there is a tag "...on the top of Our Wiki-page." So, the answer is because multiple editors of this article are suspected of having a close connection to the subject, probably paid, but none ever declared their connection. David notMD (talk) 10:22, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Furthermore, the crucial part of the article - what RIB Software does - has no references. All the refs are for history and financial dealings. Notability has not been established. David notMD (talk) 10:28, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Attempting to resolve an edit war in the Criticism section of Democracy Now! over "poor sourcing"

I've made it practice to watch certain pages which seem to be subject to frequent controversy, but as a relatively new editor (less than 500 edits), I'm unsure how to respond to an edit war, given that I don't want to join in and get banned, and given that I can't actually tell which side is right. I'm also unsure what counts as a reliable source and a neutral point of view. Talib1101 (talk) 01:34, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

To clarify, this is a request for third opinions. Talib1101 (talk) 01:37, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Talib1101. Like many articles on American politics, debates can get pretty heated and you are wise not to engage unless familiar with Wikipedia policies. If you "can't tell which side is right", that's probably because the editors in question have a difference of opinion, not of fact. Talk Pages are supposed to be used to discuss how to improve an article but sometimes editors forget to assume good faith and end up making personal attacks: which you certainly should not engage in. Take some time to read about reliable sources we often use and about the sort of neutral writing style that works well here. Happy editing..... Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:38, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Sandbox

Would anything bad happen if I edited a lot in my sandbox?  WinnipegMA (talk) 01:17, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

WinnipegMA, your sandbox is your own area to work in. Within reason, nothing bad should result from you editing your own sandbox. See WP:SANDBOX.--Quisqualis (talk) 04:18, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

I think that Quisqualis directed you to the wrong Help page: H:SANDBOX is where the general principles are laid out, WinnipegMA. One of the main things to avoid is never to place copyrighted material (e.g. copy/pasted from some external website) into a sandbox. I find that I can "preview" my writing in the sandbox to see how the Wiki markup stuff will look when saved/published but actually I rarely do so: I often copy what I've written back out to my local PC for later work. Remember that whatever you do "publish/save" will be there for anyone to see: although most people don't poke around in others' sandboxes! Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:48, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

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

Hello, I started editing this page in the Encyclopedia section and then ran into a ton of questions about the correct way to list reference works in a bibliographical format. So I did some research and it seems there are several ways to cite bibliographical style. The problem is that on this page, it is just a list of reference material, which are never authored but are compendiums of contributed entries or articles. The citations people are using, however, are citations used as if they were authored. So I did some more research and found that the way reference works should be listed in their entirety is by title first as if on a 'List of Works' in a research paper. I refer you to 2 of the more popular styles of citation to support this: https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/16/bib3.html and a sample paper for the MLA style (scroll down to List of Works page for an example) - https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/research_and_citation/mla_style/mla_formatting_and_style_guide/mla_sample_paper.html ... I am going to endeavor to rectify the listings as I can in the Chicago-style format and will also try to cite my research properly. Just giving you a heads up that this is why I am changing much of the page and you may want to check my work in case my inexperience causes errors. If you have reason for me not to do this, please let me know. Thank you. StarRider33 (talk) 00:43, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, StarRider33. That big list article has been around since 2012 and given its scope it isn't surprising that the citations have become a bit of a mess: thanks for wanting to help clean things up. Note that our policy on citation styles says that editors should prefer consistency over any one style (and usually stick to what the originator of the article did). That's clearly impractical for this particular article but working towards one of our standard styles there is fine. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:00, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Inbox recovery

My inbox has disappeared again, not generally a bad thing when guest posting, but in this case I was in the middle of a conversation. Is there a way I can recover it on my own or do I need to seek assistance from a mod? I tried ctrl+f for recover, restore, undelete, etc. but found no matches, even hit the "check the deletion log" button after hitting the talk button that takes you to your inbox while active and it just said "No matching items in log", any assistance would be helpful, thanks. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:2CC6:D432:1C1A:FA7 (talk) 02:10, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. The most likely reason is that your IP address changed, and all the messages are on the talk page of the previous IP used. I would register for an account if you're expecting to carry a conversation with someone for a long period of time. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:32, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

I guess that makes sense. But the nice thing about guest posting is that I can just go back to lurking whenever I want and no one will bother me over it, and let's be real here I've already given my e-mail address to too many sites, and the last thing I need is another source of spam, thanks for explaining things anyway though. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:50F9:F2:32EE:A4 (talk) 02:54, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

You don't need an email to create an account on here, though it does give you the option of recovering your password in the event that you lose it. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 03:01, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

I have been an active editor for 12 years and an administrator for four years, with an active email link. I get Wiikpedia related emails infrequently, and have never once received any Wikipedia-related spam. I am easy to communicate with right here on Wikipedia. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:38, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Well that's good to know. I'm going to be busy for a few weeks here, but when I have time again I may give it a try. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:6D47:E399:D0D4:5571 (talk) 12:09, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Need help editing a Wikipedia Biography submission

Hello, my submission was declined for not showing significant coverage about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject, and for not having a formal detached tone. I have workshopped my submission on a google doc that I can link. I would really appreciate any advice or help in editing. VidishaAgarwalla (talk) 17:16, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@VidishaAgarwalla, is this about Draft:Assaf Biderman? Then improve that draft with new text/sources. One thing you should do is to remove all the WP:External links from the article text. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:24, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@VidishaAgarwalla, I think many of your in-body external links could be converted to in-line citations supporting your text. Gab4gab (talk) 20:32, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@Gab4gab @VidishaAgarwalla Done via User:Novem Linguae/Scripts/DraftCleaner.js and User:BrandonXLF/ReferenceExpander. ―Qwerfjkltalk 12:25, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Help! The dark mode is misbehaving!

I can't turn off the dark mode in the preferences, and I also read the special page: Wikipedia:Preferences, and even THAT didn't work. What should I do? Please consider my situation. Sparklestern (talk) 00:17, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

@Sparklestern Have you tried running the page on safemode? If it is still on dark mode, then this is probably a browser issue. ―Qwerfjkltalk 12:29, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Sethji (Zee TV)

FYI

 – Title added by Qwerfjkl (talk) 12:34, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

I have made some changes in the credits on the page of Sethji (Zee TV). Those changes are not being displayed. What is the procedure for accepting edit changes by Wikipedia?

 49.36.121.119 (talk) 02:51, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Here's the edit you made: [11]. One of the changes is visable. The other is hidden because the infobox does not have a field called "Concept". RudolfRed (talk) 03:01, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Edits on the Page Tim Southee

Hi Wikipedians, I have recently edited Cricketer Tim Southee's article and have added info on his performances in the Cricket world cup 2019. I would like someone to check them and let me know if anything needs to be done. Thanks in advance!!!! Jocelin Andrea (talk) 13:15, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Rosa Glaser Reliable Sources/References

The article I have written was not yet accepted because it was said that there were not sufficient reliable sources and references added to the article. It is the first time I try to publish an article on the English Wiki. I do not understand why the mentioned sources are not reliable. You may check them out. I have published this article on the Dutch Wikipedia and it has been published in Wiki. See Dutch Wiki article Rosa Glaser In that Dutch Wiki I haven mentioned a lot of Dutch sources. ( after the story of Rosa Glaser origines in the Netherlands and Germany) If it might be helpful I will add these Dutch sources also to the English sources and references. There ar also a lot of German sources and references available. In adition I mention that a Dutch Memorial Museum of the concentration camp Vught has investigated the story and made an exhibition of it that have been shown in several Dutch cities and is touring right now in German cities. That museum also added in their museum the story of Rosa Glaser. I don't know how to proceed and what to do, so Please will you help me? Thank you very much Doberran (talk) 10:43, 28 July 2021 (UTC) Doberran (talk) 10:43, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Doberran A few points, in no particular order: You need to master the art of inline citations, WP:TUTORIAL/Help:Referencing for beginners can be of help with that. This is essential. Use "Glaser" throughout the article, not "Roosje", it's how we do it. Encyclopedic tone tends towards distant, dry, dusty and bland. Text like "Roosje grew into an emancipated woman who defied conventions with flair. ... She lost the love of her life in 1936, found consolation in the arms of another and married Leo; the wrong man." should be, well, less poetic. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:34, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Link: Draft:Roosje Glaser. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:36, 28 July 2021

(UTC)

Dear Gråbergs Gråa Sång,

Thank you very much for your help and advices. In the coming week I will improve the article and specially learn how to use References. As soon as I think de draft is ready for publishing I will let you know. Have a nice day and greetings from the Netherlands, Doberran (talk) 13:29, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Article got declined - Please Help

Hi, I need suggestion on an article which got declined, I tried to fix but not working. Please help me by suggesting what to correct on this article. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Reetha_Ramudoo

Q : Is the article getting declined because of adding movie title links on Career ?
Q : I have added a reference link of e-newspaper, Is e-newspaper aren't acceptable ?

