Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1233

Archive 1230

Archive 1231

Archive 1232

Archive 1233

My article has been Blocked for using a wrong Username

Hi My name is Tom Henderson (TomH300). I quite innocently made an error when I wrote my article on Vectar Project, by using the name Vectar project. I was asked to login as a new user (tomH300) and I now find that the page is still blocked. Can you please help TomH300 TomH300 (talk) 08:52, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

No, TomH300, there's no block. The draft remained at User:Vectar Project/sandbox. I've just now moved it from there to Draft:Vectar Project; you're free to work on it there. Happy editing! -- Hoary (talk) 09:10, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks so much for your help, Tom TomH300 (talk) 09:20, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

See the note on your talk page about undisclosed paid editing. You must respond to that before you make any more edits anywhere. Bear in mind that if you are an employee of Vectar Project, or a consultant and they're your client, you are considered a paid editor even they aren't paying you specifically to edit Wikipedia. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:56, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Academic Subject Capitalisation?

Hi everyone,

I've been looking at the entry for Edwina Currie. In the section on her early life her entry claims that she studied for a degree in "Philosophy, politics and economics". Should politics and economics be capitalised? I don't want to "correct" it and annoy people.

Kind regards, Puffin123 (talk) 13:35, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

@Puffin123 That degree at Oxford is usually referred to by the acronym PPE but Wikipedia's article on it is titled in sentence case, so I would leave it alone. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:47, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Politics and economics are common nouns, and would not normally be capitalized. Shantavira|^{feed me} 16:19, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

If that's correct, why is "Philosophy" capitalised? It appears mid-sentence. AndyJones (talk) 12:52, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

@AndyJones Now corrected to "p". Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:25, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Notability for a musician

Hello, I submitted a draft Draft:Waltteri Väyrynen to AfC for a musician of my favorite band, a prominent progressive metal band. I thought I had established notability through the inclusion of several reputable, independent, non-trival sources, but the draft was rejected for Notability. However, the musician and at least 2 of the bands he was/is a member of satisfy most of the "Criteria for musicians and ensembles" in the Wikipedia Notabiltiy (music) article. I cited sources, and even did not list this musician as a member of a prominent band which he was a member of because I could find no reputable, independent sources. The argument could be made that the subject of this draft is an individual member of a prominent band, and may be more properly subject to a redirect. However, part of the reason I created this article was due to the release of "Future material". The frontman of the band releasing the material has cited this musician as a direct influence on the sound of the release, and this band's past 6 releases have charted in the Billboard top 100. People may be searching for information on this musician.

I am not affiliated with this musician or any of his projects in any way whatsoever. I am just a fan who noticed the drummer of my favorite band didn't have a page. I am very new to creating and editing articles on Wikipedia, mainly because I don't have anything to add. This is the first time I've had a chance to really contribute, and I'd like to be able to.

Would greatly appreciate any thoughts on next steps here. Thanks. Zymologist (talk) 17:53, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Courtesy pinging the reviewer, @Utopes: TheWikiToby (talk) 17:56, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

@Zymologist: Notability is not inherited from the band. Band members must have had significant coverage in independent, reliable sources that go in-depth about them specifically. Otherwise, they should be redirected to the band article. AfC reviewers expect the references to be in the draft in order to accept. Source 1 is mostly an interview transcript that mainly focuses on the band. Source 2 is another interview transcript with no secondary coverage. Source 3 is a database listing and is not reliable according to WP:A/S. Source 4 is another interview transcript. Source 5 is a reposted press release. Source 6 is another interview focusing on the band. Source 7 only offers a trivial mention of Väyrynen and focuses on the band. Source 8 is essentially the same content as source 1. Source 9 is a headline namecheck and a quote (not significant). Source 10 focuses on the band, not Väyrynen. Source 11 only offers a trivial mention. Source 12 is another interview transcript. Sources 13-16 are all non-independent. Basically, we're looking for independent significant coverage about Väyrynen, not the band. WP:AFCHD is generally a better place for AfC questions. C F A 💬 18:21, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for your time. Zymologist (talk) 19:37, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

FTP URLs

When we link to FTP URLs, should we generally also link to HTTP archives of them. Given the general lack of browser support I expected that IAbot would do this, but it doesn't. In the article Code page 775, I'd like to add archives to the sources cited as "Code Page CPGID 00775 (pdf), IBM" and "Code Page CPGID 00775 (txt), IBM", but since IAbot didn't do it I thought I'd ask here. If the consensus is to include the archives, is there a bot that can do it? McYeee (talk) 19:16, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

I don't think there is established consensus on this, but in my experience fixing bare URLs, FTP links seem to die the quickest. An HTTP archive would be fine, or you could just replace the FTP link with an HTTP one altogether. C F A 💬 19:51, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

The URLs aren't bare in the articles I'm looking at, but I'll swap them anyways. There doesn't appear to be much of a consistent citation style. McYeee (talk) 19:56, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

How do you edit

I am strugguling 80.44.231.197 (talk) 12:55, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

In your one edit as this IP you removed a section title and image from an existing article, now reverted. What were you trying to do? Are you also editing logged into an account? David notMD (talk) 13:03, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! See WP:TUTORIAL for a quick overview on how to edit. Sincerely, Dilettante 20:01, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Filter

I attempted to edit an Article, but the Filter didn't publish my edit. What should I do? Cagliari in Serie A (talk) 19:15, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

