Wikipedia:Teahouse: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 16:34, 5 March 2020

Shortcuts

Hoary, a Teahouse host

Welcome to the Teahouse!
Your go-to place for friendly help with using and editing Wikipedia.

Ask a question

Question forumMeet your hostsArticles to improveBecome a host

New to Wikipedia? See our tutorial for new editors or introduction to contributing page.
Note: Newer questions appear at the bottom of the Teahouse. Completed questions are archived within 2-3 days.

To read the newest questions, skip to bottom
About the Teahouse

Most recent archives
1209, 1210, 1211, 1212, 1213, 1214, 1215, 1216, 1217, 1218, 1219, 1220, 1221, 1222, 1223, 1224, 1225, 1226, 1227, 1228

(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.)

I've just found someone else's abandoned draft about the subject of the article I'm creating

Hi. Can someone advise me, please? I’ve been doing occasional Wikipedia edits, on and off, for a few years now. I recently decided to try & create my first article. So I spent some time researching what seemed like an interesting subject (a big film producer who didn’t have his own page), drafted an article, and collected all the relevant citations. Then I logged into Wikipedia, tried to create the page – and I found that someone else had begun a page on the same person a few months ago. The page was moved to Drafts and appears to have been abandoned. What’s the correct thing to do in a situation like this? Should I add my material to the draft page – and basically edit the article until it is complete enough to submit for approval? Or should I contact the original creator of the draft? Or contact someone else? The original draft is unfinished. It appears to be sourced mainly from website of one of the producer’s companies, whereas I’ve been trawling sources from all over the world. Sorry to be stupid. I hope to get the hang of this soon. Any advice would be much appreciated. Thanks very much UKpedant2 (talk) 11:20, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there. If the existing draft is a good starting point, then I would use it. There's no need to contact the original creator (or anyone else) to ask permission but you might like to see if the original creator wants to help develop the article with you via a Talk page message, but that's entirely up to you. Before using the existing draft, it'd be a good idea to check it doesn't violate any fundamental policies - like being a copyright violation. If you link to the page you are interested in, I'm sure someone will take a look and offer an opinion. QuiteUnusual (talk) 14:14, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. That’s really helpful. I think the original creator was thinking along similar lines to me, but he seems to have decided that it’s too much work. So I’ll add my material to his framework and then let him know what I’ve done. The link to the existing draft is here: https://en.wikiredia.com/wiki/Draft:Matthew_Stillman UKpedant2 (talk) 17:43, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Help!

I’ve been trying to make my userpage a bit better. just I realised that my Awards & Badges, Contributions and Created Articles sections weren’t fitting inside my ‘green box’ (Which took me 6 hours to create). Could someone please fix it? Thanks, Rodrigo Valequez (talk) 14:16, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also, could you make the green (which is making my eyes bleed) a bit lighter in color? Thanks again, Rodrigo Valequez (talk) 14:21, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello? Rodrigo Valequez (talk) 19:14, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hellooooooo? Rodrigo Valequez (talk) 16:40, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Partly done. @Rodrigo Valequez: Hey, hope you don't mind, but I went ahead and fixed the sections not being in the green box for you. I removed the offending code ({|style="margin: 1em auto;") and it seems to have resolved the issue. As far as the colour gradient goes I suggest using a color picker like this page to figure out what colors work best for you. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 22:52, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

All right, thanks. Rodrigo Valequez (talk) 15:06, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Article Getting Declined

Is there anything wrong in this article, everything is included but always gets denied.

Title of the page is Draft:Sanat Sawant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.36.8.244 (talk • contribs)

As you have been told by Hell in a Bucket on your talk page: "At this time it has been declined (multiple times) because the artist simply does not appear notable. If you can find how this person meets the WP:GNG and show us reliable 3rd party in depth coverage it might change but it doesn't appear that is the case now.". You will now have found that your repeated attempts to put this forward for review has resulted in its deletion. The topic has also been 'salted' meaning only an administrator can now create that page. And it now appears your IP address has been blocked from editing for two weeks for evading a prior block. You have not helped your cause one bit, I'm afraid. Nick Moyes (talk) 20:52, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: More disruption has resulted in a range block and the talk page of the (deleted) draft has had to be preotected as well. Eagleash (talk) 20:48, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Quick question

Hi, if I am creating a page about a feminist woman, and from the all that I've read about her, it is clear that she believes that women should be referred to by their first name, rather than the surname., should I use her first name or surname in all the subsequent mentions in the article? Thanks in advance. FelixtheNomad (talk) 20:45, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Surname. Go by Wikipedia's manual of style, not an individual's personal opinion. --bonadea contributions talk 20:50, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@FelixtheNomad: Welcome to the Teahouse. I completely agree with the above. The voice that this encyclopaedia uses is really important. It sounds far too chatty and friendly for a neutral encyclopaedia to be talking about a subject by their first name, no matter how the subject like to be addressed in public. If that issue had been commented upon by independant and reliable sources, then it would be fine to mention that preference in the article, but still not refer to them in that way unless that was how the world at large refers to them. Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex and Cher are perhaps notable exceptions to that rule, whilst Elton John uses both 'Elton John' and just 'John' but not, as far as I can see, just 'Elton', which seems the right approach to me. Hope this helps. Nick Moyes (talk) 00:04, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This surely helps, Thank you so much. FelixtheNomad (talk) 06:39, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Card Games

Why are some card games capitalized (e.g., Durak), while others are sometimes capitalized (e.g., Bridge), and others apparently never capitalized (e.g., poker)? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kdammers (talk • contribs) 02:06, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've looked at the articles about these games. In them, none is capitalised. Skat is mostly capitalised in the article about it, because its name is a German word, and in German all nouns are capitalised. Maproom (talk) 08:31, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Editing

From above: What is the best way to find vandalism?

What is the best way to find vandalism? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Angry cuman (talk • contribs) 05:31, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Angry cuman: The probably best way is to use Special:RecentChanges. Check out the highlight options, they can save you time. Do you know Twinkle already? It makes reverting and warning much easier and takes care of I.e. Signing your edits were needed. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 06:56, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a time limit on editing for re-submission?

I haven't made all the "corrections" I need to make. It will take time. I got notice today I have made 100 revisions. I hope you don't pull the plug because you are expecting something sooner. I have a lot of work about this. thanks folks. I still have to figure out how to put my images up. This current page is not a talk page to be signed? right? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carl J. Weber (talk • contribs) 06:15, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Carl J. Weber: If it's not an article and you're making comments, please sign. As far as I know drafts can stay inactive for 6 months before they're considered for deletion. You should be fine. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 06:46, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think this must be about Draft:Etymology of Chicago. It looks more like an essay than an encyclopedia article, and it's full of original research. But it won't get deleted so long as someone makes at least one edit to it every six months. Wikipedia has no deadline. Maproom (talk) 09:30, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Has now been declined twice. This still means that it will exist as a draft which any edit (including creator) can work on before it is resubmitted (or after, for that matter). Important remaining issues are that much of the text still lacks referencing and much of the text appears to be original research on the part of the creator. David notMD (talk) 11:20, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Having been declined twice, you'll want to make sure you carefully read and understand the comments provided by the reviewers and the articles to which they've provided links before submitting the draft again. When people repeatedly re-submit a draft without seeming to make the substantial required changes, it can be seen as disruptive, which could result in the draft being rejected (permanently) and/or the editor blocked, which you don't want. There's no real time limit as long as you keep working on it every so often, so please take your time to find and cite those sources and create an article you (and we) can be proud of. Cheers. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 21:14, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Removing Controversial Information from Swarajya (magazine)

Hi respected editors, Few editors trying to remove controversial information from Swarajya (magazine) which is well sourced. Is it really be removed from there? — Preceding unsigned comment added by DMySon (talk • contribs) 2020-03-03T09:20:59 (UTC)

Hello, DMySon. If there is disagreement about the content of an article, the next stage is to discuss it at the article's Talk page: see WP:BRD. I see no discussion there since January. If editors are unable to reach consensus there, the next steps are explained at WP:DR. --ColinFine (talk) 15:11, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You, ColinFine DMySon 05:15, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Question about citations

Thank you to Maproom and Nick Moyes for advice about citations at Draft:Avery Yale Kamila. You suggested I post three most significant sources. Sulfurboy commented that the sources about subject's school lunch work are reliable. I'm still trying to figure out what citations show notability and which don't. Would an editor be able to review the following three citations about subject's pesticide work and provide feedback?

1. Bouchard, Kelley (2015-10-07). "Portland citizens' group proposes broad pesticide ban". Portland Press Herald. Retrieved 2020-02-14. https://www.pressherald.com/2015/10/07/portland-citizens-group-proposes-strong-pesticide-ban/ (Subject is quoted and mentioned in lots of articles in the Portland Press Herald and Portland Forecaster about the pesticide ban; this article talks about the group subject founded.)
2. Dow, Rebecca (2017-04-25). "Portland Marches in Solidarity". The SMCC Beacon. Retrieved 2020-02-20. https://thesmccbeacon.wordpress.com/2017/04/25/portland-marches-in-solidarity/
3. Litchfield, Kathy (2016-02-10). "Going Organic in Portland, ME: Portland Protectors Works to Eliminate Pesticides". Organic Land Care Program. Retrieved 2020-02-09. http://nofaorganiclandcare.blogspot.com/2016/02/going-organic-in-portland-me-portland.html

Are these any good? Thank you very much for taking time to help.--BrikDuk (talk) 09:51, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy pings @Maproom, Nick Moyes, and Sulfurboy: And by way of explanation: User:BrikDuk you need to put the User: part in the link as well to activate the ping mechanisn, otherwise it just thinks you want an article page called Maproom. - X201 (talk) 10:03, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for added the code to ping. --BrikDuk (talk) 10:06, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is not reliability, it's the need for in-depth discussion of the subject by independent sources. Source 1 above does not discuss her, it reports what she said. Source 2 describes things that she talked about, and says that she did so well – that's not the "in-depth discussion" that we're looking for. Source 3 has a whole paragraph on her. It's a start, but details like the age of her son don't seem to me like the kind of material we're looking for. Maproom (talk) 10:11, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for taking time to explain. Appreciate it. But still confused. Source 1 discusses a group she founded. That's notable. Isn't it? There are other among 24 sources cited that give biographical details and in-depth discussion. I can highlight those. Earlier I was told not reliable in pesticide area, so that is why I called out these three citations. Subject is mentioned in press for three areas: School lunch, pesticide regulation, and food column. I was told earlier the citation problem was with the pesticide work. Any advice for how to proceed? Appreciate your help.BrikDuk (talk) 10:54, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Source 1 discusses a group she founded. That's notable. Isn't it?". No. Anyone can found a group, I've done it myself. If the group were itself notable, that might do something towards making its founder notable. (A comment, not relevant to this discussion, but maybe helpful to others who want to check source 1. If I try to read it on my desktop PC, I can't, it's behind a paywall. But I can read it freely from my laptop. I've no idea why that can happen.) Maproom (talk) 11:16, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

More ref weakness: Ref 8 is an interview with Kamila (does not contribute to notability and does not mention that she writes a column), Ref 9 is a one-line mention, and Ref 10 is a dead link. My overall impression is that her involvement in local affairs does not rise to Wikipedia's criteria for notability. David notMD (talk) 11:42, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for this expanded explanation. Really helpful. The take away is a person can be notable in specific circles and mentioned a lot in the press but that doesn't equal notability. Thing to do seems like let the article sit and search for better citations. Thank you User:David notMD for making edits to the draft. Appreciate it. BrikDuk (talk) 14:59, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Where is Twinkle?