Thanks & Regards KeechB (talk) 12:24, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, KeechB, and welcome to the Teahouse. 1. It's reasonable to Wikilink to articles about a person's works; but you give no reference to support the claim that she was involved in those films, and our articles about them do not mention her. Unless you can find a reliably published source for her connection with those movies, then don't mention them in the article about her. And, though it's not a reason for declining the draft, it would be better if it said what her role was in those films, rather than the vague "launched" - I'm guessing from the previous paragraph that what you mean is that her company distributed them in Malaysia, and I don't see why that is encyclopaedic: thousands of films get distributed in hundreds of countries by thousands of companies: so what? 2. there's nothing necessarily wrong with an e-newspaper. There are three requirements for a source to contribute to establishing notability first, that it be reliably published - it doesn't matter what media, whether online or not, what language; but is it published by someone with a reputation for fact-checking and editorial control? Secondly, is it independent of the subject? The Deccan Chronicle citations are merely reporting her words, and so are not independent of her. Non-independent sources can be used for certain limited purpose (see WP:SPS) but do not contribute to establishing notability. And third, they must contain significant coverage of the subject. Sources with passing mentions may be used for supporting specific statements in an article, but do not contribute to establishing notability.

I notice that your five citations are actually to only two sources: the first two are the same article, which is mostly an interview; the other three are all to the same short article, which is pretty clearly based on a press release.

Creating an article is one of the most difficult tasks there is for an experienced editor: I liken it to starting work as a builder's apprentice and trying to build a house on your first day. What makes it so difficult is the bits that ordinary people don't see: in this case, finding the sources. If you don't survey the ground and build your foundations before you start building your house, it will probably fall down and your work will be wasted. If you don't find the reliable, independent sources before you start writing, your draft will probably not be accepted and your work will be wasted.

I suggest you find three articles, published in reliable sources, where people unconnected with her have written about her at some length, and write your draft around these. --ColinFine (talk) 15:38, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

About Veronika Matyunina

Hello, I'm Adam Daniel. <redacted> I'm from Malaysia. I would like to tell you something about Veronika Matyunina:

Do you know that Veronika Matyunina is a Ukrainian table tennis player and athlete, and I like her very much. I actually created Wikipedia pages about her in other languages following Ukrainian, and I even have created the page about her in the Chinese and Simple English Wikipedia. For the page titled Veronika Matyunina, in the English Wikipedia, could you please let it be published and be clear and same as the Ukrainian Wikipedia page Матюніна Вероніка in a very short time and it's not more than a month? I like her very much. I'm even going to create pages in other languages about her. She is only 15 years old. <redacted>

Thank you Adamdaniel864 (talk) 07:01, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Adamdaniel864, do you have a question about editing that wasn't answered in your earlier thread Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_1118#Creation_of_the_page_Veronika_Matyunina_and_admitting_it_into_the_English_Wikipedia_as_a_page? If so, please ask it. Meanwhile, most of us like this or that person very much, but I neither presume that you'd be interested in who it is that I like nor expect that an article will materialize about a person because I like her. -- Hoary (talk) 07:08, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

You need to read the answer to your previous question at WP:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1118#Creation of the page Veronika Matyunina and admitting it into the English Wikipedia as a page, add the necessary references, and submit the draft for review. Note also that there is no deadline. --David Biddulph (talk) 07:11, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy: Draft:Veronika Matyunina, no references, not submitted to AfC. David notMD (talk) 15:44, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Disneyland

I currently working on Draft:List of media based on Disney theme-park attractions and looking for anyone who can help Finnish it of P+T 92.236.253.249 (talk) 14:17, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

P&T?--Shantavira|^{feed me} 16:12, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Please and thanks 92.236.253.249 (talk) 16:47, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Requesting updates to law firm page

Hello! I'm an employee of Thompson Coburn LLP and would love the assistance of Wikipedia editors in making a few updates to our page. In July 2021 we opened a new office in New York. Reuters news story 1) Could the info box at the top be changed to "7" offices? 2) In the first sentence, could New York be added to the list of offices and the total headcount be changed to "more than 400" (Source: https://www.law.com/newyorklawjournal/2021/06/23/new-york-firm-and-thompson-coburn-to-merge-eyeing-benefits-of-scale/?slreturn=20210630104006) Thank you! Allison Spencecomms (talk) 14:42, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Spencecomms Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Please make this request on the article talk page, Talk:Thompson Coburn, in the form of an edit request(click for instructions). 331dot (talk) 15:09, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Spencecomms thank you for doing things properly, and declaring your conflict of interest, and for transferring the requested edit to the talk page of the article. I have made the edit as it seemed uncontroversial and it is best that WP is accurate. Nevertheless, the reference you've used is in a source that's not ideally accessible to an every-day reader (requires registering to a site that permits only one article-read per month). If you have a better reference, it would no doubt be appreciated. Elemimele (talk) 17:24, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Elemimele Thank you very much for your assistance. Here is another reference that I believe should be accessible to all readers that also has the "more than 400" attorneys information, if you'd like to sub it in. Thank you again! Spencecomms (talk) 17:40, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

References

Reverting my Contributions

This article in Wikipedia was poorly written : Front-end web development, So I myself who is a Front-end developer added some information to the page which makes it clear that what exactly is Front-end web development, also I added an Roadmap image which is my own property which gives a clear idea about front end development. Now a user named MrOllie started reverting my contribution and he is doing this from last two days. I warned him many for not repeating that but keeps on reverting my changes and instead he warned me back. I checked his talk page and found out that he has been doing all this with a lot of people without giving proper reasons. Please help and take a look at this matter its very annoying as he keep on repeating this behavior. Thank You Hacker8679 (talk) 12:50, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Hacker8679, please read WP:BRD. You boldly made an edit, and another editor reverted it. You should then have discussed it on the article's talk page. Instead you engaged in an edit was with two other editors, were warned for edit-warring, continued to edit-war, and got yourself blocked for a week. Maproom (talk) 15:05, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Count is now three editors who have reverted you, and one (MrOllie) who has initiated a discussion on the Talk page. Go there. David notMD (talk) 17:46, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Why is Wikipedia like this?

Articles with no citations exist on Wikipedia but a draft with 13 (previously 11) citations gets declined for unreliability. If I had not followed the AfC procedure, this draft would have been an article much before, without being deleted (I have seen many articles without proper citations, or citing just one source over and over). Why is this so? (P.S.: Sorry if I am shouting)  Excellenc1📞 04:44, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Because drafting didn't exist until 2011 and was not made a requirement until 2018. Our standards and enforcement thereof have only toughened over the years. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 04:59, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Jéské Couriano, can you please provide a link to the "requirement" to use draft space? I write new articles fairly often and have never once used draft space. I work in my own sandbox subpages and move the articles to main space when I think they are well-referenced and ready. And not a single one of the 104 articles I have written has been deleted. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:55, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

@Cullen328: There is no such requirement that I know of. The closest thing we have that comes to a "requirement" is WP:COI, which recommends that editors with a conflict of interest submit their drafts via WP:AFC, and that implies the use of draft space, but a personal sandbox or a user sub-page can be used also. In fact, AFC is really the only actual venue Wikipedia offers for editors with a COI to get something published here. Experienced editors like you and me write articles directly in main space, although I have put things in draft space from time to time when I can't improve something further and I think it's a notable topic but my draft isn't yet ready for prime time, Draft:Mark Cheverton being one example.

For new editors, I highly recommend they draft new articles anywhere but main article space, because they can take their time learning how to do things without worrying about someone coming along and deleting it. It's strongly recommended, but not a requirement. ~Anachronist (talk) 06:46, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Anachronist. Are you saying that when Jéské Couriano wrote and was not made a requirement until 2018, Jéské Couriano didn't say there was a requirement imposed in 2018? That is hard to understand. As for writing articles directly in main space, I have never done that. I write articles in my sandbox space until I am completely confident that I have a well-referenced, halfway decent article, and then I move it to main space, open to any good faith editor to improve. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:09, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

I think we had an edit conflict, where I replaced the assertion to which you just responded. Anyway, yes, I've done the same thing starting from my sandbox, but for some articles I have found myself using "Preview" as my sandbox while writing an article in main space. I recall once it took me most of a day to get an article written, and it was all done by previewing it until I was satisfied that it was worthy of publication. For others, I'll preview it until I have a satisfactory deletion-proof stub, and then expand it. ~Anachronist (talk) 07:23, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Excellenc1, if you are shouting, then you are doing so in a very reasonable and civilized way. Simply, Wikipedia encompasses a huge amount of junk. Of course, this has all been perpetrated by people who are less informed, lazier or stupider than editors like myself -- except that from time to time it has been perpetrated by me, personally, as TheTechnician27 recently pointed out to my considerable embarrassment. I thereupon improved it, but it's still pretty bad. Here's one (not by me) that I happened to encounter just today: Tulane University School of Liberal Arts, which, effectively, is a portrait of this School by the School itself. My gut response is to send hundreds or thousands of such things to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, and let those who think the articles could be worthwhile do the work that somebody should have done in the first place: referencing. But most annoyingly, it's instead the job of the would-be nominator to look for sources. No offence intended to the Tulane University School of Liberal Arts, but it's not a subject that interests me enough for me to want to poll Duckduckgo for reliable sources. And so I just ignore such stuff (usually). -- Hoary (talk) 07:02, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Another factor is that new articles created in main-space by "normal" editors are "patrolled"; they are flagged automatically, and checked by special editors who can assess them. Long-term editors may be declared "auto-patrolled", which means their articles are automatically tagged as checked/approved without anyone actually doing any checking or approving. The checking process means that a new article is subject to more scrutiny than an article that has been lingering here for a decade, and which can slip under the radar. On discovering a badly-referenced article, some editors might nominate it for deletion, but others might feel the basic text is (probably) correct, and well-written, in which case they're more likely to decorate it with {{cn}} tags and hope someone (else) does the work of finding some references ("cn" stands for "citation needed"). Personally, I'm a novice editor who's created two articles directly in main-space, both translations from German WP with additions, and I did it that way because I didn't know about the draft system; I'd probably do it again if I'm fairly confident the article's alright, because I've heard horror stories of AfC articles getting no attention for 18 months, while both of the articles I wrote were patrolled in a very helpful and constructive way within 24 hours. But yes, main-space is a place where failure to reference is likely to be jumped on, and new articles more so than old! Elemimele (talk) 09:24, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Excellenc1, because not many editors (myself included) are willing to fight their way through thousands and thousands and thousands of pages of dross making the effort to look for sources to improve them or delete them. --ColinFine (talk) 15:12, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

So in a nutshell:

• Old articles tend to lack citations as the draft system wasn't there to approve them (Jéské Couriano's answer).
• Not all old articles, many users checked themselves and that was apt. Cullen328's response.)
• There are many drops of ink in this ocean and they are very slowly cleaned. (Elemimele, Hoary and ColinFine's answer).