You blanked an article and replaced it with "uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu" which the filter caught and stopped. What you should do is stop making unconstructive edits. C F A 💬 19:48, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

@CFA Now I was patrolling recent changes! Cagliari in Serie A (talk) 19:49, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Cagliari in Serie A is globally locked. Cullen328 (talk) 20:19, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Gelp

Hi. I made the requested corrections; is that okay?done. if that's ok, can you move it from this section?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Praeterintention Joseph77237 (talk) 14:26, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

@Joseph77237 You have re-submitted the draft, so it has gone back into the pile to be reviewed. Meanwhile, you need to take a look at our manual of style since it doesn't conform to guidelines on bolding of section headings (we don't!) and other aspects. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:34, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Ok. Joseph77237 (talk) 14:35, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

I made the requested corrections; is that okay?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Praeterintention

Hi. Joseph77237 (talk) 15:31, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi. I made the requested corrections. Regards. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Praeterintention Joseph77237 (talk) 20:40, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

How do I edit an article to add a new section?

I understand how to create a section heading and how to edit within an existing section; what I can't figure out is how to edit at the level that would allow me to add a new section to an article. Thanks for any help you can offer! Don Q314 (talk) 20:48, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

@Don Q314 Click edit at the very top of the article. In the visual editor click the first dropdown and choose what what section level you want to add. For the source editor add a section using == on each side, adding more of them to each side changes the section level. Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 20:53, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Many thanks! Don Q314 (talk) 20:57, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Is this permitted or a copyright violation?

This film/TV episode was very dear to my heart so please be kind. Can I make it an article, or would it violate copyright? TIA User:Allthemilescombined1/SandboxNo3 Allthemilescombined1 (talk) 02:17, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

@Allthemilescombined1: Wikipedia has many articles on TV shows. As long as you don't copy material from the show or other places, and write in your own words, it is not a copyright problem. RudolfRed (talk) 02:24, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

You may, however, want to make sure that it's notable. I have no idea whether or not it is. McYeee (talk) 02:36, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

No doubt with good intentions, McYeee is sounding rather too kind. The first thing you must do, Allthemilescombined1, is to check that you will be able to demonstrate that Ask Me Again ("90-minute episode of the PBS series American Playhouse that aired on February 8, 1989) really is "notable" (as defined by and for Wikipedia). If it is, good; go ahead. If it isn't, the draft won't go anywhere. -- Hoary (talk) 02:57, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Fair point. Notability is, as you point out, really quite important. McYeee (talk) 03:00, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

If you look at American Playhouse, many of the plays that were in time filmed and broadcast on the American Playhouse TV show are subjects of Wikipedia articles. The better ones can be models for your attempt. David notMD (talk) 03:52, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, I didn't think of that! Allthemilescombined1 (talk) 21:01, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Is self-published work a reliable and usable source of info about themselves?

There is a dispute at Talk:Microsoft_Windows#Privacy_features_addition_reverted and I'm looking for a second opinion. Is self-published work a reliable and usable source of info about themselves, such as "Person X says"? ("about themselves" include their personal view of other people or matters, whether it's explicitly stated, as in "I believe that" or not)

According to case 3 of Wikipedia:Identifying_and_using_self-published_works#Acceptable_use_of_self-published_works the answer to the question is yes. (the statement concerns the source itself) An example is given there: "For example, for the statement "The organization purchased full-page advertisements in major newspapers advocating gun control," the advertisement(s) in question could be cited as sources, even though advertisements are self-published."

The concrete case is this: Digital Confidence, a software company in the field of metadata stripping, has published in its official website an analysis of the built-in metadata stripper in Windows. This is a self-published work and therefore cannot be used as a source for the assertions made in the analysis. But I think it can certainly be used as a source for the simple fact that Digital Confidence has published such analysis. So Wikipedia cannot say that "the built-in metadata stripper is flawed", but it can definitely say that "According to Digital Confidence, the built-in metadata stripper is flawed", and use the analysis on Digital Confidence website as a reliable source for this statement. Another editor thinks I'm wrong. Any more thoughts would be appreciated. Sovmeeya (talk) 18:22, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Sovmeeya. I haven't looked at the dispute, but from your description above, I agree with you.

However, dispute resolution isn't about proving that you're right and another person is wrong: it's about how you can collaboratively come to a consensus. ColinFine (talk) 19:54, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

To be clear, this amounts to 'Company A (who sells a competing product) has criticized Company B's product' in an article about Company B's product. MrOllie (talk) 22:21, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

@Sovmeeya, you're correct, the source could be used in that way and is reliable for a statement like "according to Digital Confidence, the built-in metadata stripper is flawed". But just because it's reliable doesn't mean we ought to say it. Many times, the question comes down to WP:DUE. You may want to try listing the issue at WP:3O for an uninvolved third editor to have a better look and provide their opinion. -- asilvering (talk) 23:49, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

When can I remove draft status of an article I wrote?