I went to the Twinkle's main page and followed the instructions. But I went to my preference page, went to the 'gadgets' section but couldn't find the Twinkle option to enable it. Could anyone please help me with it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Omniscien1 (talk • contribs) 14:32, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Omniscien1, to use Twinkle you need to be autoconfirmed, by having made 10 edits (which you have), over 4 days. This is done automatically, and should be done at 0615 utc tomorrow, at which point the option to enable Twinkle will appear. ~~ Alex Noble - talk 14:38, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am really sorry but can please explain me these terms you have used: 'autoconfirmed', '0615 UTC'. Sorry for the inconvenience. And I have made total 79 edits, out of which 44 are done in Wikipedia's pages mostly 2020 in India, Kerala, Wagle Estate along with some other. Omniscien1 (talk) 16:06, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Omniscien1 "Autoconfirmed" means that you have at least 10 edits and your account is at least four days old. Your account will be four days old at 6:15 Coordinated Universal Time(UTC). I'm not sure what time that will be for your area but it should be within 24 hours. 331dot (talk) 16:11, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it will be 6:26 p.m. in my area. And thanks for explaining me, 331dot. Omniscien1 (talk) 16:40, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Could anyone please help?

I asked this question before but had no reply, that’s why I’m asking it again.

I’ve been trying to make my userpage a bit better. just I realised that my Awards & Badges, Contributions and Created Articles sections weren’t fitting inside my ‘green box’ (Which took me 6 hours to create). Could someone please fix it? Thanks, Rodrigo Valequez (talk) 16:43, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also, could you make the green (which is making my eyes bleed) a bit lighter in color? Thanks again, Rodrigo Valequez (talk) 16:43, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The badges and all that look just fine on my desktop computer. Maybe in a phone they might be different. What are you seeing. As for the color, I believe that is just fine also. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 16:49, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Already done. @Rodrigo Valequez: Please see your previous question above for my response and fix. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 23:17, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Polish to English

Hello, I'm a British actor, Rupert Frazer, with a Wikipedia page in Polish: https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rupert_Frazer Would it be possible to have an English page? The Polish page, when translated, doesn't make much sense! Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rupert Frazer (talk • contribs) 16:57, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

From what I understand about the notability guidelines, someone will write the article about you eventually if you are notable enough. (Just make sure not to write it yourself-that would be a conflict of interest, I think.) Hope this helps, King of Scorpions 17:05, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also, you should probably sign your comments with 4 tildes (~). King of Scorpions 17:05, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not forbidden, but WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY explains why Wikipedia frowns on writing or editing an article about oneself. I do agree that it is a bit odd for an article in Polish to exist (with English references), but not an article in English. David notMD (talk) 19:08, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Foyle's War, Zorn and War and Remembrance. Ok, I'm a fan. I will look for sources tomorrow. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:47, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The references in the Polish article are to IMDB (which on the en-Wikipedia is considered not very reliable, and not proving any notability whatsoever) and similar all-actors listings. I did not find much in the way of WP:NACTOR online (mostly minor roles so no press coverage), so I do not think an article (on en-wp) is warranted at that point. Best of luck to GGS in the search. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 22:27, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You did hear me say he was in War and Remembrance, right? But I take your point. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:53, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

For the interested, Rupert Frazer. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:53, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please help! I put an article on my Sandbox page and it was not accepted for draft review...

Hello - I wrote an entire article and added footnotes - the article was not submitted for review on my Sandbox due to time-out of my computer. I didn't write it all in one sitting...now it's gone. Is there any way to retrieve it? Thank you so much.

Alwayslp (talk) 17:13, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Alwayslp, Try reopening the editor, and if that doesn't work, I guess you're out of luck, as you have no contributions to your sandbox. —moonythedwarf (Braden N.) 17:17, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

New article removed from main space to back to draft as not to disrupt official AfC process

Hello TeaHouse people, My article Raed H. Charafeddine was removed from the mainspace back to Draft:Raed H. Charafeddine as ‘not to disrupt the official AfC process’. The reason why I posted it directly to the mainspace is that this is a second version, in which I improved and changed the article responding to previous extensive comments on my original version. I would like to resubmit it to the main space. Would you strongly advise me not to do so? Thank you in advance for any feedback and advise! — Preceding unsigned comment added by MarthaBergman (talk • contribs) 17:18, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

MarthaBergman "Resubmitting" by definition means asking for a review at AFC, which happens in Draft-space, not Mainspace. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 17:27, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You resubmitted it, which means you should not have changed your mind and moved it to Mainspace. Given that your original submittal was declined, you are not the best person to decide that your newer edits warranted by-passing AfC this time. My suggestion is wait for the AfC process to proceed. David notMD (talk) 19:17, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In my opinion the other editor is incorrect that your move was "disrupting the official AfC process", AfC is completely optional and you are free to move your articles to mainspace if you wish to do so. I've marked a few places in your draft where the information wasn't directly verified in the cited source, it would be good to fix those. It's not quite clear to me whether he passes WP:GNG since most sources that I looked at were just very short mentions of him rather than independant coverage about him. – Thjarkur (talk) 21:31, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

About my page

Hi My page was deleted .i think it had nothing wrong.please hell — Preceding unsigned comment added by Umar Ali Sofi (talk • contribs) 17:58, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Umar Ali Sofi Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You have no deleted pages, but your user page has been nominated for speedy deletion, as it is not in keeping with the purpose of user pages, which is for you as an individual to introduce yourself to the Wikipedia community in the context of your Wikipedia use.

It is also essentially an advertisement, which is not permitted anywhere on Wikipedia. I would suggest learning more about Wikipedia, by using the new user tutorial and reading Your First Article before attempting to create a new article, which is the hardest task on Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 18:02, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I seem to remember a fake rock band in a wikipedia article

I am searching for a hoax band on wikipedia. I remember an album cover had a nuclear symbol on it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lionsleeps23 (talk • contribs) 18:24, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lionsleeps23, Have you had a look through Wikipedia:List of hoaxes on Wikipedia? It might be on there. ~~ Alex Noble - talk 18:37, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why my "Contributions" link/page shows me nothing?

Hello, I am new user here. I have made few edits and it does not appear under the link/page "Contributions". Is there any other place to look for the "edits" I have made? Or is there any other reason for showing me a blank page for "Contributions"? Any help in this regard is appreciated. Thanks in advance. Ayaz — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ayaz.ashraf (talk • contribs) 20:13, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Ayaz.ashraf: Are you talking about this page: Special:Contributions/Ayaz.ashraf....? --CiaPan (talk) 20:35, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ayaz.ashraf! The first idea that comes to mind is that you may have been accidently logged out and edited as an IP. Have you checked the pages you edited to see if the edits were actually made? That's "View history" near the top of a page. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:37, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

COI as a museum intern

I've been reading the guidelines for disclosing conflict of interest and just want to make sure I do it right! How do I declare my status as a paid intern at an art museum? I plan to edit and/or create at least some articles that relate to this museum's collections. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Onecentlife (talk • contribs) 20:44, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Onecentlife! Your userpage declaration looks fine to me. I would suggest that if you edit an existing article, make a similar note on the talkpage + "I intend to edit the article in this manner". Start carefully, perhaps wait a couple of days for reactions, discuss at need, continue. On creating new articles, use the AFC-process described at Help:Your first article, and again note your paid status on the talkpage. If your edits are well-sourced and reasonably neutral in tone, you should do ok. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:02, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk · contribs) OK great, that helps. Thanks so much! I'll do my best. Onecentlife (talk) 21:07, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Hello, Onecentlife, and thank you for being honest. There are potentially two issues here: conflict of interest and paid editing.

From what you describe, I am not entirely sure whether you are a paid editor. If your internship is in PR/communication, probably yes, if it is in another area (art, documentation, etc.) probably no. If your boss ordered you to edit Wikipedia directly, definitely yes. My personal test would be whether your boss would be happy to learn that you edit Wikipedia during work hours: if yes, it means you are editing for pay. If so, you need to make a formal disclosure that includes your employer and client (here the same person): see WP:PAID.

If you are not a paid editor, you should still disclose the conflict of interest: see Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest#How_to_disclose_a_COI for how to do so.

I would think writing about the museum's collections is a relatively mild conflict of interest; that situation is common among expert editors (i.e. editors with a higher than usual knowledge of a niche topic), who are either working in a related field or passionate about it. Make sure to comply with WP:NPOV (do not promote the museum or the works of art, stay neutral and factual) and WP:OR/WP:V (everything in the articles you write should not be your original idea, but should be referenced to a reliable source). Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 21:16, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tigraan (talk · contribs) Thanks so much for weighing in. Your response is helpful, although I admit I'm still a little confused! Yes, my employer would know and be happy that I am editing Wikipedia during work hours, and/or supplementing or creating pages for artists in the collection here. But is that strictly off-limits? My understanding is that there are exceptions for paid COI, specifically in the cultural sector: Wikipedia:The_Wikipedia_Library/Cultural_Professionals

I am not a PR/communication specialist of any kind. Rather, I am an art historian (I suppose an art historian in training) who recieves a nominal stipend as a curatorial intern. As such, I carry out a range of research / writing / exhibition-related tasks. Hmm! I definitely understand that I should disclose my position, but am I actually not allowed to edit related content in this capacity? Thanks again for your guidance. Onecentlife (talk) 21:37, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Onecentlife: I would think you are a paid editor, then, although that is not a clear-cut case. If you want a more definite answer, the best I could advise is to ask for input at this specialized noticeboard; but is it really worth the hassle?