(Sorry if I am not supposed to call you directly by your username but instead add a title before (like user, editor, Mr./Ms./Mrs. etc.) and I also apologize if my interpretation is wrong.) Excellenc1📞 17:13, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

@Excellenc1: It's not just that the draft system didn't exist, the policies that govern how articles are written didn't exist either. WP:What Wikipedia is not wasn't created until late 2001, nearly a year after the project started. WP:Verifiability, the requirement that articles be sourced, was first drafted in 2003. WP:BLP wasn't created untill 2005, in response to the Seigenthaler biography incident. WP:Notability wasn't written down as a policy until 2006. Even when these were written down we didn't get serious about enforcing them until about 2010 ish. There were literally millions of pages that were created in the early 2000's that would not be accepted today, but with 6 million articles and only a few thousand active editors it is going to take decades to clean up everything - bear in mind that not every unsourced stub needs deletion - a lot of them are about notable subjects but are just terribly written. WP:WikiProject Sweep is currently trying to organise a task force to sort through a load of these early pages. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 17:45, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

And calling people by their username is normal, Excellenc1. I would say it's quite unusual to use titles and honorifics in online forums in English, except perhaps by people from India. --ColinFine (talk) 19:12, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

AfD discussions

Is there a guideline, policy, or even an essay discouraging an AfD nominator from responding to other editors in the deletion discussion? I've come across multiple instances where I've been told it looks really bad, but in almost all cases the user in question has been previously flagged for a policy or guideline violation or their account is relatively new. I've read through a few policies and guidelines relevant to AfDs but I can't find anything discouraging this kind of discussion. Once or twice I've had editors claim I'm not following WP:CIVILITY guidelines, but I'm asking specifically about whether making comments in an AfD after the nomination is bad or not. TipsyElephant (talk) 16:27, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

@TipsyElephant: At WP:AFD it says "Nomination already implies that the nominator recommends deletion (unless indicated otherwise), and nominators should refrain from repeating this." RudolfRed (talk) 16:38, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

@TipsyElephant: I'm not sure if this applies to what your asking, but it might also be worth having a read of WP:BLUDGEON. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 16:46, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you RudolfRed and 192.76.8.91. I'll keep these in mind. If an editor brings up a point I hadn't considered but still believe is faulty is it appropriate to edit my original rationale? TipsyElephant (talk) 16:55, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

@TipsyElephant: You can add additional stuff to the deletion rationale, but it should be done in a way that it is clear to anyone reading the discussion that it was added after the discussion was started, for example you might add an additional comment underneath the nomination. You shouldn't change the original statement after other people have responded to it as it makes their comments meaningless or difficult to follow. If you do need to correct an error in the nom statement you should strike out the mistake with <s></s> tags, rather than deleting it. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 17:01, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

TipsyElephant, do not edit your original rationale except to strike out errors. If another editor asks you a question, answer it. If another editor make a good point, concede the point. If another editor is wrong factually, gently point that out. But it is bad form for an AfD nominator to try to refute every "Keep" opinion. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:03, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Just as User:Cullen328 has said. But also be aware that people who don't want to discuss and merely want to drive-by "vote", will often try to use BLUDGEON to try to prevent having to support their assertion. AfD is a discussion page, not a voting page. But in all, be Civil, and be prudent. as the others said, and try to WP:AGF as much as you can. And be prepared to explain and discuss should you be asked to as well. I hope this helps : ) - jc37 19:25, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Need help with Tone

Moved from Wikipedia talk:Teahouse § Need help with Tone

 – —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:25, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Amir Ghavidel
Hello. I have submitted my draft for Amir Ghavidel for quite some time, and it has been reworked many times. It got rejected again today for having a praising tone for the subject. And I know that my close relationship with the subject does not help it either. So, I butchered the article again and cut many parts. The way I read it, I am not talking up the subject after these new changes.

I would appreciate it if anyone can take a look at it, so I won't take my and anyone else's time on this. It won't take much of your time with its humble 3 paragraphs.

Thanks Wikipedia community.Ngm 7 (talk) 17:22, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

To be specific, today's action was a Declined (4th), not a Rejection. David notMD (talk) 17:49, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

@David notMD: Thank you for the correction. I'm not quite familiar with the lingo.Ngm 7 (talk) 17:54, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Rejection more severe/final. I did a bit of clean-up toward neutral tone. Are their any potential sources other than IBDb to confirm his accomplishments as film director, screenwriter, etc.? David notMD (talk) 18:00, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

@David notMD: That's very kind of you. Thank you. For the Iranian Cinema, it is mainly the Iranian Movie Database which has been listed as reference. There are other articles as well (some referenced) but mostly in the Persian language. This one is on BBC for example: https://www.bbc.com/persian/iran/2009/11/091110_na_pj_ghavidel_cinema Ngm 7 (talk) 18:08, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

@David notMD: On the last BBC link, it says and I'm merely translating (not promoting) "Even though Ghavidel's name was not mentioned a lot in the artistic cinema of Iran, but his power of filmmaking is undeniable, and the fact that he made a film such as "Sardar-e Jangal" demonstrates his dominance and skill in directing large-scale cinematic projects". I didn't cite it, cause the writer of the article has a praising tone. Ngm 7 (talk) 18:14, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Ngm 7. It's fine to quote a favorable evaluation of the subject as long as 1) you make it clear that it is a quotation, and cite the source; 2) the source is genuinely independent of the subject (not a colleague or an employer, for example) and 3) if there are equally prominent independent sources that are negative, you cite them as well. (You don't necessarily need to quote them, but should make clear that there are other views than the one you quoted). --ColinFine (talk) 18:58, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you ColinFine. I will keep that in mind.Ngm 7 (talk) 19:27, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

What's the correct procedure for minor CoI changes that cannot be referenced properly because they're too minor to interest secondary sources?

This is something that happens quite a lot, I think: we have an article on a clearly notable company or institution, which says it has three divisions and 2400 staff, referenced to something sensible. Then it restructures itself into four divisions and ends up with 2250 staff. Even the local newspapers are more excited about a newly-discovered cannabis farm in someone's attic than a rather dull internal restructuring of the national institute for mushroom research, so the change goes unreported. Up pops an employee, declaring their CoI, and in possession of a press-release confirming the change. What do we do? If we don't accept edits like this, on the reasonable grounds that the proposer has a conflict of interest and the reference isn't independent, then we end up with an inaccurate article. But if we do, we're accepting double-standards on references and edits. What's the right thing to do? Elemimele (talk) 17:43, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

I think this is a matter of SPSs, Elemimele. While the number of employees could be controversial, in most cases it is not, and we can accept eg their own website, including a press-release that they've put up on their website. If it's never been published anywhere, that's a different matter, though. --ColinFine (talk) 19:01, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, ColinFine, that makes sense. Elemimele (talk) 22:14, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Jewish Lithuanian history on Hasidic Judaism in Lithuania

Hello; I just put the Jewish Lithuanian history template on the article Hasidic Judaism in Lithuania, but I want the template's section "Groups" to remain expanded, as this is the section that includes that Hasidic Judaism article. I want to know how this can be done. Thank you, Charlie Smith FDTB (talk) 17:00, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Charlie Smith FDTB, and welcome to the Teahouse. It looks to me as if this can be done, but it will need an edit to the Template. If you look at {{Sidebar with collapsible lists}}, it says there is an option |expanded=, but that needs as a value the name of the particular list. But as far as I can see {{Jewish Lithuanian history}} doesn't define the name parameters for its lists. I think you'll need to edit that template to add (eg)

list1name=groups

and then you'll be able to add

expanded=groups

to the call in the article. (I'd have tried it myself if it had just required a change to the article, but I don't want to play about with editing a template). --ColinFine (talk) 18:54, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Okay, thank you very much, Charlie Smith FDTB (talk) 22:35, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Edits on Page: Tim Southee

Hi there, I have asked this question already, but I would like someone to check the Article of Cricketer Tim Southee's stats of the Cricket world cup 2019 which I have added yesterday. I would like to know if anything needs to be changed, Thank you! Jocelin Andrea (talk) 01:57, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Can someone please help me request a deletion of a Wikipedia page

I'd like to help in making Wikipedia a place where each page is notable and not faked. Can someone please help me delete a page of this person - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beau_Vallis_(singer) By researching carefully, I believe the credits/sources are fake. Not 100% sure, so wanted to ask here for support in this decision. Also, I don't know how to request "articles for deletion" so wanted to ask for assistance in doing so please.