I wrote and submitted a bio for review: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Cristina_Eisenberg The article was declined once with comments. I made the corrections. I am an autoconfirmed user, but I'm unclear about whether it's ok for me to remove the draft status. Can anyone point me to clarification? Thanks! Bodhipup (talk) 20:58, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

@Bodhipup: Yes, since you are autoconfirmed, you are able to move this to article space yourself with the "Move" tab. Articles for Creation is an optional process for autoconfirmed users that do not have conflicts of interest. It's up to you if you want to skip the additional review. C F A 💬 21:02, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

@Bodhipup, I've accepted this draft, but I'm not totally convinced that her position is a "named chair" in the sense we're looking for. If you can find and add some academic reviews on her books, that would be helpful. -- asilvering (talk) 23:58, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

No Box to Publish Article

Hi, I'd like to publish my article Draft:List of circus accidents. It doesn't have the box at the top that usually allows you to submit it for review. I originally created Draft:List of fatal circus accidents, but wanted to change the name when I widened my scope. Since I couldn't figure out how to do so, I just made a new page. I don't know how to delete the one I no longer want, but it does have the correct box at the top. How can I submit the correct one for revision? Thanks! Gnat8 (talk) 20:02, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

I've added the submission template; if you use the article wizard I believe it's provided automatically, but you can add {{subst:AFC draft}} to a draft if need be. 331dot (talk) 20:08, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Submitted, thanks! Gnat8 (talk) 20:13, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Next time you can't find a submit button, please feel free to try the AfC submission wizard. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 21:27, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

@Gnat8, I notice there are some obviously unreliable sources in the references. You should have another read of WP:RS, and you might want to enable this handy userscript as well: User:Headbomb/unreliable. -- asilvering (talk) 00:01, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Can someone make a page about “حي البحيرات“ in Mecca ?

Because right outside of it is Masjid Al-Taneem and it’s a place people go around by car before Hijra…

so… can somebody make article? Please? Bebo12321 - Talk 10:45, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

@Bebo12321 well, yes, we all can make such an article but it isn't likely anyone will do so unless they are interested in the topic. We are all volunteers here. If you want to give it a try, I suggest you look at this general guide to the process and note that this is the English Wikipedia, so all our articles and titles need to be in English. Google translate says that the title might be "Lakes district (Mecca)". Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:13, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

@Bebo12321: One place to request a page like this is on Wikipedia:WikiProject Saudi Arabia/Article requests. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:25, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Can't stay logged in

When I log in, I click the "stay logged in for a year" box. Yet when I return to the site after some time I'm always logged out. This happens in 3 different browsers. In Firefox, which I use most, I have Wikipedia on the "always allow cookies" list, but it makes no difference. Reggie Pepper (talk) 15:03, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi Reggie Pepper, welcome to the Teahouse. Do you allow cookies at both wikipedia.org and wikimedia.org? Is your browser set to not delete cookies when the browser is closed? PrimeHunter (talk) 15:29, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

And are you using the regular mode of your browser(s), or is it possible you are using "incognito" mode (it may be called different things in different browsers)? This would also discard your cookies when you are done, and have the same affect as PrimeHunter alluded to. Mathglot (talk) 00:37, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Restarting mode

this is in restarting mode please help me work it out so that it can be normal 197.215.23.40 (talk) 11:27, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

hi ip user and welcome to the Teahouse! do you have a question regarding Wikipedia? 💜  melecie  talk - 11:36, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

If this relates to the device/system you're using/viewing WP on, please contact the manufacturer (and/or their support line) or a computer-repair forum/outlet. --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 07:25, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Adding an explanatory note

Hello

I've been trying to add an explanatory note to Joseph Barbera in the Early life section about his ethnicity but it's not appearing, although I used the template which appeared automatically after typing efn! could anyone tell me why is that and how to fix it? Thanks in advance Whatsupkarren (talk) 09:30, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi Whatsupkarren. I have fixed some issues in the note and added {{notelist}} to display it.[1] PrimeHunter (talk) 10:17, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Mass watchlisting pages

Hello there, Is there any way to mass watchlist certain pages in one (or not many) click(s), such as every episode article in a TV series, or every politician in a political party? Reply by VisualEditor is fine. Thanks very much! Mr Sitcom (talk) 08:24, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Nope, sorry. -- asilvering (talk) 09:14, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Ah, I'll need to do a lot of clicking, then. Thanks for the reply! Mr Sitcom (talk) 09:19, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

@Mr Sitcom: I don't know if this helps, but you can edit the watchlist by simply adding page titles to it, via Special:EditWatchlist/raw. You would still need to know the exact titles you want to add, but if you can figure that out then this would at least save you having to visit each page individually to watch them. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:41, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

@Mr Sitcom: See Wikipedia:User scripts/List#Categories for scripts to watch all pages in a category. I haven't tried it. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:42, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you all for your responses, I will take a look at the suggestions. Mr Sitcom (talk) 12:42, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Why ask Why?

Why Women Kill Isiskhpri (talk) 10:34, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

This page is for asking questions about editing Wikipedia. Do you have a question about editing Wikipedia? -- D'n'B-t -- 10:49, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Because that is the series title. Do you have a question about using or editing Wikipedia? Shantavira|^{feed me} 10:49, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Compare this edit by the same username. "Not here", perhaps? -- Hoary (talk) 12:47, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

What is ‘that you own the copyright to’?