Assuming you are indeed subject to the paid-editing rules, you are not forbidden to edit, but you need to make the mandatory disclosure. Following Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure#How to disclose, you should either make an unambiguous statement on your user page (the current text seems a bit ambiguous to me, I would encourage you to use the standardized template {{paid}} instead) or on the talk page of every article you edit.

Also, there is no exemption for the culture sector. Regarding Wikipedia:The_Wikipedia_Library/Cultural_Professionals, it does not contradict the terms of use that forbid undisclosed paid editing (even if it did, the terms of use would overrule it). What it says is that teachers, university professors etc. are usually not considered paid editors even though outreach and vulgarization are part of their general work duties because there is no specific instruction from their employer to edit Wikipedia or to write/speak about precise topics. I would add that academic jobs have extremely fuzzy boundaries between work and non-work duties; PR employees rarely write about how great BigCorp's products are in their blogs during weekends, but many academics have vulgarization blogs even without career incentives. Whether an intern in academia editing during "work hours" (again, a fuzzy concept in academia) is a paid editor or not probably depends on intricate details of how closely their supervisor(s) follow them and what instructions they give.

Paid or not, you have a conflict of interest, and therefore should refrain from potentially controversial edits. If you are unsure, err on the side of caution. For possibly-controversial edits, propose the change on the article's talk page in a "change X to Y" edit and slap the template {{request edit}}, someone else will review the change and perform it (or decline and give you a reason for that).

Finally, could you could give a look at how to indent your replies to other posts?

Now that the unpleasant stuff is out of the way: welcome! Academia-oriented profiles usually do well on Wikipedia because the (arguably) most important principle of Wikipedia, citing your sources, is also a bedrock of academic research. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 22:23, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Tigraan (talk · contribs), for the advice on all of this, including indentations. I'm still learning, obviously. I was trying to find a template for COIs, but was having trouble with that too, so I appreciate the link. I guess the best thing will just be to proceed slowly and see how it goes. Obviously I'm not looking to do anything problematic on here, and I will certainly disclose whenever I edit! Thanks again. Onecentlife (talk) 23:04, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Onecentlife: There is a specific project for contributors connected to Galleries, Libraries, Archives and Museums, see WP:GLAM, where you are most welcome to participate. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 23:56, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Dodger67n: Thanks for this! I did see that page, but I'll go back and look at it more closely, to see if it might be useful. I assume that this specific project is not the only way that GLAMs can contribute to Wikipedia, though! Onecentlife (talk) 19:24, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Onecentlife, welcome to Wikipedia! If you're into curation, cataloguing or digitization as well as writing, you could also have a look at Wikidata and Wikimedia Commons. Though for Commons, a big barrier is copyright if the artists were still alive in the last 100 years. It's still early days for structured data on Commons, but this blog post describes some of the interesting work being done in the area: [1]. Pelagic (talk) 00:58, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Chicago 'L' articles

A couple of IPs (presumably the same person) seem to be going through all the Chicago 'L' stations and changing all the buses to be in monospace font (e.g. Jackson station (CTA Red Line), Chicago station (CTA Brown and Purple Lines)); in the latter case, they've also changed references to other lines to use a coloured template that I think is intended for line diagrams. I'm pretty sure I'm right that this is all inconsistent with WP:MOS and should be reverted, but I wanted to check that was the right thing to do before I go ahead and revert basically every contribution two users have made. YorkshireLad (talk) 20:52, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Example diff.

@YorkshireLad: I agree the nowiki tags should be removed, but the rest of the edit looks fine to me (or at least, it should be inspected carefully rather than reverted in bulk).

You should really try talking to them, though I am not sure how. That diff is from an IPv6 with four edits in a 10-min window, so the IP address is changing and they cannot be reached via user talk pages. My best guess would be to open discussion somewhere central (is there a Chicago public transportation Wikiproject?), and point to it through edit summaries and hidden wiki comments in the source text. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 21:26, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Tigraan: Many thanks for your answer. There isn't a CTA Wikiproject, though there is one for Chicago and one for rapid transit (inactive), so I guess either would work, or perhaps Talk:Chicago 'L'. When you suggest edit summaries/comments, do you mean I should remove the <code> ... </code> tags when I find them and add the note there? Or add a note to all the as-yet unchanged pages? YorkshireLad (talk) 10:12, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have edited an article and incorrectly marked my edit as not minor. What should I do?

Theanswertolifetheuniverseandeverything (talk) 21:01, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Don't sweat it. GMG ^talk 21:02, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:03, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's too late. You're going to be put under review at AN/I and plead your case.^[sarcasm]

On a less sarcastic note, it's nothing. Other than certain guidelines as to what constitutes a major versus a minor edit, the distinction is mostly arbitrary. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 17:04, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Changing category names

need to be changed so that "liberated" is lower case. I think I saw once a tool that would change all the members of the categories. Would someone (preferably) take care of this, or tell me how to do it. Thanks. deisenbe (talk) 21:24, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You can list these at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion#Speedy_renaming_and_merging and someone will run a bot to fix them. – Thjarkur (talk) 21:39, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How do I deal with copy right form fill-ins for 17th and 18th century images.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Etymology_of_Chicago?action=edit&veswitched=1

I'm working in both source editor and visual editor on my Draft of The Etymology of Chicago. I'm trying to upload and use on my article 17th and 18th century image documents, and the (1) prompts asks for day/month and I have only the year, but putting the year only is not accepted. (2) when asked if I own the copyright, I say no, and the default goes to ask "info about copy right owner" -- there is none. These images are public domain. In some of the forms I fill in, there is a public domain option, which I check, but I seem to be going in circle.(3) I understand that uploading my images to Wiki Commons is a good thing for the wider community. I've tried that too. Carl — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carl J. Weber (talk • contribs) 2020-03-03T21:37:44 (UTC)

Try the Wikimedia upload wizard: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:UploadWizard You can definitely upliad with year only. Look at my uploads: https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:ListFiles/Deisenbe&ilshowall=1 deisenbe (talk) 23:58, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How do I fix an article?

I am a board member for the Transcultural Exchange and I and the TCE director, Mary Sherman, are currently trying to fix 2 pages in Wikipedia that have been flagged with this notice:

"This article may have been created or edited in return for undisclosed payments, a violation of Wikipedia's terms of use. It may require clean-up to comply with Wikipedia's content policies. (November 2019)"

The articles were written for pay - we didn't know that it needed to be disclosed, nor that it is not allowed. In trying now to correct this, we find that we are unable to reach the author, who seems to have gone out of business. The articles were written and published in 2015.

Here are the urls of the pages:

How can we fix this? All of the information is factual and adheres to wikipedia's guidelines. Srcohen614 (talk) 22:09, 3 March 2020 (UTC)Srcohen614[reply]

Hi Srcohen614. You can find out more specifics in Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure, but basically you shouldn't try and remove those notices yourself. The content may certainly be factual, but whether it adhere's to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines is probably best left for someone else to assess. The first thing you should do is probably declare your conflict of interest; ideally, you should do this both on your userpage and the relevant article's talk page (using Template:Connected contributor), but you should be fine as long as you do so at either of those two places. Then, you can make an edit request as explained in Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide#Steps for engagement. Just explain the situation and ask for the templates to be removed. You request will be added to a queue and someone will eventually answer it. If too much time passes and nobody answers your request, you can ask for assistance at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard. If you remember the username of the account of the editor who created the page for you, you can add Template:Connected contributor (paid) to the top of talk page of the relevant article(s) they created, and that should further help to clarify things. You can also post a not on that account's user talk page to let them know about the situation because even that person might still be using the account to edit (perhaps for a different company) and letting them know about things might help them avoid any future problems. There's no guarantee they will respond or do anything, but they might appreciate the heads up.

Please be very careful, however, about reveling any person information about others on Wikipedia or trying to connect an account to a specific person as explained here, and also try and remember that Wikipedia is in the real world and that everything you post is publicly there for anyone and everyone to see. In general, it's best to refer to other editors by their usernames as much as possible and limit the discussion to their Wikipedia activities.

Finally, you might want to suggest to Ms. Sherman that she take a look at Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing, Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Relationship between the subject, the article, and Wikipedia and Wikipedia:Ownership of content for reference for information on what options she has regarding the article Wikipedia written about her. You may want to look at those pages as well. The thing to remember is that Wikipedia articles are written about a subject, not for or on behalf of a subject, and that neither the subject or the creator of the article has have final editorial control over the article's content. Content will be assessed to see whether it's in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines, and anything not OK can be revised so that it is or removed altogether at any time. Subjects or articles are not entirely helpless when it comes to Wikipedia, but they are going to be expected to adhere to relevant policies and guidelines just like everyone else and their are procedures put into place to help them do so. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:46, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Srcohen614: You seem to have asked about this before at Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1050#"Undisclosed payment" notice and your response seemed to imply that you had cleared things up. Is there now something in the answers given to your previous question that you don't understand? — Marchjuly (talk) 00:29, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) OK, this is a mess. Housekeeping note: both pages were indeed created in 2015. Special:Contributions/88.73.14.92 has substantial edits to both pages, so I do not think WP:G5 applies (and even if it did, it would be better to do the WP:BEFORE and AfD instead, because the pages look decent).

@Srcohen614: first of all, you should make your own paid disclosure before editing further. To do so, click User:Srcohen614 to create your user page, copy-pasting the magic text {{paid|Transcultural Exchange}} should produce an adequate disclosure. (All this assumes that your position as board member is paid, but if TCE can pay someone to write a Wikipedia article, I assume they pay their board members.) Be also warned that user accounts are single-person-use, so Mary Sherman should not be editing through the same account (and she should make the paid disclosure on her own account).