Thank you. Thomastrainor (talk) 00:18, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

When I search on "Love Stand Still" Kelly Rowland, it confirms a connection to Beau Vallis. Why do you believe the Vallis references are fake? David notMD (talk) 03:39, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

I believe it to be fake because it's only in blog articles and I don't see it verified on Kelly Rowland wikipedia pages or any sources that seem more legitimate.

It wouldn't be verified on her Wikipedia page because (1) we don't have a formal verification process - the sources do that, and (2) we don't require sources for credits or liner notes barring uncredited or Alan Smithee'd roles. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 04:57, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

I also just noticed at the top of the wikipedia page that there it says the article doesn't meet the notability guidelines on Wikipedia - this is why I asked about deletion - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beau_Vallis_(singer)

A better response to "The topic of this article may not meet Wikipedia's notability guideline for music." (note "may not meet") is to try to improve the article. For example, his role(s) in the albums and singles are not described nor referenced. David notMD (talk) 02:48, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Help on WikiProject creation

Hello, I've created a new project Wikipedia:WikiProject Indian Civil Servants. Please help me to complete the process. Thanks --Shaji issac (talk) 03:43, 31 July 2021 (UTC) Shaji issac (talk) 03:43, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Vernacular name/Common name of Tuberose

Tuberose is commonly known as Rajanigandha or Nishigandha in Asian countries. However, I didn't find any other_names parameter in speciesbox template but present in drugbox and chembox. Should I include its other name directly under some heading `== Common names ==` of Tuberose or is there some parameter for including vernacular name/common name in speciesbox. Adding common name in synonym parameter shouldn't be done right? Machinexa (talk) 05:51, 31 July 2021 (UTC) Machinexa (talk) 05:51, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Machinexa, this is English-language Wikipedia, so generally only English-language names for subjects should be listed. Maproom (talk) 07:40, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Log out

I currently can not log on to my account, so I am using a I.P but every edit I made get reverted and I told to not edit anymore it seams to started because I my a few edits to my old talk page User:Fanoflionking 92.236.253.249 (talk) 06:41, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

If you are unable to regain access to your account, you may create a new account and on its user page identify it as a successor to your old account("I am User23456, I had used User12345 but lost access to that account"). 331dot (talk) 07:47, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

How do I determine if something is worth an article or not?

Hi there. As a kid I used to play with these specific-branded marble runs called "Techno Gears Marble Mania", and the company that manufactured them is called "The Learning Journey International", which I've been thinking of making an article about, as they certainly have a lot to them than the marble sets and have received numerous awards. Because of the latter, I suspect that if I give it a thorough look, the company as a whole will be mentioned by multiple reliable sources. The problem is, I don't have interest in their other products, so I don't think I'd be able to commit to a full article about them, and I'm not sure if anyone else here really knows what this company is. Is it worth creating? Zeke Essiestudy (talk/contributions) 06:49, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

@Zeke Essiestudy I'll give you my opinion. An article doesn't have to be "full" or "complete" to survive mainspace, but it must "float" on it's own from the start per WP:GNG and in this case WP:NORG. See this example I moved to articlespace: [12]. Not "full", but it didn't fail WP:GNG either. It improved as time passed. So, if you can find a few more good sources like [13][14] (less local is even better), I say go for it. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:04, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Noticeboards, what to do when not enough editors are involved?

Greetings! I openend a section on July 17th, @Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#RFC_Tghat.com whether a source was reliable or not, however last comment dates back to 18 July. There doesn't seem to be a consensus yet. Only 4 editors(excluding myself) responded, two expressing concern, and two in favour. I'm kind of new using noticeboards, does someone propose something? Or is it just waiting for others? I'm asking here, because Noticeboard doesn't seem to have clear cut procedure for this, or did i overlook something? Thanks Dawit S Gondaria (talk) 05:39, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

It's not that uncommon that a WP-discussion ends (at least for the time being) without "result". I think there was some sort of scientific study on it, actually. However, WP:APPNOTE can help. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:26, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Didn't even notice your reply @Gråbergs Gråa Sång, but thanks for your response, one more question regarding WP:APPNOTE, is it appropiate to put a notice in another noticeboard(and which one)? I'm not at all familiar with Village Pump. Dawit S Gondaria (talk) 10:42, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

@Dawit S Gondaria In this case I'd consider appnoting some of the wikiprojects mentioned at Talk:Adi Hageray massacre and Talk:Massacre. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:58, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Comparison images

Sorry, I am in a hurry so this question is short and may be hard to understand. I want to upload a comparison images, but one side is not mine and the other is mine. What should I do? Kuro・(Kuro's talk page) 04:04, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Kuro the black dog, where is the "not mine" image? What is its copyright status? Maproom (talk) 07:36, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

I was a bit confused at first, but this image comes from a Wiki hosted by Shoutwiki, which seems to be powered by MediaWiki ([http://lumines.shoutwiki.com/wiki/File:SHININ-L1.png link to image]link disabled by ColinFine (talk): see below). Also, sorry about forgetting to sign a signature. Kuro・(Kuro's talk page) 08:05, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Kuro the black dog, and welcome to the Teahouse. What software the image is hosted on is irrelevant: anybody can use the MediaWiki software for any purpose, so it tells us nothing about the reliability or (more relevant here) copyright status. At the bottom of the ShoutWiki page you've linked to it says Content is available under Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 unless otherwise noted, which on the face of it is acceptable for upload to Wikimedia Commons. But, having said that, it appears to be a screenshot of a video game, and there is no evidence that whoever uploaded it to ShoutWiki had permission to do so or the legal right to license it under CC. Wikipedia (and Wikimedia in general) is very careful about copyright, and (while I am by no means an expert) I have a significant suspicion that it is a copyright violation, and so may not be uploaded, and in fact even linking to it is forbidden. I have therefore disabled the link to it above: if I am interpreting copyright over zealously, somebody can reinstate it. --ColinFine (talk) 10:59, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Anthon Bosch

I am really unable to understand why Wikipedia won't accept this Draft: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Anthon_Bosch

He is a professional snowboarder and an Olympian. He clearly passes WP:SPORTBASIC & WP:NOLYMPICS as he has played on various major leagues. If there is no specific criteria for snowboarders, then there should be one created. It's not a barely played sport.

Is an international professional player not notable enough? What can be done? This group seems to be inactive: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Skiing_and_Snowboarding DyingLightquests (talk) 00:23, 31 July 2021 (UTC) DyingLightquests (talk) 00:23, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

DyingLightquests, I think the problem is in the sources. Most of them I have never heard of, except for olympics.com. Try to find better sources. I don't know too much else, pinging User:DoubleGrazing and User:Tamingimpala. Sungodtemple (talk) 00:50, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Sungodtemple I have seen many many pages with only a few references and they are usually tagged as Stubs. The Olympics and FSI are enough! Just because the media giants didn't cover him doesn't mean he is a nobody. He is literally the first person to represent the African continent in Winter Olympic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DyingLightquests (talk • contribs)

Thanks for pinging me, Sungodtemple. Hi @DyingLightquests: happy to account for my decision. The way I see it:

• This person is not an Olympian, as they haven't yet competed at the (forthcoming 2022) games, which is what WP:NOLYMPICS requires; that may well change in approximately six months' time, and in that sense this could be just a case of WP:TOOSOON — then again, anything could change, and lest we forget, Wikipedia is not a WP:CRYSTALBALL.
• Being a 'professional international player' is indeed accepted for some sports as a notability criterion, but as pointed out already, there are no specific criteria for snowboarding. Therefore we have to rely on the general WP:GNG notability rules, which require significant coverage in multiple independent, reliable secondary sources.
• As for being 'the first person to X', that doesn't in itself guarantee notability, although it may provide grounds for significant coverage in secondary sources, which in turn often will. If such coverage has been generated, please cite it in the draft.
• Finally, there may well exist other articles on Wikipedia 'with only a few references', but that is an argument for improving the referencing on them, not for accepting this draft with insufficient references.