What is ‘that you own the copyright to’? What are some examples of this? Please tell me or give me a link where I can read more about it. Олена Бєляєва (talk) 13:21, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

@Олена Бєляєва I suggest you start by reading our article on copyright. Wikipedia cannot, in general, use material that has appeared in publications (books, websites etc.) which are still under copyright. It is the job of Wikipedia editors to summarize and paraphrase any such material to be included in our articles, with citations to the sources where we obtained the information. Copyright is a complicated legal area, so please be more specific if you have further questions after reading the links I supplied. See also this page about copyright of Wikipedia's articles. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:39, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

@Олена Бєляєва: In the context of Wikipedia, this literally refers to text or images which you yourself have created (or in very limited cases, where you have purchased or inherited the copyright from the person who did so). Note that (again, with very limited exceptions) this does not include taking a photograph of a work in which someone else owns the copyright. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:32, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Mobile view

Something changed within the last few hours. It used to be so if I was viewing a wiki page on my cell phone, and clicked the language button to go to a different language version, I would see the mobile version. Now I see the standard version instead. Batrachoseps (talk) 00:49, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

If you look at the URL, it should read as en.m.wik... If you remove the m, it should revert you back to desktop view. ✶Quxyz✶ 01:04, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

I know, but I hardly think I should have to do that every time. Batrachoseps (talk) 01:14, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

at the very bottom of the page, you can see the "desktop view" at the rightmost part, click it and it will switch the default view back to desktop so you don't need to keep changing it on the url. Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 10:55, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out, I wasn't aware of it. To clarify, I was talking about when I was using a cell phone and wanted to use mobile view, but it showed desktop view instead. In any case, it doesn't seem to change the default view.

It used to be that it always redirected to mobile view when you were using a cell phone. Is that no longer the case? Batrachoseps (talk) 06:52, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Check the links you are clicking. Usually search engines like Google will give you the appropriate version, however, occasionally it will flip-flop. Also, I believe that direct links brings one directly to the linked version, but I am not sure how that works on mobile. ✶Quxyz✶ 11:38, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Somehow, the problem has been fixed. It now redirects to the mobile version. Batrachoseps (talk) 16:18, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Ok to add this quote?

Regarding Next Stop Wonderland, is it appropriate to add this: A quote by Ralph Waldo Emerson figures prominently early in the film. "Consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds" means, to Erin, that predictable men aren't worth dating. At the end of the film, Erin learns that the correct quote is "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds". https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/353571-a-foolish-consistency-is-the-hobgoblin-of-little-minds-adored. With this new perspective, Erin realizes that if a dating prospect has his heart in the right place, that can make up for his lack of adventurousness. Allthemilescombined1 (talk) 11:34, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Allthemilescombined1. As usual, it depends on the sources. If an independent commentator has discussed this quotation and its role in the story, then the article could summarise what the commentator says. If it is your own observation, then it is original research, and doesn't belong in the article - and the inclusion of the quotation then becomes trivia, and should probably not be there. ColinFine (talk) 12:32, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. Allthemilescombined1 (talk) 16:39, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Unable to edit

Hello. Around 10 years ago I was very active from dynamic IPs. Lately either my range is blocked or the pages (articles) that I want to edit are protected. Even AN and ANI are currently protected but not teahouse. Why is that so? 2409:4081:1D9C:D478:0:0:4C0B:D90C (talk) 16:29, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

I mean, why are so many ranges blocked, and why are so many pages protected? This used to be considered unusual back in the days. 2409:4081:1D9C:D478:0:0:4C0B:D90C (talk) 16:36, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi IP, I can't really speak to whether there's been an overall trend towards protecting more pages, but we've been experiencing some really persistent disruption from a very determined vandal over the past few months, so that might be affecting your experience. Sorry about that. The easiest solution would be to create an account, but if you don't want to do that for whatever reason, you'll have to work through Wikipedia:Edit requests for now, I'm afraid. -- asilvering (talk) 19:13, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Does this influencer meet the requirements for BLP-Notability? [German required/preffered]

I’m looking to write an article for a BLP, and have limited experience with the notability requirements for BLPs.

WP:Three are [1],, [2], and [3], originating from 20 Minuten. There is also some additional coverage, such as [4], [5].

I think we’re on the safe side of borderline notable, but am looking for a second opinion. FortunateSons (talk) 16:23, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, FortunateSons, and welcome to the Teahouse. On a quick look, I don't see much independent coverage. Apart from 2 and 3 (which appear to be the same link, but require registration, so I haven't looked at them) the rest are largely based on her words. See WP:42. ColinFine (talk) 16:28, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, ColinFine, thank you. My apologies, I fixed the link, it should work now.

While some parts are based on her words only (which obviously don’t count for notability), much of the other content is descriptive of her content and/or making claims in their own voice, enough to be considered SIGCOV if you struck every quote (IMO, but I could be very wrong). Obviously, everything coming directly from the subject would be covered by the usual restrictions. What do you think? FortunateSons (talk) 16:38, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, too busy giggling at "Shitstorm ist rasch entfacht" to provide a helpful opinion. -- asilvering (talk) 19:19, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

That’s definitely a good excuse in my book FortunateSons (talk) 19:22, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Ok, having managed to control myself: I don't think you're on the safe side of borderline, but I agree it's borderline and not an obvious no. I'm encouraged that some of the coverage goes back to 2021. And is this her too? But I don't like that most of the coverage originates from the same core story, and I'm not encouraged by the results of the "Kennst du die Tiktokerin Franny?" poll on #3, where only 7% of respondents on an article entirely about her say that they've even heard of her. But she's young and in a public-facing career, so she's pretty likely to become more notable as time goes on. It might be worth spinning up a draft, and checking every six months to see if there's anything you can add to it. -- asilvering (talk) 19:47, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

I think it’s probably her, based on her design education and the uncommon name, but I’m not great with faces.