It is no surprise that the author went out of business; their user account Muhammad Ali Khalid was blocked because of undisclosed paid editing. Although it was their responsability to do so, you can declare the payments after the fact. The high-level explanation is at WP:DISCLOSEPAY. For the more technical: if you were directly paying that editor rather than an agency, copy-paste {{Connected contributor (paid)}} on the talk pages of both articles (that is, at Talk:Mary Sherman (artist) and Talk:TransCultural Exchange). If you were paying an agency, copy-paste {{Connected contributor (paid)}} (with the appropriate substitution).

After making those disclosures, you should really not remove the tags yourself, since you have a conflict of interest. Now that you posted on a decently-visible page, someone will likely come and remove them if they judge the problem was addressed.

Regarding the adherence to Wikipedia's guidelines, although I see no promotional language, I am not entirely sure that the references demonstrate the topics meet Wikipedia's "notability" requirement. The short version is that a topic is suitable for a Wikipedia article only if it has been talked/written about at length by multiple reliable sources independent of it. Both articles have many sources, but those I checked are insufficient. For instance, ref 5 of the MS article has only one paragraph about MS's art, so it fails the "at length" requirement; all interviews fail the "independent" requirement. Notability is only supported by sources meeting all three criteria (discusses at length, reliable, independent) so a thousand sources lacking one of the three does not replace one source having all three (see WP:BOMBARD).

I intend to perform a more thorough check of the sources at some point in the near future, and if I find nothing sufficient I will nominate the articles for deletion. In the meanwhile (or after the nomination), if you do have sources meeting all three criteria, please post them. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 23:09, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Questions for Rollback and PCR

Hi, I had been a temporary rollbacker for a month and a half now, and I'd just been granted the pending changes reviewer right. I'd like to know if I see vandalism by an editor and I undid or rollbacked (using Twinkle or not) his edits, would the edit after the undo be automatically accepted, or would I have to manually accept it. Thanks! tLoM (The Lord of Math) (Message) 00:47, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Lord of Math, IIRC it would be automatically accepted, unless there was another pending edit prior to the reverted one that hadn't been reviewed. You won't have to accept your own edits, as any edits by autoconfirmed users are accepted anyway, unless there is a non reviewed, non autoconfirmed edit, prior to it. ~~ Alex Noble - talk 10:42, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Getting the social handles of Urdu Wikipedia verified

Hello, I want to ask on behalf of the Urdu Wikipedia community about getting a blue tick on the social handles of Urdu Wikipedia. I've seen the handles of Arabic Wikipedia verified so far. Get the Urdu Wikipedia official social media handles a blue tick. We are on facebook, instagram and twitter @UrduWikipedia. Aaqib Anjum Aafī (^talk) 05:44, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @AaqibAnjum:, you should raise this question directly in an appropriate forum on the Urdu Wikipedia. All language-specific projects are autonomous, and we on English Wikipedia usually can't help you with questions regarding other Wikis. Also, please do not post the same question in multiple forums like Teahouse and Help desk at once. Thank you. GermanJoe (talk) 07:59, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@AaqibAnjum: Maybe somebody at meta:Meta:Babel might have some ideas. Also, is there a Wikimedia Pakistan affiliate? Pelagic (talk) 08:48, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Pelagic: Sadly, Wikimedia affiliates in India and Pakistan are not working as of now. See Wikimedia India and Wikimedia Pakistan --- Aaqib Anjum Aafī (^talk) 08:55, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

what is musical notability criteria

Hello why my article is rejected multiple times saying musical notability criteria is not met — Preceding unsigned comment added by DipSagarregmi12 (talk • contribs) 08:35, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy: Submitted and declined as User:DipSagarregmi12/sandbox and as Draft:Raman Regmi. Creator has been directed to music notability criteria. David notMD (talk) 09:12, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

HIDE USERNAME

How to hide title of the page or username? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1008rajpuranalas (talk • contribs) 09:05, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@1008rajpuranalas: Why would you want to do that? —[AlanM1(talk)]— 09:13, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, 1008rajpuranalas. I'm guessing that you think you have created an article, but it has your user name as its title. I'm afraid that this is because you have made several errors that are very common among inexperienced editors.

First, you have attempted to create an article on your user page. That is not what your user page is for: it is for telling the Wikipedia community about yourself as a Wikipedia editor. See user pages.

I considered moving your user page to a sandbox, but I don't think there is much point, because I think it is likely to get deleted as promotional anyway. This is the second common mistake: a Wikipedia article is not for you to tell the world about something: it is a summary of what independent published sources have said about the subject. Creating a new article is one of the hardest tasks in editing Wikipedia, and I always advise new editors to spend a few weeks or months improving existing article before they try it. In any case, I suggest you read your first article carefully.

Contributing to Wikipedia can be very rewarding. But it is not easy, and there are many policies and processes to learn about. --ColinFine (talk) 09:44, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User has added several links to their user page in articles - since deleted - Arjayay (talk) 11:07, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please explain how I edit the information about the school I work for?

Hello

I have never edited the information about our school on Wikepedia and would like to do so eg exam results are for 2012 and we are not non-selective.

Thank you.

Holly — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.246.163.233 (talk) 09:08, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A recent user of this IP address committed vandalism, so to differentiate yourself, I recommend you register an account. After that, review WP:PAID for directions on how to edit as a paid person. Short answer is that rather than edit the article directly, you will be expected to go to the Talk page of the article and request specific changes. A non-affiliated editor will decide to act on your request(s). David notMD (talk) 09:26, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Overwrite or delete existing media file

Hello,

Playing in my "sandbox" before editing the real Wikipedia page, I have accidentally uploaded a far too low resolution version of a video. But I do not know how to overwrite or remove the bad one. I really want to remove it. It's not in any article, not even on the sandbox page.

How to remove HuygensMaintaining.ogg ?

Help welcome. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RobertCailliau (talk • contribs) 09:16, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify the OP is talking about commons:File:HuygensMaintaining.ogg - X201 (talk) 09:28, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Just go to the file history section over at Commons and click the "Upload new version" link. - X201 (talk) 09:30, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi RobertCailliau. You should probably read c:Commons:Overwriting existing files before you do anything such thing because in some cases overwriting can actually not be a very good thing to do. -- Marchjuly (talk) 09:58, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It might qualify for speedy deletion. Pelagic (talk) 01:26, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Technical help with a table in an article

I've updated some statistics in a table in an article that no-one else seems to be maintaining. I don't really have any idea how the table is constructed, but I seem to have successfully updated it by looking at the source code and copying and pasting then entering the new data. I have some problems with default sorting of columns. I've looked at the help page for tables, but it's beyond my knowledge. Is there a way I can access someone who can advise on this or do it for me? I'm guessing it's not that difficult for an experienced editor, and it would only need to be done once. (I think). kritikos99 (talk) 10:51, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean by "default sorting"? Do these data happen to be numerical values and if so, for what? Wikipedia tables follow some sorting schemes if left unspecified, especially with numbers. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 14:55, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Forgot to ping Kritikos99 so that they know that a reply has been made. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 17:07, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for answering. It's a bit difficult to describe. I've fixed it for the time being so that the ranking is correct based on the latest year's data. But I had to do this by physically moving the line of data for each port so that it was numbered correctly in terms of ranking, and was also placed in the correct order. I'm guessing there is a way of avoiding having to do this every year if the ranking order changes? The article is called "List of busiest ports in Europe". The table in question is the first one in the article, called "Busiest container ports". As you will see, the first column is a numbered ranking based on the latest year data. Because the year columns are sortable, that first column is only sorted correctly when the latest year column, (2018), is clicked to sort it with the highest container throughput at the top.

The problem arises when a new year's data is added and if one or more ports "overtake" another and the ranking order changes. How can I arrange it that the ports are numbered and sorted so that when the table is first displayed, it will show the correct numbering and order based on the latest year's data? kritikos99 (talk) 19:51, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kritikos99, The only way to adjust the initial order of a table is to move the rows around in the wikitext, unfortunately. See Help:Sorting#Initial_sort_order_of_rows for more information. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 20:13, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Kritikos99: It doesn't seem wikitext has the same level of functionality and versatility as software like Microsoft Excel. Sounds like a job that should be updated manually every year. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 20:21, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Making sure references move from sandbox to article

I have been working on editing a (machine) translated version of the Dollfus-Mieg et Compagnie article from the French Wikipedia to move to the English-language DMC (company) article, which is now just a stub. I've been doing this work in my sandbox but when I attempt to copy and paste the content to the article, I can't get the references, which I've rechecked from the French version, to move over. I've looked for help on this topic in various places, but must be missing it. If anyone can tell me how to make sure the references copy as well, I'd appreciate it. (I do know that I need to place certain information in both the edit history and on the talk page regarding attribution and translation.) Thank you! (Looking into this further, is a page move involved? Is there a way to integrate the new content with the old, so that some of what exists in the DMC (company) article could remain? I can make sure there is no duplication and needed edits are made.) TrudiJ (talk) 11:29, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest that initially you copy the history section from your sandbox to the enwiki article, noting the attribution as you mentioned. I see no reason why the references wouldn't work when you copy them in, but we can see why if they don't. --David Biddulph (talk) 14:07, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What about if the OP copies the parts of the existing article they want to keep to their sandbox and then copies the whole sandbox content back to the article? That way the existing bits to be kept would give the appeance of having never left the article history. - X201 (talk) 14:24, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

TrudiJ, thank you for expanding the article on this wonderful company. You are using our Visual Editor which is a wonderful editor but has problems handling named references such as those in your article. I've been experimenting and the references seem to copy fine. You will need to open both your sandbox and the target article in the Visual Editor to make sure the full references copy over. I suggest moving all the material at once since VE won't recognize that references are the same if they are added in different edits. StarryGrandma (talk) 18:20, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Visual editor is blanking content

I have noticed that at least 3 times so far, when editing a page (especially big ones) in Visual editing mode, sometimes the editor acts as if I am continuously pressing the backspace key even after I stop pressing it. It is obviously not a hardware problem as it happens only on Wikipedia, but what I want to know is whether anyone else has encountered it and how to avoid it.