Hope this helps, --DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:48, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

DoubleGrazing How can I create a notability criteria for snowboarding? DyingLightquests (talk) 07:28, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

DyingLightquests Creating a specific notability requirement for snowboarders would not override the requirements of the more general notability guidelines- you would still need significant coverage in independent reliable sources, which you don't have at present. Is there a particular need you have for a speedy movement of this draft to the encyclopedia? In a few short months, if he appears in the Olympics, he will merit an article. 331dot (talk) 07:37, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

One would think there'd be a WP:NSKIING at WP:NSPORT, but no. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:18, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

@DoubleGrazing@DyingLightquests Here's a few decent sources I found (as in they all have WP-articles): [15][16][17]. However, the internet also reveals he's actually Russian ;-) Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:57, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

331dot Gråbergs Gråa Sång Well, why won't creating a new notability criteria get him approved? That's literally what Notability Criteria are for? It says here, if the subject doesn't meet the General Criteria, then the specific criteria is used? Also, if he officially participates in the Olympics, given he lives until that day, will he be eligible under WP:NOLYMPICS? If yes, then creating a new criteria will work the same, won't it??? Also, there are sources that say he is the first person to represent Africa for Winter Olympics, I still don't understand how he is not notable. There are literally hundreds of pages with less notable career and yet they exist, shouldn't they be deleted? If I put his entire career from FIS, will it get approved ( major leagues)? These are international matches and not everyone is selected. I understand the main criteria says we need references, but only to prove things that are on the page, and the Draft already have references to prove the content of the page. It's very sad to see Wikipedia is full of flaws. The first editor who declined it had only around 2,000 edits and herself was using AFC until recently. Also, the new references Gråbergs Gråa Sång found, will they help? And regarding the Russian origin, the subject's official site says he is from South Africa...— Preceding unsigned comment added by DyingLightquests (talk • contribs)

DyingLightquests As I said, a specific guideline for snowboarders would not override the more general notability definition. Trying to game the system to get an article approved isn't usually successful. As you were told, he has not yet appeared in the Olympics. Once he appears in a competition, he will be notable. You haven't said what the rush is here. Wikipedia has no deadlines.

That other inappropriate articles exist does not mean yours can too, see other stuff exists. As this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, it is possible to get inappropriate articles by us. We can only address what we know about. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to identify other inappropriate articles you have seen for possible action.

That a reviewer has 2,000 edits means little, maybe they edited without an account before that. 331dot (talk) 11:14, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

My articles keep getting rejected for very vague reasons and it doesn't seem constructive

Moved from Wikipedia talk:Teahouse § My articles keep getting rejected for very vague reasons and it doesn't seem constructive

 – ―Qwerfjkltalk 21:34, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Transgender Rights in Wales

Hello, I have recently had two articles declined and sent back to me to edit again. The first few times there was genuine feedback that I implemented, however, now all I am getting are very vague or unelaborated declinings that seem very out of place? My draft on Transgender rights in Wales (currently pending again) was rejected for not using a formal register, however, I really feel I was using a formal register. I think it's very strange that it got rejected for this reason, as I have enough reliable sources and content to qualify for a page, a previous rejector noting this and advising on more elaboration the first time. I have extensive UK qualifications (A levels and above) in English Language so I'm well aware of what constitutes a formal register - this recent rejection, it just seems off and out of place (especially when much of my article includes quotes from Uk legislation, which is the one of the most formal registers possible I feel. Re: my other pending draft on discrimination against transgender men, I think that one just hasn't been seen yet, which is okay. Can anyone shed light on why my draft may have been rejected and provide useful feedback on how to improve it? Thank you (edit: my apologies, my dumb ass posted this in the wrong place. Don't wikipedia and sleep deprived) Vulture (a.k.a. Transandrosupport) (talk) 21:25, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Transandrosupport. The latest reviewer, Bilorv, left some very detailed and constructive feedback on your talk page. Bilorv most certainly did not reject your draft. They were encouraging and asked for some specific changes. Have you read what Bilorv wrote? Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 21:49, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello Cullen - I just read that now and yeah, it isn't discouraging this time. The last reviewer straight up didn't leave a reason hence I was quite irked. I'm unfortunately in the middle of a lot of Uni work but I hope to amend the article as much as I can tonight. Thank you for all your patience — Preceding unsigned comment added by Transandrosupport (talk • contribs) 22:08, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

I'd just like to add to this, Transandrosupport, that the responses you're receiving in the big pink templates have default wording, but the comments are handwritten. The decline you're talking about is someone clicking "essay" as the decline reason, and I agree with that decline reason. The implication is not supposed to be that you're unable to write in a formal register, but that the draft doesn't read with the tone of a Wikipedia article. Phrases like "The reception has been broadly positive from the LGBTQ+ community in Wales, though many still note that there is a long way to go" are perfectly fine in other contexts (maybe a university essay), but on Wikipedia the aim is to have no opinionated voice—no insertion of our own opinions and no uncritical repetition of biased sources. PinkNews is just one tabloid-ish news source so it can't really be used to describe the whole scope of the LGBT+ response to such a broad plan.

For what it's worth, I know of at least one outstanding editor who failed GCSE English and has been the most major writer of some of our best-quality articles, so writing in a Wikipedia style is not so much a matter of having formal qualifications, but learning from feedback and others' works.

I'm planning to re-review the draft you've submitted sometime in the next 18 hours, depending on real life factors. Before this month, your maximum wait time for a draft would be five months, because of a critical shortage of reviewers, but a concentrated effort of thousands of volunteer labour hours over July has helped us nearly clear our months-long backlog of several thousand drafts. If a draft doesn't get a response, that just means no-one has had the time and energy to assess it yet. — Bilorv (talk) 23:27, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Bilorv Your explanation is a lot clearer and is specific to where I've gone wrong, so thank you. I'll amend the 'positive reception' comment. I apolosgise if I came off as if I was insinuating that people without qualifications aren't capable of excelling despite that, that was not my intention at all- I was worried someone would misunderstand my concerns as not knowing what formal register is, so I'm sorry if I caused offence, this was preemptive on my part. As well as this, I'm aware of and massively thankful for the efforts of volunteers to clear the backlog, to be clear, I was in no way upset at wait times, this was a passing comment on another draft. That being said, I'm very busy with university work at the minute so I wouldn't have minded the wait at all- I just wanted these articles to be submitted and pending so I can concentrate on my uni work- I was frustrated because drafts kept being sent back and this meant I had to drop everything to amend the articles and resubmit (I'm neurodivergent and it can cause difficulty in work flow and overload). I'm sorry for any upset caused, if any, and I wish you all the best. Vulture (a.k.a. Transandrosupport) (talk) 12:21, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

My page keeps getting refused?

Hi. I'm trying to get a page set back up for Mike Heaton of Embrace, as for some reason his original one had been removed. I've included sources etc and there is nothing on there that isn't factual, nor is it any less lengthy than other links to the band. i've looked on help pages here and nothing is assisting me Smithykit (talk) 14:59, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to The Teahouse Smithykit, findmypast.co.uk, Linkin.com and Allmusic are not reliable sources. Theroadislong (talk) 15:03, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

i've copied Allmusic and findmypast.co.uk from other, accepted pages on Wiki? Smithykit (talk) 15:06, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Not all Wikipedia articles are reviewed. Our standards and enforcement thereof have only gotten tougher over the years. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 19:26, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Smithykit Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The sources you have offered are not acceptable for establishing that this person meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable musician. A Wikipedia article must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about him. His LinkedIn profile is not an independent source. His birth records are just that, they are not significant coverage. Please see Your first article. 331dot (talk) 15:07, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Smithykit That other articles use inappropriate sources does not mean it's okay for you as well. As this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, it is possible for inappropriate edits to get by us. We can only address what we know about, please feel free to help by pointing out these other articles with inappropriate sources for possible action. 331dot (talk) 15:09, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

I've added sources and removed the ones that weren't acceptable, I hope this is ok? Any advice is most welcome :-) Smithykit (talk) 15:18, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

The problem is to do with the types of sources. You need to take to heart that they have to be independent of the subject, so not based just on interviews with him and they must have significant coverage about him, not just mentions. You will irritate the WP:AfC reviewers if you keep putting the draft back for consideration before you have about three sources that firmly establish he is a notable musician. Wikipedia had articles in the past about him which were deleted just for failure to establish notability. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:28, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

talkah i understand, thank you :-) Smithykit (talk) 15:35, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@Smithykit: Although there are some issues to be aware of regarding Allmusic, Reliable sources/Perennial sources lists it as reliable for some purposes. Gab4gab (talk) 20:54, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Smithykit, I remember seeing this draft in Articles for Creation. One of the things I look at when I see an article for someone who is part of a larger musical group, is this line from Wikipedia's notability criteria for bands and musical artists: Members of notable bands are redirected to the band's article, not given individual articles, unless they have demonstrated individual notability. Singers and musicians who are only notable for participating in a reality television series may be redirected to an article about the series, until they have demonstrated that they are independently notable. So basically, is the person notable outside of their work with the band? Are they known for a solo career outside of the band? If not, we'll just redirect their article to the band. I hope that helps as you work on your draft. Bkissin (talk) 20:02, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

thank you Bkissin ! I know the subject personally (my partner is also a member of the same band) so i've taken a pause for the cause and done a bit more research for sources and sent a few text messages to him to get some info :-) fingers crossed for the next submission... :-) Smithykit (talk) 20:46, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

No problem Smithykit. Though, keep in mind our policies about conflict of interest editing. It can often be difficult for people who are close to the subject of an article to write about them in the dry, neutral way that WP articles often are. That is another big reason why articles get declined. Bkissin (talk) 20:50, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

I think i've kept it sufficiently third person Bkissin, i'm used to writing factual in my day job so fingers crossed :-) Smithykit (talk) 21:00, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Can someone please help me, I've included multiple, independent sources, a lot of which are around activities outside of the main band, as I've been advised to do, including registered charities, and it's still refused? I've read the help links etc and i'm really struggling to understand what more is required from me? Smithykit (talk) 10:45, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

thank you usedtobecool but that's exactly what i've had back previously, hence my confusion. i'm sorry if i'm becoming irritating, it's just that i'm really trying to provide what's being asked for, bearing in mind i've seen a lot of other, unrelated pages on Wiki that are a lot worse/basic etc Smithykit (talk) 11:21, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. ―Qwerfjkltalk 12:49, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Village pump proposals, or here?