Yeah, I’ll definitely keep her in mind, she’ll likely keep growing, with my judgement slightly based on the fact a third person independently sent me one of her posts today. There was also SRF, which will be nice for aboutself background (she speaks pretty clearly, but I’m not the right person to transcribe Swiss German).

I think I’ll add her to my “needs one more article to be ready” list, thank you very much for your time! FortunateSons (talk) 20:05, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Need help in page publishing

Dear Administrators, Volunteers and Contributors Greeting of the day

I am writing in regard of my recently edited page but I faced rejection from Mr. @Saqib. I have made every effort to ensure that my submissions comply with Wikipedia’s content policies, including verifiability, neutrality, and notability. However, despite these efforts, he repeatedly rejected my page. I kindly request you all please suggest me a better way to publish my page.

here is the link of my edited page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Dr._Mahboob_Ali_Sial Latifayazsiyal (talk) 18:37, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

@Latifayazsiyal Please read the helpful messages on your talk page. The draft appears to be promotional. I am not seeing your peacock words such as prominent, exceptional, or exemplary in the references you have provided. The article should reflect only what reliable sources say. Shantavira|^{feed me} 19:00, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

@Latifayazsiyal, according to the page history, no one has ever declined or rejected this draft before. Did you create another version earlier under a different name? -- asilvering (talk) 19:02, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

@Asilvering It was created directly in mainspace and subsequently draftified by User:Saqib. Among other things, the title should not have "Dr.", per WP:TITLESINTITLES. Mike Turnbull (talk) 20:17, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I saw that. My question remains. -- asilvering (talk) 20:21, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

I think they forgot to mention that they are also working on an autobiography at Draft:Ayaz Latif Siyal, which both @S0091: and I rejected. I'm unsure why they would single me out in this situation. Maybe it’s just because we’re from the same country? — Saqib (talk I contribs) 21:11, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

eh, it's not uncommon for new editors to mistake reviewers/patrollers for one another, and you two both have names of about the same length that start with S. Easy mistake. -- asilvering (talk) 21:33, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Latifayazsiyal.

Please understand that Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely 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. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources. Most or all of your sources are either not independent of Sial, or just mention his name. We require several sources that are reliable, wholly independent of Sial, and contain significant coverage of Sial (specifically - not just of his organisation). Only if you have several such is an article about him possible. ColinFine (talk) 20:05, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

My name appears on Wikipedia

My artist name has been mentioned in an article. I wish to add a new article to reference myself on wikipedia, so that people can click on my name, and actually see the work that I've done and how I've contributed to my particular craft within my culture. Elayne Adamczyk Harrington (talk) 21:50, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. If you're an artist or creative professional, you would need to meet the definition of a notable creative professional, as shown with significant coverage in independent reliable sources, to merit a Wikipedia article- your name being in another article is not grounds by itself for you to get one.

Be aware that an article about yourself is not necessarily a good thing. It's highly discouraged for people to write about themselves, please see the autobiography policy. 331dot (talk) 22:04, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Elayne, and welcome to the Teahouse.

I am also mentioned in a Wikipedia article, but I am aware that I do not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability (because not enough independent material about me has been reliably published) and so I do not expect there to be an article about me.

If you meet the criteria (which are not about what you are, what you have done, or what you have said or created, but, again, depend on what has been published about you) then there could be an article about you. However, you are very strongly discouraged from attempting to write it yourself - see Autobiography. ColinFine (talk) 22:06, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Huh. I'm not mentioned by name anywhere. On the other hand, my Wikipedia username has been mentioned in a couple of reliable sources but not enough coverage for an article about me with my username as a title. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:21, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. I have reviewed all the links you shared... interesting and important. Personally, I am cool with positive and negative articles to be referenced in an unbiased personal Wikipedia page, but will hang back until someone else feels the need to do it. I simply presumed it was a professional thing to do, to be honest. Seems I was wrong... Elayne Adamczyk Harrington (talk) 22:44, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

What's your artist name? One thing we can do is turn it into a red link, which increases the likelihood that someone else (someone from WP:WIRED, for example) will create an article on you. -- asilvering (talk) 23:14, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Her user name is her real name, and she's known by another name as described by her profile on the Irish Museum of Modern Art website here: https://imma.ie/artists/elayne-adamczyk-harrington/ ~Anachronist (talk) 23:35, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

I'm not finding either of those names anywhere, so this is where I give up. -- asilvering (talk) 23:42, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Temper-Mental MissElayneous Elayne Adamczyk Harrington (talk) 00:36, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

@Anachronist, would you say that one counts as independent in this context? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:44, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure if a museum that profiles an artist whose work is on display at the museum would be considered independent. I could see making an argument analogous to one of the WP:MUSICBIO criteria, in which an artist whose work is displayed in two notable museums might be considered notable. ~Anachronist (talk) 07:11, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

@Anachronist Thanks. I will try to make this one on GNG grounds. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:25, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

https://misselayneous.com/news-archives

https://misselayneous.com/interviews

Thanks for your help everyone. It's been interesting to learn about these processes. I am in the process of formally documenting past media coverage, etc, for posterity or whatever. (Above I attach links to my progress on compiling articles & news, plus published interviews)*

It's incomplete at the mo. But getting there slowly & surely. And even if a Wikipedia page is not warranted, at least I can resume collating all media converage together in one place on my website.