Device: iPad (2017) (same processor as the iPhone 6S) with onscreen keyboard
Browser: Safari
OS: iPadOS 13.3.1 (previous versions also had this problem)
How to reproduce: Go to any page with more than 350k bytes of content, use visual editor, after some editing, press backspace repeatedly (as fast as possible) and let go after a couple of seconds.

RedBulbBlueBlood9911 (talk) 12:07, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

EDIT: I have noticed that even choosing to just edit a section of a page doesn’t solve the issue. RedBulbBlueBlood9911 (talk) 13:09, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
RedBulbBlueBlood9911, last I checked, there was no section editing in visual editor.

Is it just the backspace key? The problem you describe sounds to me like a simple lag. The system lags when handling large pages. When you press a key too many times, you can't keep track of how many times it was exactly, and the system can't respond fast enough to show you all the backspaces onscreen in real time. What might be happening is each instance of your key press is being saved in a buffer and executed/displayed taking however long it takes the system, which could be much longer than the time it takes you to press the key in quick succession. Does that sound like what's happening here?

P.S. You can try asking at WP:VPT if you don't get a resolution here. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 17:26, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Usedtobecool, thanks for responding to this question. Thanks for pointing out that visual editor can’t edit individual sections (I forgot that it switches to editing the whole page). Yes, it is just the backspace key but I was thinking the problem is with the way Wikipedia handles mobile edits or something like that (as only the iPad has this issue and visual editor is literally the only place where it lags seriously). So would this issue be solved by either just typing slower or getting a faster device? RedBulbBlueBlood9911 (talk) 03:37, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

RedBulbBlueBlood9911, I'd say typing slower, yes. With experience, you should be able to get a sense of roughly how many characters are deleted per second of your pressing backspace and learn to use backspace based on your mind's internal clock rather than using the visual feedback from the editing window. Faster device, I am not sure. I don't know whether the editing is handled locally by our devices or by the wikipedia server. Any one of the components in the whole process of getting your key press to your screen could be lagging and I have no guess as to which one. Plus, it is probably a feature, rather than a bug, see Typeahead. Another solution could be to use Ctrl+Backspace instead, which erase one word per press and is much easier to keep track of. Usedtobecool ☎️ 04:31, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Source Editor issues (by the same person having the visual editor issues above)

About a month back, I was editing the CAA protests page (400k+ bytes) in source mode on a laptop (though I usually use an iPad) and I noticed that the editor writes over content instead of inserting whatever I type where the cursor is. For example: ‘Obma was...’ becomes ‘Obaa was...’ instead of ‘Obama was...’ if my cursor is between ‘Ob’ and ‘ma’. What is happening?

Device: HP Pavilion AU023CL (Intel i5-6200U with 12 GB RAM)
OS: Windows 10, latest version (or second latest, I don’t remember)
Browser: Internet Explorer
How to reproduce: I don’t know as it is totally random and it happened in the only edit session I’ve done on desktop.

RedBulbBlueBlood9911 (talk) 13:08, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It sounds as though overwrite mode may be enabled. Have you tried pressing insert? Moaz786 (talk to me or see what I've been doing) 13:42, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

RedBulbBlueBlood9911, This is the, typically rather annoying, function of the insert key. By pressing it, you are in overtype mode, where typing overwrites any text that is present in the current location. See Insert key. To turn this off, just press it again. ~~ Alex Noble - talk 13:44, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Moaz786 and Alex Noble, thanks for responding to this question. However, I do not use insert key (as a matter of fact, I don’t think I have ever used it). The only keys I use are Arrow keys, Caps, Shift, Alphabets, Numbers and Punctuation Marks and Ctrl+C (copy) and Ctrl+V (paste). I use only the mouse and arrow keys to move the cursor or select text. RedBulbBlueBlood9911 (talk) 03:29, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

RedBulbBlueBlood9911, I press Insert accidentally all the time as my little finger isn't adept with the north-east area of the keyboard. In at least some keyboards though, this happens to me when I try to hit the right arrow key. This is because when the numberpad is disabled (numlock), the "0" on it, which is right next to the right arrow on the keyboard also acts as "Insert" key. That's all I got; don't know if it helps. Usedtobecool ☎️ 04:07, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Usedtobecool, I guess you might be right as I always thought I disabled the number-pad (I never read about all its functions). I guess I should be more careful when typing. Anyways, thanks for helping me with this issue! RedBulbBlueBlood9911 (talk) 04:15, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

references with original source

i have found few references or notes which mention original source.

example: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/08/150806151357.htm source is http://www.news.ucsb.edu/2015/015797/sticky-situation

should i update "in via" or should i replace with original source. Leela52452 (talk) 13:14, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Leela52452. If you could provide a little more context to your question (for example, the name of the article you're referring to), then a Teahouse might be able to help you sort things out. You seem to be asking about convenience links. In general, it's best to cite the original source or as close to the original source as possible when you cite something. Think of it as something like a whisper game in that the further you move away from the original source the greater the chance there is of something being changed. If, however, the original source is not available online on the source's official website and you can find a copy of it on some other website, then you can probably use the |via= to provide information about the website where you've found the source. (You could also follow WP:SAYWHERE.) If you use a convenience link, the source would still be the original source, but the "via" would just let others know where the link is from. You should be careful of just automatically doing this in that you need to be fairly sure that the original article, etc. was not edited or altered in anyway by whomever uploaded it to the "via" website. I think that's kind of what you're asking; if not, please feel free to clarify your question and perhaps someone else can help you out. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:31, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Marchjuly. article Alison Butler. thank you now i have clear cut idea about using via. Leela52452 (talk) 13:53, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Miniature railways

I know of a miniature railway ad would like to add it to Wikipedia. Lots of other miniature railways have been added. No different in size etc. The only difference is that some of them have been around for while and the one i want to add is only 2.5 years old. Each time I try to add an new page on the railway its always the references that are rejected. I have added various links to bits written about the railway and a link to a leading miniature railway magazine that did a 9 page piece covering the railway and its building process. I am obviously new to this and need some guidance? The railway is called Bushey Miniature Railway https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Bushey_Miniature_Railway Many thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by BMR bushey (talk • contribs) 15:59, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

BMR bushey Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I would first note that you will probably need to change your username, as it is not permitted for a username to be that of any organization per the username policy. Please go to Special:GlobalRenameRequest to change your username to something more individualistic(it does not need to be your real name). Please also read about conflict of interest.

Regarding your draft, it is being rejected because the sources are not independent reliable sources with significant coverage- and your draft merely tells about the existence of your railway. Wikipedia articles must do more, they must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage say about your railway and how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of notability. Wikipedia is not interested in what any article subject wants to say about itself. If there are no such independent reliable sources about your railway, it unfortunately would not merit an article at this time. No amount of editing can confer notability, it depends on the sources and what they have chosen to say about your railway on their own. 331dot (talk) 16:05, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Well, one thing you'd want to do, looking at Draft:Bushey Miniature Railway, is put the references throughout the article itself, rather than just a collection at the bottom. Note that I don't mean to just paste the links throughout the article, though. Take a look, for example, at 2020. In the lead, you can see a tiny "[1]", "[2]", etc. These link to the references with those numbers at the bottom of the page. This helps the reader know exactly what factual claims go to which reference. Try to mimic that reference format. Also, since your username is BMR bushey and this, please make sure you've read and understood the conflict of interest policy. Useight (talk) 16:06, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

BMR bushey, please don't remove comments by other users. ~~ Alex Noble - talk 16:29, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Each time your draft was reverted you were given useful links, including to Help:Referencing for beginners. You need to read that, and instert references correctly to support your text. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:31, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

we need guidance!

Hello There :) we are a group of university students working on a project to better the Moroccan Web Content and we chose to work on a thesis relates to a Moroccan Author, unfortunately we haven't found anything related to it on wikipedia while he does exist, that is why we would like to request an article for creation, it's about the youngest Moroccan Author Hamza El Moutadir. Can you help us or at least guide us? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.141.84.202 (talk) 16:06, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, have a look at the notability criteria for authors - if they don't meet these guidelines there is likely not enough coverage to write an article. If you think they meet those criteria, you can start writing an article yourself by following wikipedia:Your first article, or request someone else writes one at Wikipedia:Requested_articles/Biography/By_profession#Authors, however, as we are all volunteers, there is no guarantee anyone will write it, or that it will be done quickly. ~~ Alex Noble - talk 16:21, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As Alex Noble has mentioned Wikipedia has WP:Notability guidelines where articles aren't created if the subject doesn't have enough substantial sources. Is your goal to put information out about El Moutadir or to find information about them? If it's the latter I'm sure your university would have databases with information on them.

I suggest creating an account so you can receive a notification when someone replies to you. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 16:31, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I did a search for the author Hamza El Moutadir. He has self-published two books on Lulu.com and there do not seem to be any independent reviews in reliable sources. He therefore does not meet our notability criteria for articles.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 17:00, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ThatMontrealIP but have you searched in Arabic too? Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 19:17, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Show me one author with a Wikipedia article who publishes on Lulu, and I'll look into the Arabic side.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 19:32, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An article about that author was deleted after a community discussion in January this year, and a couple of sockpuppet accounts showed up to recreate it, also talking about them being "a team" wanting to promote the individual. As a result of that disruption, the article title has been protected against creation. --bonadea contributions talk 19:29, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Article

Hello dears

Can you teach me how to create a new article — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amr.b.alalas (talk • contribs) 16:52, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Only autoconfirmed users can create articles, and you are not autoconfirmed. However, you can read WP:Your first article and then request an article to be made with the WP:Article wizard. PorkchopGMX (talk with me - what i've done) 16:57, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Amr.b.alalas Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Successfully creating a new article is the hardest task on Wikipedia. New users who dive right in to creating articles without being familiar with the process and what is being looked for often end up disappointed and with hurt feelings as their work is mercilessly edited and deleted by others. I don't want you to have bad feelings. You will increase your chances of success if you first spend time editing existing articles in areas that interest you, so you get a feel for how Wikipedia operates and what is being looked for in article content. It's also a good idea for you to use the new user tutorial to learn more about Wikipedia.