I stumbled across a thing in my mind: "Why is there no 'minor edit' button in Wikipedia?" 180.251.151.92 (talk) 10:05, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

I friggin tried the Tab ↹ + Space key combination when I'm writing that "question", and it immediately directed me to the Publish button rather than making my edit minor, darn… 180.251.151.92 (talk) 10:10, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

There is a minor edit button, but it's disabled for IP users due to abuse. If you would like to be able to mark your edits as minor you will need to register an account. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 13:15, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Can you guide me on how I can improve my article?

This is my article, please give me specific suggestions how I can improve it and get published? Thank you.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Ojas_Oneness Trnhanct2001 (talk) 10:45, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello Trnhanct2001 and welcome to the Teahouse. Currently the article reads more like an advertisement than an encyclopedia article, which is not how articles on Wikipedia should read. Furthermore, you need to include links to significant coverage in reliable sources. Significant coverage must go into more than passing detail, and reliable sources must have a reputation for accuracy and fact-checking. If such coverage doesn't exist, then there shouldn't be an article. Furthermore, although it's great to create an article technically no article is "your" article; they belong collectively to the encyclopedia. Links: WP:WWIN, WP:Identifying reliable sources. I hope this helps, Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 13:46, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Notability for Talitha (Malaysian Musician)

An enthusiastic and promising editor wants to create a page for Talitha and reached out for feedback on notability. I have provided my feedback but I have limited expertise with Malaysian sources. Can someone look at our discussion and give a more conclusive advise [18]? Tagging them here MarkieC07. Thanks! Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 03:29, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello everyone, I am MarkieC07 from Malaysia. As Nomadicghumakkad had mentioned, I'm interested to create a Wikipedia page for Talitha, a Malaysian artist. Hence, I would appreciate if any reviewing editors/advocates could provide some advice regarding the notability and reliability of the sources mentioned in this discussion with me and Nomadicghumakkad. Looking forward to meeting all of you guys here. Cheers, MarkieC07 (talk) 16:37, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Please feel free to leave a message at my talk page or reply to this thread. Cheers, MarkieC07 (talk) 13:58, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Astro Switch On Article

Hello,

I am wondering why the article keeps getting declined? I have submitted references that are reliable, as I have looked in their past album article that Naver is reliable and is a independent source. Is there something that I am missing or would this article have a higher approval once their album is released on 2 Aug 2021 at 6pm KST? Please do let me know, so that I can get this article published.

Astro Switch On - Article keeps getting declined Hello,

I am wondering why the article Switch On keeps getting rejected? The first time, it was rejected because on ureliable sources, but when I looked on their past articles the citation I used was considered reliable. Therefore I changed the citation again, coming from their label that was rejected due to it not being independent. And now the third is that is does not have significant coverage. Should I wait until the EP gets released on 2 August 2021 at 6pm KST so that it has a higher chance of getting approved? Please do let me know, as I would love to be able to publish this article. Lilylovesreading19 (talk) 14:29, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! Lilylovesreading19 (talk) 14:14, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello Lilylovesreading19 and welcome to the Teahouse. I've moved your question into its own section: to add headings, put ==equal signs like this== or use the "new section" link at the top. Wikipedia:Notability_(music)#Albums states that albums need to demonstrate their own notability to have Wikipedia articles written about them. Unfortunately I don't speak Korean and am not familiar with Naver. However, the site has been criticised for unauthorised publishing, so would likely not be considered a reliable source. Coverage in reliable sources is needed; sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. Cheers, Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 14:40, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Adding to my answer; this comment was left; "This is an unreleased EP. Unreleased albums and EPs seldom satisfy musical notability." It may be that an article isn't yet warranted, but will be later this year. Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 14:43, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Adding pictures

Problem adding pictures 184.13.110.96 (talk) 14:25, 31 July 2021 (UTC) I would like to use pictures from WWII in Color website to illustrate edits to existing pages. I have tried adding the pictures as thumbnails and tried adding the picture to Wiki Images so I can attach them from there. I have been totally unable to get the Wiki to accept these image files. I did not take the pictures, but they are not copyrighted. How do I get the system to display these images? Thank you

Welcome to the Teahouse. This is really a question for Wikipedia Commons copyright folk but, in brief, you would need to upload the files there with evidence they have been released with a suitable Creative Commons licence. The Wizard for uploads is at commons:Special:UploadWizard. If you post the URL for one of the pictures here, together with why you think it is suitably licensed, I can give further advice if you need it. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:53, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Juni Cortez sources

The reason I removed those two references in the Juni Cortez article is because they are not from proper sources. They're from these Buzzfeed-like list sites, which aren't always reliable. Can I please keep them removed? 58.84.165.76 (talk) 11:14, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi 58.84.165.76, I would try discussing this at Talk:Juni Cortez. It's also important to remember to write an edit summary, in the box under where you are editing, so other Wikipedians know why you are removing these sources. Cheers, Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 15:02, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Changing a title

Is it possible to change the heading of a page? For example, the Deutsche Schule Pretoria changed its name a few years ago to the Deutsche Internationale Schule Pretoria (DSP). Although I can't find any articles about when it happened, I do know that it is the case. Can anyone help? Hassanbeem (talk) 12:20, 31 July 2021 (UTC)hassanbeem

@Hassanbeem See Wikipedia:Moving a page. ―Qwerfjkltalk 12:57, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

@Hassanbeem: Hello, welcome to the teahouse! To change the name of a page you need to move it. To move a page you need to be autoconfirmed, i.e. have made 10 edits and have had your account for 4 days. Since you only joined on the 29th you won't be able to move pages yet, so to get a page moved list it at WP:Requested moves and someone with the appropriate user rights will move it for you. Once you've been here a few more days you can follow the instructions at WP:Moving a page to move a page yourself. Happy editing! 192.76.8.91 (talk) 12:59, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

@Hassanbeem Hello and welcome to the Teahouse! According to the schools website, you're right. This can be done, and per WP:AUTOCONFIRM you'll have the ability to do so in a few days, your account isn't quite old enough yet. Guidance at WP:MOVE. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:00, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

@Qwerfjkl: : @Gråbergs Gråa Sång: Thank you. No rush, I will edit a few other articles in the meantime and come back to it at some point! (Unless someone does it before me!

Hi Hassanbeem, I've moved the page. Feel free to come back if you have anymore questions. Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 15:06, 31 July 2021 (UTC) Oh, perfect, thank you, Rubbish computer. Consider this topic closed on my behalf...

Main needs to be draft

I made a mistake. I created a page Epoxy value. It really needs to be in draft space. How do I move it please GRALISTAIR (talk) 15:39, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi GRALISTAIR, it looks like it was deleted from the mainspace. In future, you can use the move option to change the page's namespace; see Wikipedia:Moving a page. This will still leave a redirect which you can then tag with {{db|g7}} to request the deletion of. Cheers, Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 16:11, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Yes saw that thanks. I have now recreated the article but in draft space which is where I should have put it in the first place. Rookie error! GRALISTAIR (talk) 16:13, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

No worries GRALISTAIR, good luck with the draft! Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 16:21, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Requesting Image of a living person bio from the person? (is this permitted?)

I have recently worked on these page and others: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukanya_Krishnan and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Markopolos It would be helpful to add a photo to these notable people. I have no relationship of any kind with these subjects, is it permissible per Wikipedia policies (WP:COI or othewise) to contact the people to request they submit a photo with CC BY-SA 4.0 permissions? CosmicNotes (talk) 09:16, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

@CosmicNotes You can ask. Note that the copyrightholder, usually the photographer, should upload it themselves: here. Also that you can't guarantee the pic will actually be used, but if it's the "best"/only one available it probably will be. Preferably the pic should be (uptil now) unpublished elsewhere, that can make things easier. I'd make it clear that you're asking as an independent netizen, not as some sort of "official WP-rep." Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:28, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, Gråbergs Gråa Sång, that makes sense. Could you clarify which person holds the copyright? The person taking the photo or the subject in the photo? Assuming the person the has the copyright would be the one that needs to upload it. And is it permissible for me to then put the photo on the page once it is accepted as an approved image? Just trying ensure I follow proper procedures, as to date I have not done anything with photos, just text edits. CosmicNotes (talk) 09:40, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

@CosmicNotes Basic rule: Copyright is a pain in the ass, in the WP-environment. In many (most?) jurisdictions, the photographer is the copyrightholder. But this can change through some sort of legal agreement. So we don't know, presumably Harry Markopolos does. The simple solution from "our" POV is that the subject takes a new selfie and uploads it themselves. The upload link I gave you is to Wikimedia Commons, a sister-project to WP where we keep "free" images. You should check it out, you can use everything there on WP. So yes, once it's there, you can use it. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:08, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

@User:Gråbergs Gråa Sång thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by CosmicNotes (talk • contribs)

@CosmicNotes:. The simplest thing to do these days, assuming you are going to email the person whose photo you seek, is to ask them to take a selfie and send it to you. Then it will be of them and copyright by them. You can offer to upload the image on their behalf and get them to confirm to the Commons copyright folk that they have given you permission for this: see Commons:Email templates for the sort of thing that is required. It sounds like a faff, and it can be but I've done this on several occasions and it works! Ask me on my Talk page for more assistance if you need it. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:26, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