Thank you all for your assistance

-E Elayne Adamczyk Harrington (talk) 07:50, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

That's a start. See WP:Golden Rule for what we expect in sources. Interviews don't count toward notability. Some of those sources look like they may be OK although they are all from the same place, hotpress.com. ~Anachronist (talk) 14:18, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

excellent. Thanks - will do!

Browsing today I found other items so far. Some are blogs and amateur kind of stuff, but a lot of the sources of coverage are reputable I.e. Irish Examiner and Irish Independent. I am trying weed out as we speak.

Interestingly, I have been invited to contribute to the UCD James Joyce Irish Poetry Archive, so this Wiki endeavour has really helped me to gather and organise that aspect of my career.

However, I have a physical archive of newpapers and such...much of what actually isn't digitised.

For example, I have the physical newspaper matching this online article:

https://www.irishexaminer.com/lifestyle/artsandculture/arid-40246097.html

But many of the newspapers and magazines I have are not online, i.e.; The Ticket 2012 I was featured on the front cover for a St. Patrick's Day special, having being commissioned to write a piece on Irishness for the occasion.

(I presume I can't share the scan as an image here)* Elayne Adamczyk Harrington (talk) 18:58, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

There is no requirement for sources to be online as long as they are properly cited, so that anyone who wants to verify can go to a library or use a subscription digital archive service to access the source. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:24, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

For the interested, Elayne Harrington. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:22, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Gråbergs Gråa Sång triumphs again. @Elayne Adamczyk Harrington you are very fortunate to have attracted his interest. Your next step is probably to upload a selfie to Commons so the article can include your picture. Mike Turnbull (talk) 20:25, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

A triumph indeed. I certainly am fortunate. It's an excellent composition so far! Absolutely...I have a few photos. Not sure which to go for. Reviewing the suggestions again Elayne Adamczyk Harrington (talk) 23:32, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

All that in a day? Wow. Excellent work.

@Elayne Adamczyk Harrington: all it needs is a picture of you. It can be a selfie you upload and release to the Wikimedia Foundation under a free license. If it's a picture taken by a photographer other than you, then the photographer would need to release it to the Wikimedia Foundation under an acceptable free license. See WP:CONSENT for the communication template that needs to happen from the photographer, regardless of who it is. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:28, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

I've not been here that long (2ish years) but I don't think I've seen this before. @Gråbergs Gråa Sång: what a nice thing to do for the artist. Knitsey (talk) 23:39, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Why are most drafts declined

Why because a lot of them I have seen are 86.97.103.231 (talk) 10:03, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

There are many reasons why they get declined, but the most common issue is simply a lack of notability, poor formatting or a lack of good citations. If you have specific pages in mind then feel free to post them here and we can take a look at why they were declined. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 10:08, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

IP editor. The decline reason is always given by the reviewer and can be seen at the top of the draft. So, for Draft:O with open top which you contributed to, it was for the simple reason that it cited no sources. All Wikipedia articles must be backed up by reliable, published sources which demonstrate the notability of the topic. Mere existence is not enough to have an article: see WP:NOT. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:52, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, IP user. Doggo and Mike have given the demonstrable, factual reasons. I would like to give an answer at a higher level: because many drafts are created by people who do not understand Wikipedia's policies and practices, and have not spent time becoming familiar with them before they try to create an article.

I also observe that a lot of drafts are created by people as the first thing they do after creating an account, which gives rise to the suspicion that their purpose is to promote the subject of that draft (though they often don't realise that what they are doing is promotion according to Wikipedia's view).

Finally, I remember from my own early days editing, nearly twenty years ago, when I so much wanted to "make my mark" by adding a new article. I have no direct evidence that that desire is at play, but I'm sure it must be. ColinFine (talk) 11:02, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Another way to frame it, is that even slightly experienced editors don't need to use the AfC process - so you dont see the articles they create getting approved or rejected. -- D'n'B-t -- 13:03, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

The opposite is also true. I'm an experienced editor of 18 years, and admin for a dozen years, and even I have submitted a draft for review to get a second set of eyes on it. This has been helpful. In one case the reviewer convinced me to completely refactor the draft to be about an author's books rather than the author, and the result was a much better article that my original submission.

That said, AFC is the only venue available for an IP address who wants to publish an article, and it's the only realistic venue available for paid editors or COI editors. I have seen a COI editor publish an acceptable article without going through review, but it's extremely rare. Usually such attempts end up getting moved to draft space anyway. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:29, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Article Denial

My article, Draft:Chernoh Alpha M. Bah has been denied twice; first due to insufficient coverage and second because of unreliable sourcing. The topic has had some pretty widespread coverage and recognition, but the sources are primarily African news outlets. Can someone help me identify what may be the problem and if it's one that can be resolved considering the subject matter? Thanks. Gnat8 (talk) 15:59, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Gnat8, and welcome to the Teahouse. I haven't looked right through the list of sources in the draft, but I can see that several look as if they might be problematic. No 1 is published by his university, so is not independent and cannot contribute to establishing notability; Number 3 similarly, and 4 looks very much as if it is based on his words, not independent ones. 2 and 14 don't seem to mention him, and so contribute absolutely nothing to an article about him. 7 looks like a blog site, and does not appear to have any evidence of being subject to editorial control, and so is not a reliable source. I haven't looked further.

Please understand that Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely 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. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources.