However, if you still want to attempt to create a new article, you should read Your First Article, then use Articles for Creation to create and submit a draft for a review before it is formally placed in the encyclopedia. This way you get feedback first, instead of after your article is in the encyclopedia. 331dot (talk) 16:58, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The questioner appears to have created a draft: Draft:Amr Gamal (director). David notMD (talk) 19:04, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

how to prevent disruptive editing /vandalism

please guide for preventing repeated disruptive editing by someone despite giving enough warning and advices on the talk page of the wikipedia article

Ritesmart (talk) 17:46, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you are talking about this, that's a content dispute, not vandalism. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 17:53, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ritesmart If you are in a content dispute, and discussion on the talk page fails to resolve the matter, you may then move to dispute resolution. 331dot (talk) 18:14, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Removing an erroneous link on my dad's biography page

If I Google my dad, an actor who passed away last year, the Google previews his Wikipedia page. As the eldest child I am listed top in the list of his children, however an actress by the same name has created a link from 'our' name. She has the same name as me but is not my dad's daughter therefore I would like the link listed under children removed. Could someone help me delete this please?— Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.74.56.42 (talk • contribs)

@87.74.56.42: Hello! You will need to tell us the name of the article please.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 20:14, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It sounds like another famous Google indexing error that we can't do anything about. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 03:17, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Contributors authoring sections on themselves

Is it customary for academics to author their own sections.

I was doing some work for school on Polymathy and found that the section on Michael Araki was written by Michael Araki in the third person.

I think my University (NYU) would take a dim view but wanted to know if this is the standard of Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wowenmurphy (talk • contribs) 20:18, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Wowenmurphy: Wikipedia frowns on editors creating such articles as people find it hard to write about themselves from a neutral standpoint and consequently results as a major conflict of interest. Some leeway is extended if you are removing unambiguous vandalism or clear-cut and serious violations of our biography of living persons policy (WP:AUTO). --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 20:27, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How to edit

How to edit — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.164.30.31 (talk) 20:36, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipeida. To get started, check out the WP:TUTORIAL and the interactive learning game WP:ADVENTURE. Please do come back if you have more specific questions. RudolfRed (talk) 20:39, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How to determine whether a topic is consequential enough to warrant an article?

Hello, I'm interested in writing a new article for Wikipedia but I'm not sure how to tell whether or not it's a significant enough topic to be accepted. The article I'd like to write about is the Magee Furnace Company, a Boston, MA-based manufacturer of furnaces and ovens from the mid-19th to the mid-20th century. This seems like a significant piece of economic and cultural history, and I see no page on the company currently.

I know there are articles on other companies, but how can I tell whether this company is significant enough to warrant inclusion here? I would rather not do the writing and research only to be told that the article should be removed. Are there editors who work on topics around ovens or manufacturing I should speak with first?

Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:184:497F:84A0:718C:B3C0:FDA9:FFF0 (talk) 20:42, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, you can see Wikipedia:Notability to see if a topic is considered notable or not. You should also check out the WP:TUTORIAL and the interactive learning game WP:ADVENTURE if you haven’t contributed to Wikipedia before. Regards, Rodrigo Valequez (talk) 20:54, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello IP editor! WP:NORG has information on what makes a company deserving of a standalone article on the English Wikipedia. Generally speaking, any subject which has been covered by multiple (at least three) reliable sources independent of the subject in significant detail deserves a standalone article. This is because Wikipedia only summarises information already available on other trustworthy sources and three different sources discussing in some detail usually provide enough information to base a Wikipedia article of decent size on. There is WP:WikiProject Companies where you can find editors potentially interested in and likely better able to help about the subject. You can use the WP:AFC process if you would like your first attempts at writing a new article to go through a review by your more experienced peers, or if you have a WP:COI with regard to the subject, or you do not intend to register an account to write the article. Best, -- Usedtobecool ☎️ 05:01, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked from editing for no reason?

I appear to have been blocked by one prolific Wikipedia moderator known as "Graham87" and I don't know what caused it. He never appeared to have come into contact with any pages I have created or made edits to, and I can't find a way to contact him directly through Wikipedia. Looking for some clearance? — Preceding unsigned comment added by AnonymousGiraffe (talk • contribs) 21:01, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@AnonymousGiraffe: What do you mean by blocked? I don't appear to see any items in your block log. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 21:08, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Tenryuu: It only seems to affect the mobile version of Wikipedia for some reason, no problems on the desktop version.

@AnonymousGiraffe: What page were you trying to view?

Please sign your comments in non-article pages with ~~~~. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 21:43, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe your phone's IP is blocked because someone else used it for something. Its totally not your fault! MadameButterflyKnife yeah sure.talk 22:59, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @AnonymousGiraffe:, you can leave a message to @Graham87: at User talk:Graham87. But there's little else to go on. As MadameButterflyKnife pointed out, it could be as simple as that your mobile device's IP is blocked. Perhaps, WP:IPBE is of help.

That is unless you are talking about a different account. Do you use multiple accounts? Using multiple accounts isn't allowed in many different circumstances and administrators usually block all but the oldest account created by a single user but if that had happened you should have received a warning. So, I find that unlikely. Usedtobecool ☎️ 05:15, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thinking of becoming a host. Any hurdles I need to jump through or approval?

Well, I finally got my extended confirmed permissions on Wikipedia. Is there anything I need to know about or do to apply to be a host on here? I've read the host expectations and other relevant pages. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 21:12, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Tenryuu. Whether or not you sign up as a host, you are always welcome to answer questions here. We care that the answers given here are accurate and informative. The Teahouse could always use more editors that can answer questions to newbies. I signed as a host after a few months contributing here. Basically, it's your call. Interstellarity (talk) 22:41, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Interstellarity: Thanks for the response. I'll give it another day or two before I make up my mind. I've got the scripts installed already on my Javascript page. How are people getting images uploaded to their host profiles? Via WikiCommons? --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 22:50, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Tenryuu: You can choose whatever image you'd like. It has to be under a free license or in the public domain. These kinds of images are likely found on Commons so I would think they would be found there. Interstellarity (talk) 23:13, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Is it ok to put a (non pornographic) link to Pornhub at the bottom of the article?

Hi, I just created an article about a documentary film Shakedown (2018 film) that was released on Pornhub as its first non pornographic content. So is it OK to put a link at the bottom of the article that links to the documentary on Pornhub? It's not a pornographic film, but yeah just wasn't sure if that was ok or not since it's pornhub. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Avonsicier (talk • contribs) 21:57, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Avonsicier: I think it is OK, if I am reading WP:EL correctly. If someone disagrees, they will remove the link. Please don't ask the question in multiple places. RudolfRed (talk) 00:14, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Avonsicier: We don't add links to distribution services for film articles, regardless of type or venue. Mention of the unique situation should be OK, as long as it's cited. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 02:51, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Since Pornhub is on the Spam blacklist you can't add a link to it without asking for exemption on the Spam whitelist. We do occasionally link to films that are made available online (Big Buck Bunny), and your page seems fairly harmless as there are no links to the main Pornhub page on there. – Thjarkur (talk) 09:38, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

New article since 1 year on draft

Mohammad Shaikh. Why so long on draft? He is the most influencal Muslim preacher on this globe. —Collector244 (talk) 23:24, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy link: Draft:Mohammad Shaikh.

@Collector244: It's likely that whoever was working on the draft did not submit it for review. Looking at said draft everything (the body, the sources, and external links) is heavily promotional, which would not be suitable for a Wikipedia article. For more information please refer to pages such as WP:PROMOTION and WP:NPOV. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 23:54, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

He does not appear to be notable enough for an article here on Wikipedia: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Muhammad Shaikh (2009), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mohammad Shaikh (2009), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mohammad Shaikh (2nd nomination) (2010), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/International Islamic Propagation Center (2019). Articles require significant coverage by multiple independant reliable sources. – Thjarkur (talk) 23:59, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Question: While you're here, Þjarkur, what's the policy for nominating drafts for deletion? The last human editor doesn't seem to have edited in almost a year and {{draft-prod}} is apparently not supposed to be used for drafts. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 00:05, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Tenryuu: If it has not been worked on in more than six months, you may nominate it for speedy deletion. See section G13 here Wikipedia:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion RudolfRed (talk) 00:11, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

G11 may also apply if it is overly promotional. RudolfRed (talk) 00:12, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)This draft could actually be tagged with WP:G13 since a human hasn't edited it for so long. It is possible to nominate drafts for deletion at WP:MFD but usually it's not necessary, unless it's spam or a hoax it will just linger there until it hasn't been edited for 6 months. – Thjarkur (talk) 00:11, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the replies, both of you. Learning a lot about implementing AfD templates. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 00:33, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Editing Company Information

Hello,

How can we edit company information to reflect the new CEO, location, products and company story/mission? I am being told me edits aren't contructive....not sure what that actually means.

Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by JKALINA22 (talk • contribs) 00:39, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@JKALINA22: Post a request on the article's talk page along with {{Edit request}} and an unconnected editor will look at it. Also, accounts can only be used by one person. RudolfRed (talk) 00:43, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You removed text which had references to published reliable sources and replaced it by text which was unsourced and used blatantly promotional language. The wording of your change suggested that you were editing on behalf of the company, so you need to read about conflict of interest and about paid editing. --David Biddulph (talk) 00:45, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

JKALINA22 (edit conflict) Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. First, you must review and formally comply with the conflict of interest and paid editing policies(the latter is a Terms of Use requirement). Once you do that, you may propose any changes you feel are needed to the article about your company on the talk page as edit requests. However, I can tell you that much of what you propose here would not be accepted. Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources say about article subjects like companies, not what the company wants to say about itself(such as what it considers to be its "mission" or what it considers to be its own history). It would be okay for you to propose adding the CEO of the company or its location- but the rest would need independent sources with significant coverage(not press releases, routine announcements, staff interviews or other primary sources) to support it. 331dot (talk) 00:47, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy link to unconstructive edit [[2]] TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 03:14, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@JKALINA22: To be specific, to Peeled Snacks, you added:

On the go or comfy at home, (redacted copyvio) feel good about snacking with Peeled Snacks.

This sounds like ad copy, and is totally inappropriate language for Wikipedia, which is an encyclopedia, like Britannica or Encarta. Please see WP:TONE and WP:NOTADVERTISING.