John Davies poet 1944

I need some help, please, in understanding why my draft wiki above has been declined four times on the basis of not having independent and/or reliable sources. I fail to understand this: I have over 30 footnotes, almost all citing published sources, either pubications or on line. Hope you can help Moonbread (talk) 17:07, 31 July 2021 (UTC) PS I have successfully published several wikis in the past without encountering this issue. Moonbread (talk) 17:07, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:John Davies (poet, born 1944) ―Qwerfjkltalk 17:09, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi Moonbread, the messages from 27 and 31 July are identical and they still hold true right now. Have you considered actually reading Wikipedia:Reliable sources? If you have a specific question, may be I could help with that. Anton.bersh (talk) 18:11, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

How can i publish an article on wikipedia

Am new to wikipedia and all the article i have been created is been delete or not been approved, so what can i do please am new here so enlighten me more about it Doctorray02 (talk) 11:32, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

@Doctorray02: Hello, welcome to the teahouse! Your pages have been deleted from Wikipedia under the WP:G11 criteria, because they appear to be advertising or promotion. I can't access the entire text of the deleted page, but the snippet in the log includes wording like "Lisa Hoggarth is known throughout the fashion industry for putting fashion leaders in their place in a male-dominated society.". Wikipedia articles are supposed to summarise what has been written in independent, reliable sources like newspapers and books, without editorialising. They should not be written to promote or praise the article subject. Some good guidance on how to write an article is given at WP:Your first article. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 13:09, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi Doctorray02, you can also try creating a draft at Wikipedia:Articles for creation, taking what the IP said above into account. Cheers, Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 14:46, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Asked and answered at Help (do not ask in more than one place). The answer is the same - several experienced reviewers looked at your draft and sandbox content and Speedy deleted it as promotional. My quick search for "Lisa bree Hoggarth" yielded nothing that I would consider reliable source referencing. David notMD (talk) 18:26, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Rejected new article

I have been editing a new article on the topic of intimate partners abuse worldwide. Yet, my submission has been declined many times due to 'insufficient content for the article to be a new article'. They have referred me to merge it with the 'Domestic VIolence' article. However, after consideration, I found our point of view and perspective of domestic violence are different, and it is difficult and awkward to merge them together when the focus of our articles were different. Is there any ways for me to improve my draft and could be accepted to be posted up in the Wikipedia community? Thank you. BeatriceBevania (talk) 15:45, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi BeatriceBevania and welcome to the Teahouse. I think it would definitely be unnecessary to have an article called "Abusive relationship between intimate partners worldwide" when we already have the domestic violence article. You are welcome to edit domestic violence. I don't think this particular article is going to work out. Wikipedia presents information neutrally, and gives different perspectives due weight. A new article to show a different perspective would not be needed on Wikipedia (WP:POVFORK). Also, please don't submit a draft repeatedly without making much of a difference to it. Hope this helps, Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 16:20, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy: User:BeatriceBevania/sandbox Declined four times and then issued a STOP, all on 31 July 2021.The reviewers consistently recommended you incorporate content into the Domestic violence site. David notMD (talk) 18:34, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Is this ready?

Hi all,

I’ve done all the recommendations that people have made on my first article and have had some very positive feedback.

Could someone explain the next step to publish?

Thanks!! UKRoyalFan (talk) 09:53, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, UKRoyalFan, and welcome to the Teahouse. Looks like a reasonable job, though there are a couple of minor issues (eg the short paragraphs make it jerky to read, "now" in the last sentence will be problematic as time goes on). I have added a header so you can submit it for review. --ColinFine (talk) 11:11, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. I’ll try and improve those short paragraphs, and the “now” first. Thanks again! UKRoyalFan (talk) 12:54, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

This is looking good, UKRoyalFan but many of the citations need work to bring them up to our standards. I've just improved the first one (to a Telegraph newspaper article) and will help with others. We try to give credit to the authors of our sources, just as we expect credit for the editing we do here. For newspapers, check out Template:Cite_news. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:13, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. I will look for better sources and credit the authors. Thank you also for the cite template. UKRoyalFan (talk) 15:24, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Isn't his family name "Lane Fox" (spelled with a hyphen in early generations, but now with a space)? If it is, he should be referred to in the article as "Lane Fox", not as "Fox". Maproom (talk) 18:58, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Yes, you’re right. That wasn’t me but I’ll correct that. 22:38, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

UKRoyalFan, I struggle to discern this person's notability. Also, your draft cites Hello! and Mail Online (see WP:DAILYMAIL). -- Hoary (talk) 22:31, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

My thought was that as he had played such a pivotal part in Prince Harry’s life, he was notable. He is certainly well known amongst UK Royal watchers. I agree that neither the Daily Mail nor Hello make credible sources. I will try to find better ones! UKRoyalFan (talk) 22:38, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

help with Glenn Bray article

hello i am still trying to find someone to help me with Glenn Bray article, the only help i got so far has been telling me about sources, but as many times as i have reread about it, nothing makes sense, i do not work on computers, and it has been very frustrating figuring out what is wrong, having no clue of the problem presented. There is a documentary made by netflix about Glenns art collection, i am not sure how much more noteworthy the person needs to be... all the different books published with art he owns... so i am at a complete loss Sirskull (talk) 17:34, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Welcome back to the Teahouse, Sirskull. When writing an article, the content needs to be based on what reliable sources document about the subject. Taking this on a sentence-by-sentence basis, you've written that "Bray was born in Van Nuys, California on April 1, 1948". What's the source for that statement? You need to add a reference to the source at the end of the sentence. Then you have "His father Gene Bray owned Sylmar Builders Supply, a hardware store that began business in 1959". What's the source for that? You need to reference that too (it might be the same source as his birthplace, in which case you can place the reference after the second sentence rather than the first). And so on for the whole article.... Does that make sense? Cordless Larry (talk) 17:39, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Glenn Bray TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 23:18, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Sirskull. I found a detailed article about Glenn Bray in the Los Angeles Times. This is the type of reference that you should be using. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 22:48, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

I need to edit

I need to edit my own page and do not have any idea how to begin. Please help?  Linda Hogan 2 (talk) 18:51, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Linda Hogan 2 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. There are three articles about persons named Linda Hogan, so I don't know which one you are, but you are welcome to make an edit request(click for instructions) on the article talk page, detailing changes you feel are needed. If you are on a computer, there should be a "Talk" tab at the top of the article about you. Preferably, any changes should be sourced to independent reliable sources; we can't just take your word unfortunately. You should avoid directly editing the article yourself (except for things like blatant vandalism). 331dot (talk) 18:59, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

@Linda Hogan 2: Welcome to Wikipedia! You might find the following resources useful for getting started:

• Wikipedia:FAQ/Article subjects – Info for people who are the subject of an article
• Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide – Info for contributors with a conflict of interest
• Help:Editing – General guide to editing
• Help:Talk pages – General guide to discussion pages
• Wikipedia: Edit requests – Info about proposing a change to an article

A small but significant correction: you do not have "your own page". Rather, Wikipedia has an biographical article written about you, based on what reliable sources have written about you, for better or for worse. You don't own this article, and as long as it adheres to the encyclopedia's policies and guidelines, you don't have very much control over what it says (or doesn't say) about you. Wikipedia is not particularly interested in what subjects have to say about themselves, and editors here are strongly discouraged from directly editing Wikipedia articles where they have conflict of interest.

That being said, if a Wikipedia article contains information about you which is undue gossip, unsourced, or libelous, it does need to be corrected right away, in accordance with the Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons policy. As 331dot mentioned, the best way to suggest possible changes is to make an edit request on the talk page of the article, where you can explain exactly how you think the article should be changed. You're free to request as many changes as you like, to any part of any article, although they will only be accepted if other editors think they contribute positively to the encyclopedia.

Best wishes! Feel free to ask if you have further questions. RoxySaunders (talk · contribs) 23:27, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Finding references in online

I'm going to make a new definition and put it in, but the document I'm referring to is a book, so should I put a link in the pdf file of the book as a reference or is it okay to just mention the book and page? I couldn't find any other online sources than books. Jung Sodam (talk) 23:32, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse, Jung Sodam. It is not necessary to link to an online copy of the book. See Wikipedia:Offline sources for more info. Kleinpecan (talk) 23:38, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Jung Sodam. It is not necessary that your references cite sources available online, but if there are plenty of sources, select and link online sources for the convenience of the reader. But if sources are less readily available, printed offline sources are fine. In any case, provide the full range of bibliographic details in your references, including URL links to the sources that are available online. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:04, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

My edits are getting deleted for very strange reason

Hlo there!, I am newbie to Wikipedia, I have recently made an edit but it was removed by mentioning that it's an SPAM by someone called User:ItsSkV08 ( https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/1036371374 ) It doesn't seems to me like an valid reason for deletion. Help me to figure out if I am wrong (sorry for my english). Xi Xing Ping (talk) 04:51, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

@Xi Xing Ping: Hello, and welcome-- the pdf link you provided includes IP , and not opening, you can reverse my edit with correction in source or use other reliable sources, see WP:RS and WP:CITE… Thanks.~ ItsSkV08 (talk) 04:57, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

The OP has been blocked indefinitely as a sockpuppet of Helios007. Maproom (talk) 06:21, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Article

my article and Draft not find https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Derveshpur_Gaushala --DerveshpurGaushala (talk) 07:30, 1 August 2021 (UTC) DerveshpurGaushala (talk) 07:30, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