You need to look at each source critically according the the triple criteria of reliability, indepedence, and significant coverage: see WP:42. Any sources which are not reliable, or which do not mention him, should be removed (together with any information in the draft which is verified only by these sources). Any sources which are not independent of him and his associates, or which contain only passing mention of him, may be retained, but do not contribute towards establishing notability. ColinFine (talk) 16:24, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Please look at WP:Golden Rule. Identify three sources that meet all three criteria at the same time. If you can't, then it's hard to make an argument that the subject merits an article on Wikipedia. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:51, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Long Island Sound Crossing

Article misspells the name of the road in Rye, NY where bridge would be located in Westchester County. Correct spelling is "Manursing", not "Mansuring." I used to live on Manursing Way. 2601:184:300:21:9899:BD7A:52F5:B1E8 (talk) 22:31, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

What article has this problem. It is not clear. Bduke (talk) 23:17, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Looks like it's Long Island Sound link. ayakanaa ( t ) 01:19, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Fixed, after consulting Google Maps. (Thank you for pointing this out, but anyone could have done what I did.) -- Hoary (talk) 03:39, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Japanese dynasties

.. Can anyone please assist with Japanese dynasties,and the role they played in modern Japan...

... Immortalising their roles & impact on current Japanese society...

.... I do love facts like the 1st three years of Japanese schooling are only about Discipline and Respect,how can such a great culture curriculum be applied to African school systems... 121Joe (talk) 03:47, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello from Tokyo. On the monarchy, read T. Fujitani's Splendid Monarchy (U California Press). I sense that you are deluded (or joking) about Japanese education. NB this page is for questions about the use of Wikipedia. -- Hoary (talk) 04:00, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

If you have done research about this then you can write that from yourself, If you write an article about that or you can expand articles like Imperial House of Japan and History of Japan.–– kemel49^{(connect)(contri)} 04:02, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

General question

Are comments by IPs valid in any AFD? Youknow? (talk) 14:59, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

@Youknowwhoistheman Yes, see WP:AFDFORMAT, which says Unregistered or new users are welcome to contribute to the discussion, but their recommendations may be discounted if they seem to be made in bad faith. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:02, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. Youknow? (talk) 15:05, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

On the other hand, comments by SPAs (WP:Single-purpose accounts) are often not valid, and these are often made by IP addresses or new accounts because of off-Wiki canvassing. When I evaluate an AFD discussion, I generally ignore SPA comments in my judgment unless they are well-reasoned policy-based arguments (which is almost never the case with SPA comments). ~Anachronist (talk) 00:36, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, you are right @Anachronist. can you check the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/E. A. Jabbar - Wikipedia? Youknow? (talk) 07:26, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

String theory

Space object connections have not a single atmosphere chain locks, it's working only in english reactjs string. 62.181.56.1 (talk) 04:53, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Your posts to artocle Talk pages have been reverted as nonsensical. Do you have a question? David notMD (talk) 06:35, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

I can't provide a picture over internet without language package. 62.181.56.1 (talk) 08:03, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Looking for mysteriously DELETED PAGE - "Draft:Hotcakes & Outtakes (Little Feat album)"

I was working on a page yesterday, linked it, added credits and footnotes. I was told it didn't meet standards, UNKNOWN WORK? or something like that. Bad source (Discogs.com - verified data, from orig album source. ("Little Feat" American Rock group from the 1970s-90s)

TODAY it is all gone. DELETED.

I can't even access to copy data to utilize for my own use.

DELETED PAGE is - "Draft:Hotcakes & Outtakes (Little Feat album)"

> I thought I had 6 months to figure out how to use your 'system', so as to correct my dirty little deeds - apparently this is not true.

ANY assistance would be of help, I just don't know how to connect / access people who know about these things. Stumbling around a rabbit hole of 'links' that don't relate to "FINDING out WHAT happened to a page I was working on." Don't want to FILE some LEGAL document for such a small trial page.

THANKs for your TIME and expertise!

(Apoplogies IF this communication is in a TOTALLY wrong place. It was the only place I could find to ASK A QUESTION 'to the ether'.

cheers Rklund (talk) 03:14, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

I expect that 331dot will soon be along to explain, and perhaps restore. Meanwhile: (i) "Deletion" doesn't actually mean deletion. (ii) The "deleted" draft appears to reproduce a review, in toto. Credit is given for this, and the fact that it's a quotation isn't obscured. Thus the intention isn't dishonest -- but all the same, this isn't satisfactory. (iii) The "deleted" draft has an excessively long list of credits. (iv) No, you don't want to file some legal document. (v) The more CAPITALS one uses, the less persuasive one becomes. -- Hoary (talk) 03:34, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

According to a link from your Talk page, an author (you) asked that it be deleted. If not true, expect the draft to be restored. David notMD (talk) 06:32, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Rklund I assumed that this comment was made by you and in this comment it was said "you can delete this page whenever you choose" so I interpreted that as a deletion request. Since that apparently was not the case I will restore it. 331dot (talk) 08:37, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

You don't have a time limit on editing the draft as long as it's active- so you have as long as you need, not "six months", the six months is only if the draft is completely inactive for that time. 331dot (talk) 08:39, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Reads like an ad vs appropriate sources

A new entry has been rejected due to "reading more like an advertisement" and problems with the references. Are both of those problems equally important or does using appropriate sources carry more weight? CBathka (talk) 17:50, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