We do, however, want basic facts (like the CEO and location) to be correct. Please post at the article's talk page (Talk:Peeled Snacks) using {{Edit request}}, including a reference so we can verify the information. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 03:16, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@JKALINA22: Also, I had to redact part of the original quote above because you copied it from the company's social media and/or other copyrighted source. Do not do this. It is a violation of copyright law and cannot remain on Wikipedia. Offenders can lose their editing rights. (Note to admins: I've tagged Peeled Snacks with RD1 and info about the redaction here as well, if someone will have a look please.) —[AlanM1(talk)]— 10:25, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

When will my article be approved?

Hello there and good morning! I would like to enquire when would my article be approved please? I have completed 10 edits and it has been more than 4 days. I'm checking to see if I missed any steps.

Thank you and have a lovely day ahead! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hiranmayii (talk • contribs) 02:16, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not yet submitted. There is a blue box on your Sandbox draft to submit to Articles for Creation. At AfC there are thousands of drafts. Can be weeks to months for a review to select yours and review it. That said, it will absolutely be declined, as none of the text has references, and all of the references for the exhibitions list are to the company's own website. Also, wrong to hyperlink artist names to the company website. David notMD (talk) 02:26, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Hiranmayii: Courtesy link User:Hiranmayii/sandbox. Before you submit, syntax and formatting aside, you should know that there's no chance the article will be accepted. You are missing independent sources that demonstrate the gallery is notable. The gallery's own web site and social media sources do not show notability. I did a quick Google search for the gallery and can't find any media coverage at all. This is all I could find, and it looks user submitted. [[3]] I'm sorry you went to all that trouble. If you can find one source, you can add a mention and the source to Kuala Lumpur#Arts. (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.) TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 03:11, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Hiranmayii: I had a look at your draft as well and agree it with @Timtempleton that it will not be accepted without significant changes. It needs independent sources to establish notability, and a search I did turned up nothing much in that area, so it seems unlikely that we would be able to publish the article. I can see you have an interesting organization, but Wikipedia is not here to promote anyone's business, which makes what you have written ineligible.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 03:47, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hiranmayii (talk) 06:40, 5 March 2020 (UTC)Thank you so much for your input. I will rework the page to establish notability.[reply]

All of the "references" to KL's own website must be deleted. David notMD (talk) 11:00, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I want to create a page.Please advise me some topics

I want to create a page in wikipedia but don't know which topic to write about. Can someone advise me any topics?I am interested in the field of science and technology , So it would be better if you give related topics — Preceding unsigned comment added by Universology (talk • contribs) 05:55, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Universology: Welcome to the Teahouse, and by extension, Wikipedia. If you're looking for suggestions you can go to WP:Teahouse/Suggestions to get SuggestBot up and running on your talk page to give you suggestions every once in a while. Creating an article is one of the most (if not the) difficult things to do on Wikipedia. I suggest reading through Help:Your first article if you want to get introduced to starting articles. You can only start submitting directly to the main articlespace when you're autoconfirmed (i.e., your account is at least 4 days old and has had more than 10 edits made). Otherwise feel free to start a draft in draftspace before putting it up for submission. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 06:06, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Update It seems you already have SuggestBot. Ignore my suggestion then. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 06:15, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Universology, WP:RA has some categories related to science and technologies where you might find something interesting. Be careful though, not all suggested topics are notable. Check the notability guidelines at WP:N before you begin. You might want to read WP:YFA too. If you are just looking for something to work on without being bothered about the somewhat complicated notability guidelines that we have, you could try working on an article for any species. A list such as Wikipedia:WikiProject Mammals/Missing mammal species might be of help. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 06:17, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding decline of my content on wikipedia

Hi,

I have posted an article, can see here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Soniasinghania/sandbox , Can any one help me what is exact problem there to publish. Should I give some more references to prove each and every line in the article?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Soniasinghania (talk • contribs) 06:39, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Soniasinghaia:, welcome to the Teahouse. References are just half of the story, and if the Times of India are a reputable source, I don't see too much of a problem with notability and subject coverage. The issue that pops out to me is the comment that appears after the

, and I have to agree: the tone is not neutral enough and is written from the viewpoint of the company (Robert McClenon). It is too promotional and that needs to be cleaned out before it is acceptable to be submitted for article review.

Of course, since you wrote the draft is written from said company's viewpoint, you would have a conflict of interest and must disclose this on your userpage (and preferably also on the draft's talk page). You are allowed to make small factual corrections that are properly sourced, but anything larger than that should be done through {{Request edit}} templates on the draft's talk page. For more reading on the subject please consult WP:COI and WP:PAID. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 06:52, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Tenryuu, edit requests in cases of WP:COI are for mainspace only, drafts can be edited directly, that's why they must go through WP:AFC. Usedtobecool ☎️ 06:57, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Usedtobecool: Ah, my apologies. I just assumed the process would be the same in both places as it would make it less likely for drafts to be approved if they were being written with a COI to begin with. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 13:16, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse, Soniasinghania! it would be easier to respond if you'd said that you had read all the bluelinks in the message that says the draft was declined and the additional note that was left, and asked more specific questions about what exactly you are having trouble with. Without that, here's what I can say:

Although having references to prove each and every claim in the article is one of the basic principles of Wikipedia (see Wikipedia:Verifiability), that's not what notability is. Before we can even have an article, we need to establish that the subject is notable (see WP:N, or WP:NORG which specifically talks about organisations). Basically, we need multiple (three or more usually) reliable sources (see WP:RS) which cover the subject in detail (as opposed to mere mentions) and are independent of the subject (not based on press releases from the company, not published by the company itself, not written by someone connected with the company, not a paid placement by the company) (see WP:SIGCOV which explains this in more detail). The draft was declined for not meeting this requirement. So, basically, better sources are needed. Personally, I think the sources you have are almost there but not quite yet. Many of them are routine coverages, or based on press releases, or mere mentions when talking about something else such as the project that the company is participating in. A few of the sources don't appear to be reliable to me based on just how they look and read but I am not an expert on Indian sources.

Secondly, the writing may not exactly be up to encyclopaedic standards. But as long as it is not overly promotional, other editors will help you with this when notability has been established. So, it's not a big deal, again, as long as it is not overly promotional, which I don't think it is.

Finally, you were told that it would be unacceptable for you resubmit without answering the conflict of interest question. Wikipedia values neutrality. It is almost impossible for someone connected with the subject to be neutral. So, we require connected contributors to disclose their connection with the subject and have all their edits go through peer review. That means creating articles only as drafts that go through the WP:AFC process, and once the article is accepted and published, using WP:Edit Requests at the article talk page. See WP:COI. If you have any financial interest, WP:PAID applies. You must disclose your COI/PAID status, or make a firm/explicit denial that you are in no way connected with the subject before you continue editing on a subject that another editor in good faith has queried to you about having a COI about. So, please read WP:COI and specially carefully read WP:PAID, and disclose your relationship with the company as instructed there if you do have a connection, or otherwise deny having the conflict of interest, for example at your userpage or the draft's talk page and then continue editing.

I think that about covers it. Feel free to ask a follow-up as necessary, after you have carefully considered my comment supplemented with a careful reading of the pages as suggested. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 07:39, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Rejected creation of a page of a railway station with new name with redirect to existing old page

Recently I was traveling and was trying to find the renamed name of a famous railway station on Wiki but unable to get it so I created a page with official name and just redirected to existing page with old name. I thought initially to change the name but following WPCOMMONNAME definition i reverted back as suggested by other senior editors.

So the easiest way was to create a page with New Official Name as suggested by Wiki and then redirect to existing page. However on submission of draft for new page with redirection, it was rejected.

Deen Dayal Upadhyaya_Junction^[1]

Redirected to Mughalsarai Junction railway station ^[2]

Kindly note I have provided reference to change of official name through newspaper and a copy of draft circulation by the government on twitter. May I know if there is something that I missed or was it a misunderstanding?

References

DBigFacts (talk) 06:51, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DBigFacts, this appears to have been sorted, with the redirect created now. Is it appearing how you intended now? ~~ Alex Noble - talk 07:56, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

…

DBigFacts, I've added your reference to the talk page so that people can find the supporting article. I was a bit lazy and didn't format it as a proper citation. Would you like to convert it to {{cite news}}? Pelagic (talk) 08:10, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DBigFacts, redirects do not require references. Instead the claim should be established at the target article itself. You also seem to have tried to create the redirect in visual editor but using the instructions for source editing. These apparently led to your submission being construed as a test edit and was declined by the reviewer as such. I have fixed the formatting and moved it to the mainspace. Feel free to review my edits which are accessible through the history tab at the top of the redirect page. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 08:18, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to Alex Noble , Pelagic and Usedtobecool for your help and clarifications. TeaHouse rocks. DBigFacts (talk) 09:10, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Usedtobecool and Pelagic: Kindly note that a lot of Indian cities, districts, etc got their name changed recently and quite a few overzealous new editors try to enforce that in Wikipedia, disregarding WP:COMMONNAME. These new name changes include Allahabad -> Prayagraj, Faizabad district -> Ayodhya district, Mughalsarai -> Pt. Deen Dayal Upadhyaya Nagar, etc. Since WP:COMMONNAME applies here, the RfC for move should happen in the main settlement articles, as in the case of Allahabad, and related articles bearing the name of the place should follow that. Since Mughalsarai was not moved to Pt. Deen Dayal Upadhyaya Nagar, there is no reason changing the article name of the railway station, or creating a FORK. Also note that Bangalore wasn't moved to Bengaluru (the official name, changed in 2005) despite multiple move requests. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 09:28, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter Maybe Dstar (d*(2380) hexaquarks should be added to this wiki.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter Maybe Dstar (d*(380)hexaquarks should be added to this wiki. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.230.68.79 (talk) 09:40, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello IP editor! Improvements to articles are best discussed at their corresponding talk pages, in this case at Talk:Dark matter. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 10:18, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please make a request at Talk:Dark matter - at the help desk we aren't experts in every single topic area on the Wiki, and the editors that watch the article's talk page are much more likely to know what they're talking about, and so can make a better decision about inclusion in the article. ~~ Alex Noble - talk 16:14, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How do I help articles Without citations?

Citations are very Important^[1]. I want to help Wikipedia by adding citations. Can you please Add a option to search for pages without proper citation? RhysTTime Inc (talk)

References

^ As pages without citations can get erased.