It went here: Draft:Derveshpur_Gaushala Leijurv (talk) 07:39, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

DerveshpurGaushala, the draft has been rejected. Not just declined, but rejected. Please stop. -- Hoary (talk) 08:25, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Danielle Lessie

Danielle Lessie born Danielle Celeste Brown in Chesterfield, Virginia started playing the piano and clarinet at the age of nine years old. She started acting out in plays at church at a very young age and she grew up having a passion for acting at a very young age. She even sanged at church on the youth choir for many years. She is best known for her role as a Bridemaid on 'Elle Rose' the movie that was written and directed by Jessica B. Smith — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daniellecelestebrown (talk • contribs)

@Daniellecelestebrown: Welcome to the Teahouse. I see you've typed the exact same thing over at Draft:Danielle Lessie and Draft talk:Danielle Lessie. While not strictly forbidden, editors are strongly discouraged from writing about themselves. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:37, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

All proposed articles require references. DCB's activities as a child do not contribute to notability. If her career to date is minor movie roles, this may be WP:TOOSOON to consider an article. David notMD (talk) 11:17, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Draft is rejected

sir my draft is rejected now what can do ?? Article Derveshpur Gaushala

Thaks --DerveshpurGaushala (talk) 10:31, 1 August 2021 (UTC) DerveshpurGaushala (talk) 10:31, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

DerveshpurGaushala Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Unfortunately, there is nothing you can do. A rejection means that the draft will not be considered further. No amount of editing can confer notability on a subject. Please read the comments left by reviewers. 331dot (talk) 10:40, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

I might suggest that you spend some time editing existing articles, to get an idea of what is being looked for in article content. Successfully creating a new article is the absolute hardest task to perform on Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 10:42, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

To delete your draft, at the top type Db-author inside of double-curly brackets {{ }} This will cause an Administrator to delete your draft. David notMD (talk) 11:34, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Where to suggest an article topic

Hi Teahouse Hosts

Where would be the best place to leave a suggestion for article creation on an Australian woman diplomat and academic? I have been reading about Coral Bell, who seems like someone who would likely meet notability guidelines, and might be in under-represented categories in WP as well, e.g. Australian subjects; Women diplomats. I had thought she could well have a WP article already, but no. There is an article on the Coral Bell School of Asia Pacific Affairs which, apart from mentioning it was renamed for her in 2015, is silent on her work and career.

What would you recommend? I thought of dropping a note on WP:WikiProject Women, WP:WikiProject Women in Red or WP:WikiProject Australia but I am not sure of the protocol, or if suggestions like these would be welcome: I am aware that many WikiProjects have more than enough work already.

I could help with sourcing if that is of any use. There are a few initial refs to start, just on a very quick look around.

• News item
• Book of essays
• Report of speech by Julie Bishop, then Minister for Foreign Affairs

Any suggestions appreciated.  49.177.69.7 (talk) 04:58, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

References

I'm no expert on biographies but the three references you have listed here seem to me to represent significant coverage in reliable sources. A brief draft article based on paraphrasing what these sources say should certainly be enough for acceptance. Use the WP:AfC process to create Draft:Coral Bell and I'll help if I can. This JSTOR reference to which I have access also looks very promising as a source.[19] Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:47, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, I think Wikipedia:Requested articles is what you're looking for? You make a request with a couple of sources and someone else looking for article to write makes it in the future. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 17:11, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you both, @Mike Turnbull and @192.76.8.91. They are both very useful suggestions. I will give it some thought, and either go with the WP:Requested articles route that 192.76.8.91 indicated, or, if I get brave enough, try my hand at a draft, as Mike Turnbull suggests. Thank you also for the JSTOR reference - very useful. And for your offer of help - much appreciated. 49.177.69.7 (talk) 01:28, 1 August 2021 (UTC) Updated: 49.177.69.7 (talk) 01:32, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

I would recommend against using the requested articles route, 49.177.69.7 as it is well known that suggestions can languish there for a long time: in a volunteer project like Wikipedia, people usually prefer to work on their own ideas. If you start the draft soon I'll happily pick it up with you. I may even start it myself if I'm feeling in need of something to do.... Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:07, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Ready to Add Sources to Otis Williams Career Section

 Courtesy link: Otis Williams

Hello, how can I add references with specific page numbers to an existing referenced book? I own a copy of the Temptations by Otis Williams and Patricia Romonowski and just finished reading it, so it was easy to find four references to add, which are hopefully enough that the Sources Template can be removed.

I've only made some minor page edits up to this point, but would like to get more proactive. Joeythegimp (talk) 21:57, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

You might consider using Template:Rp. -- Hoary (talk) 22:32, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

@(<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Hoary"</a>), thanks for your advice, I've added the references and if you could take a look at what I did, I'd appreciate it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joeythegimp (talk • contribs) 00:00, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Joeythegimp, done! -- Hoary (talk) 01:17, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

... and I give up on the proper syntax for an href here (sigh). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joeythegimp (talk • contribs) 00:09, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

@Joeythegimp: If you're new to Wikipedia, I suggest checking out the Cheatsheet for basic formatting, and Ping to learn how to properly mention other users. (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.) —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:51, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

You can also try using the visual editor and discussion tools (Preferences → Beta features → Discussion tools). Kleinpecan (talk) 01:02, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks to you all for your help, @Hoary:, @Tenryuu:and @Kleinpecan:. I'll keep that cheatsheet handy and look at the Discussion Tools. I'm going to remove a loose href I see on the on the Otis Williams page and reformat a run-on section for easier reading. Joeythegimp (talk) 13:30, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Can't edit molar mass of ABTS

Hi, I've come across an error in the ABTS page. Namely, the molar mass is incorrectly given as 514.62g/mol instead of 548.68g/mol. I've tried to edit it myself but it doesn't seem to show up when I enter edit mode of the Chembox? This would be my first time trying to edit anything so it may very well be an error on my side. Do you have any suggestions on why the molar mass doesn't show up in edit mode?

Thank you for your time. MolMass (talk) 15:08, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

The figures for molar mass in the chembox are calculated automatically from the molecular formula. The formula is correct and is confirmed by the Chemspider ID. Were you thinking of an ammonium salt, MolMass? Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:31, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Also, it seems to me that if you tried to edit, maybe you didn't click "Save". There is only the one edit to this Teahouse page in your contribution history, and the edit filter log shows nothing that was blocked. ~Anachronist (talk) 15:35, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Ah, yes, I was thinking of the ammonium salt. I guess it's a good thing I wasn't able to edit it. Also, it wouldn't show up as I didn't actually edit anything since I couldn't find the molar mass (because apparently it's calculated, which is pretty great). Thank you for your help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by MolMass (talk • contribs) 15:50, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Upcoming shows/movies

Hello, I'm a relatively new user of Wikipedia; I'm confused as to when shows or movies get their own articles? Using Marvel shows as an example: What If...? comes out in a week and has an article as such, but Armor Wars or I am Groot have no articles; despite the fact we have little to no knowledge of either's plot. Does it depend on when a trailer is released?

Many thanks. Eye ay en (talk) 19:25, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Eye ay en, and welcome to the Teahouse. In principle, the answer is straightforward: like any other subject, an upcoming show or movie may be the subject of an article if it meets the criteria of notability: roughly, that several people, wholly unconnected with the item, have chosen to write about it at some length, and been published in reliable places. (Note that articles based on announcements or press releases do not count towards this). Typically this doesn't happen for a show that has not been released yet, and it is TOOSOON; but sometimes for some reason the show has been discussed widely, and then an article may be justified. Generally if an upcoming item has been widely discussed, it won't be because of the plot, but because of something else about it, so the article should not focus on the plot; but there could be exceptions. --ColinFine (talk) 19:52, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Sandbox

Need help to make space in my sandbox to work on a new article. The one that is currently in the sandbox has been accepted.

Thanks!

Vedlagt (talk) 21:17, 1 August 2021 (UTC) Vedlagt (talk) 21:17, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Vedlagt, and welcome to the Teahouse. Congratulations on getting a draft accepted. Your sandbox is currently a redirect. If you go to User:Vedlagt/sandbox (or the "sandbox" link at the top of the page) it will take you to David Provoost, but at the top there is a note "Redirected from User:Vedlagt/sandbox". If you pick the link in that note, it will take you to the sandbox itself, and you can edit it to remove the redirection and put new content in it. --ColinFine (talk) 21:43, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

File:VTS 01 2.webm. Change of name to Saber Mensur

I would like to change the name of file: VTS 01 2.webm to Saber Mensur. How can I do this? Wname1 (talk) 06:47, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

There does not appear to be a file named VTS 01 2.webm. Exactly which file are you asking about? -- Hoary (talk) 08:22, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

@Hoary: Here is just going to change the name of the video. This shows you the page where the video is: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:VTS_01_2.webm . Regards, Wname1 (talk) 08:44, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Sorry Wname1, my mistake. But I see that you have now attached commons:Template:Rename to it. -- Hoary (talk) 12:03, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

@Hoary: What is the first step I should take now? Wname1 (talk) 12:34, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

I don't think that there's anything that you should do, Wname1. You've asked for a name change; just wait till your request is acted on. -- Hoary (talk) 22:07, 1 August 2021 (UTC)