CBathka, the issues are equally important because they relate to our three core content policies. Problems with the references relates to Verifiability and possibly No original research. The advertising concern relates to the Neutral point of view. Cullen328 (talk) 17:57, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Does this refer to Draft:Microsoft Azure Quantum? I've never seen an advert that looked like that. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:21, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

"Tenuta Pantanacci" page deleted

Hello All, i've just created the article "Tenuta Pantanacci" but it has been cancelled. May i know the reason? Who can help me? Tenuta Pantanacci (talk) 14:51, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello. First, are you Tenuta Pantanacci? Second, you wrote in Italian, and this is the English Wikipedia. You need to go to the Italian Wikipedia if you want to write in Italian. 331dot (talk) 15:02, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Consistent spelling/grammar errors from IP

There is an IP whose edits I've been following for a bit, as they make a lot of spelling and grammar errors(I suspect English may not be their first language) though I try to just fix up some of the more obvious errors. However, they often will go back and revert my edits without explanation anyway. As far as I can tell they have never used a talk page, so discussion with them would likely be pointless, but I also don't want to start getting into an edit war with this person. Is there something I can/should do in this scenario? LaffyTaffer (talk) 14:01, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

You need to use their talk page; in case your assumption is incorrect. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:34, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Linking to interviews in BLP

More of a general question: I have seen some BLP articles which contain many external links to extensive interviews with the subject of the article. I reviewed the Wikipedia:External links page and it includes detailed interviews as an example of an acceptable external link, but I am wondering at what point it is considered excessive? If an author has done an extensive interview every time they have released a book, is it considered acceptable to link each interview? Should these be condensed down to a few choice interviews, and how is that decision made? Mintopop (talk) 05:20, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Adding hundreds of interviews to an article would certainly be spammy. A better solution would be to start an RfC or a discussion to build consensus with other editors related to the article and add only the important ones. GrabUp - Talk 07:44, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Mintopop, in cases like this, I always look to existing practices in Good articles and Featured articles about similar topics. So, I took a look at a Good article about a renowned actress Meryl Streep and saw no interviews of her in the external links of her article. I then looked at the biography of a famous actor, Lawrence Olivier, which is a Featured article. No interviews in external links. So, I looked at biographies of authors. William Gibson is a Featured article with one external link to an interview. Ursula K. Le Guin is a Featured article with external links to four interviews. Kurt Vonnegut is a Featured article with no external links to interviews. So, I think that the established practice is that external links to a a very small number of interviews is OK, but more than a handful is not OK. As for how to select the best interviews, those would be the ones that cover the person's entire career as opposed to their most recent commercial release, and those that are conducted by notable interviewers and published in highly notable periodicals. In the end, the selection comes down to well-informed editorial judgment, which is a precious commodity. Cullen328 (talk) 08:30, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, this makes sense and I appreciate your insight. I am finally biting the bullet and trying to just "Be Bold!" with my edits, but at the same time trying not to go too crazy. I keep your idea in mind of cross-referencing against articles deemed good by the community :) Mintopop (talk) 16:34, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

@GrabUp Thank you! I have often noticed this on pages that seem to be less generally popular and have had the majority of their edits done by fans. It is sometimes difficult to tell if it is worth trying to start talk/rfc discussions on pages where it seems that no one is looking at it frequently. Is it Wiki practice to do it anyways, regardless of the perceived traffic levels? Mintopop (talk) 16:38, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Be bold. If someone disagrees with you, engage in a discussion. That’s all. GrabUp - Talk 16:42, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Could anyone take a look at this article

I created a draft and it was rejected please help me get it published here's the link Draft:Lean Savage. Blueman17 (talk) 14:12, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi, Blueman17. Your draft has not been Rejected, which means "no hope of qualifying for an article, please give up": it was Declined, meaning "not up to standard yet, please carry out improvements." This implies that the Reviewer does think that the Draft can potentially be improved to Article quality.

The Reviewer has advised that the draft does not (yet) demonstrate the subject's Notability – that is, that the subject has been sufficiently written about in published Reliable sources independently of him: in this case, the career-specific Wikipedia:Notability (music) is most relevant: please read it carefully and determine whether the subject meets the criteria there. If you think he does, you need to show this in the text.

I notice also that, outside of the two references for the Lede paragraph, the rest of the article is entirely unsourced. Every fact in a Wikipedia article needs to be cited to a source, at the end of a sentence or paragraph in which it (first) appears. (Usually, one source will cover all or most of the several facts in a sentence or paragraph, but either can have multiple sources.) You included all these facts because you know them: how do you know them? Unless you have some relation to the subject (or are the subject, but see WP:Autobiography) you must have read, heard (radio?) or seen (TV, etc?) them somewhere. You need to say exactly where using citations, as you did in the Lede. If you only know them from personal experience (see Wikipedia:No original research), without their having also been published, then they cannot appear in the article: this is all necessary because of Wikipedia's basic requirement of WP:Verifiability. Hope this helps. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.209.45 (talk) 17:20, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

That's harsh

Thanks I'll try to dig deeper

Would appreciate it if you help with the research Blueman17 (talk) 17:27, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

It may seem harsh, but it's necessary to maintain the quality of this encyclopedia.

Generally, Help Desk and Teahouse responders do not also engage in collaborative research with new editors, and I myself have no interest or expertise in this particular type of subject. Someone else reading this, however, may want to, in which case they will probably respond on your own Talk page, or the Talk page of the Draft. Good luck. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.209.45 (talk) 17:40, 24 August 2024 (UTC)