RhysTTime Inc, would Category:All articles needing additional references do? Usedtobecool ☎️ 10:21, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by RhysTTime Inc (talk • contribs) 10:35, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

RhysTTime Inc, also note that your username is in violation of WP:CORPNAME. I think you'd best abandon this account and create a new one. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 10:42, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I was not aware of the username policy when I made my account. If I could change it, I would. Your regards RhysTTime Inc (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 10:51, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As you just started using this account two days ago, I recommend you delete all the content on the RhysTTime Inc User page (promotion is not allowed) and then just abandon that account and register a new account with a different name. Does not have to be your real name (great majority of editors don't). David notMD (talk) 11:06, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Initiate to create the page

Hello Dear I`m Saeid, a new user of Wikipedia. I create my company page here but I don`t know how to start write the content. I need your advice to start edit my page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saeid.shanghai (talk • contribs) 11:33, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The advice is on your user talk page. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:55, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Saeid.shanghai, firstly, please don't. Most businesses aren't notable enough, and will likely be deleted. If any topic hasn't received significant coverage in reliable sources independent of the topic, please don't create an article.

If you really have to, first read, and follow, the instructions at wp:conflict of interest, and wp:paid editing.

Then follow the instructions at wp:your first article, which will guide you through the process. ~~ Alex Noble - talk 11:58, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bot concept

Hi, I'm thinking of a bot concept that allows the automatic, non-controversial tagging and cleanup of certain articles. It can, for example, add tags like {{lead too long}} or {{Uncategorized}}, but not, for example, {{copy edit}}. It can also potentially tag articles unsourced for an extended period of time for PRODding. What would be your opinions on this potential bot? Thanks. tLoM (The Lord of Math) (Message) 13:14, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I like your proposal, but WP:Bot requests is probably the better place to post this. PorkchopGMX (talk with me - what i've done) 13:32, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Lord of Math, you might also want to open a discussion at either Wikipedia:Village pump (idea lab) or Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals), as this would likely have more impacts than a typical bot. ~~ Alex Noble - talk 13:34, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Alex Noble and PorkchopGMX: Thanks. BRFA required a "consensus" for bot tasks and I'm looking for one. So is Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) the preferred location for obtaining it?Thanks. tLoM (The Lord of Math) (Message) 13:50, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Lord of Math, Proposals would be the where consensus is made; the idea lab is for developing the details before it goes to proposals. ~~ Alex Noble - talk 13:58, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

Is it possible for a copyeditor (who is not the original author of an article) to modify or update a reference? In my case, a new edition of a reference work has made a small change to an earlier edition. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rogermccart (talk • contribs) 13:54, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Rogermccart Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Any editor is welcome to edit any article, editors that create an article have no more rights to it than any other editor. If you are concerned about stepping on others' toes, you can first discuss what you want to do on the article talk page. 331dot (talk) 14:36, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Accusation of vandalism

All I know is that Widr blocked me with Vandalism and I have never been on this site prior to today. Those claims made against me are fraudulent, unfounded and slanderous. I will take this to a higher court if need be. I don.t have a user name  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.24.66.119 (talk) 14:15, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

All I know is that Widr blocked me with Vandalism and I have never been on this site prior to today. Those claims made against me are fraudulent, unfounded and slanderous. I will take this to a higher court if need be.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.24.66.119 (talk) 14:17, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you are blocked, you must make a formal unblock request on your user talk page, instructions should be provided there. You should also be aware of no legal threats. 331dot (talk) 14:34, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

First, that is a 31 hour block, so calm down. Second, given you have not registered an account, a different person may have created content ("vandalism") that led to the block. Best recourse if you want to continue being a Wikipedia editor is to register an account. And yeah, stop with the "higher court" threats, as there is no higher court. David notMD (talk) 15:14, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

David notMD, just for clarification: the 31-hour block was enacted after the question was posted, and was not the one mentioned in the OP. Moaz786 (talk to me or see what I've been doing) 15:56, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

List of leaders of dependent territories in 2017

Please help me

I wrote The article List of leaders of dependent territories in 2017 which was not accepted for publication. I specify that all information was entered in good faith and after it was verified in the available sources. The article The article was considered unpublishable for reasons related to the missing citations from reliable, independent sources and to insufficient context for those unfamiliar with the subject matter. I don’t know what I can do. This article is of the chronological list type. For such articles, it is not possible to insert citations, because such citations do not exist. I wrote this article starting from the data presented in the websites which I presented as External links and from the results of my own research on various websites of the authorities that appear for different entities or on the site of CIA World Facebook, old editions.. On the other hand, the sites Rulers and World Statesmen are the most reliable sources in the field of arkhontology which can be easily accessed. If I try to find information from the press this would be a long research and I am not sure that I will find information for all the events that took place so long ago. On the other hand, quoting such sources would lead to a volume of information that would exceed the actual article. On the other hand I do not know what information I could add for those unfamiliar with the topic. I believe that the terms regarding the territorial entities and the functions of the leaders of its can be accessed implicitly through the links within the article. I do not think it is possible that a person who does not have at least elementary knowledge about the problems exposed would be interested in accessing the article. Starting from the above, please help me and suggest what should be added and what the modified event should be for the article to be publishable. I mention that I have a masters degree in political science so I think I have knowledge that will qualify me in approaching the problem.

Bogdan Ulaia 14:50, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Bogdan Uleia Please only seek assistance in one location. 331dot (talk) 14:59, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bogdan Uleia, I just took a look at your draft and I could not find a single citation in it. As well as that, the reason that your submission was declined, was because it didn't provide context to people unfamiliar with the subject. It was an extensive list and used templates, but how were we to know it wasn't just random? I suggest you read WP:WBA for more info. Also, you sign your drafts by using 4 tildes, like this ~~~~ Bᴇʀʀᴇʟʏ • ^{Talk to me}∕_{What have I been doing} 15:40, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Contact with article's source—COI?

Hi, apologies for asking another question. I wrote an article (Pride in STEM), and nominated it to appear at WP:DYK. I then made contact with the organisation to ask a question, and at the same time informed them that they now had a Wikipedia ~~page~~ article. As part of their reply, they sent back some links to third-party reliable sources, which contain information I'd like to add to the article. I just want to check—does the existence of that conversation constitute a WP:COI? They haven't supplied me with any text to add, they're not paying me, and I'm not a member of the organisation, nor do I know personally any of its members. YorkshireLad (talk) 15:58, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

YorkshireLad Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You don't need to inform the subject of the existence of an article(not just "page", a subtle but important distinction). Since you have been in contact with them and they have provided you with information that you intend to use, you should declare that as a COI. It's not paid editing(a different policy). Just my opinion. 331dot (talk) 16:17, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

On "page" vs. "article": Thanks, I've corrected myself above (I got it right the other two times, though!) YorkshireLad (talk) 16:24, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

YorkshireLad, I wouldn't call this a conflict of interest. Yes, there might be a bit of a conflict, but realistically, we all have some form of conflict of interest with everything. You might want to mention that they sent the sources in an edit summary, but I wouldn't expect an editor to do anything more. Just bear in mind that they aren't going to send you sources critical of them. ~~ Alex Noble - talk 16:20, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Alex Noble That's essentially what I was saying, they should note that they have been in contact with the organization. That's all. 331dot (talk) 16:22, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

331dot, edit conflict. I wasn't disagreeing with you, but replylink doesn't tell you until it's been posted. ~~ Alex Noble - talk 16:27, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, so an edit summary should be fine, rather than a declaration on the talk page? (I haven't normally contacted people to tell them they have a Wikipedia article, by the way! They're just quite a small operation—one that meets WP:GNG, but nevertheless small-scale—so I thought they might be interested to know.) YorkshireLad (talk) 16:25, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

YorkshireLad, personally;

No need for COI template on user page {{UserboxCOI}}
{{Connected contributor}} is debatable - you aren't really connected to the group, but it wouldn't harm to use if you want to be cautious
Definitely mention in edit summary, or in any discussion you're involved with about the article. ~~ Alex Noble - talk 16:34, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

citing sources

While creating an article. Is it best to cite sources that are already on wikipedia or sources outside wikipedia? Part of me thinks if sources are already on wikipedia, they've been already vetted so that may be the best way to go but please let me know. Thank you so much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Msansevieri (talk • contribs)

Msansevieri Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. It's certainly easier to use more well-known sources that are often used on Wikipedia, but if you have a source that you truly believe meets the criteria of a reliable source(in short, a source with a reputation of editorial control and fact checking), you are welcome to use it. The worst that will happen is that someone might disagree and ask you to support what you are trying to do. 331dot (talk) 16:24, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I found something to be added to the Spice_(bomb) page under "Use in combat"

Under use in combat there is only 1 entry. I know of another confirmed case where this weapon or weapon alteration kit was used. It was used on the night of 20-21st of January 2019 by the Israeli air force in a strike on Qatana, Syria.

https://twitter.com/QalaatAlMudiq/status/1087798994712084481

I know Wikipedia editors usually use largely unsourced articles as sources, but I find direct evidence to be much more convincing. Can someone update the page for me? Or can someone make me an extended confirmed user so I can do it myself?

[1] ttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Deen_Dayal_Upadhyaya_Junction

[2] ttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mughalsarai_Junction_railway_station

[3] As pages without citations can get erased.

[1]

[2]

[1]

@@ Line 650: / Line 650: @@
 :::{{u|331dot}}, edit conflict. I wasn't disagreeing with you, but replylink doesn't tell you until it's been posted. <span style="color: darkgreen"> ~~ </span> [[User:Alex Noble|<span style="color: darkgreen">Alex Noble</span>]]  [[User talk:Alex Noble|<span style="color: darkgreen">- talk</span>]] 16:27, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
 ::: Okay, so an edit summary should be fine, rather than a declaration on the talk page?  (I haven't normally contacted people to tell them they have a Wikipedia article, by the way!  They're just quite a small operation—one that meets [[WP:GNG]], but nevertheless small-scale—so I thought they might be interested to know.) [[User:YorkshireLad|YorkshireLad]] ([[User talk:YorkshireLad|talk]]) 16:25, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
+::::{{u|YorkshireLad}}, personally;
+::::*No need for COI template on user page {{t|UserboxCOI}}
+::::*{{t|Connected contributor}} is debatable - you aren't really connected to the group, but it wouldn't harm to use if you want to be cautious
+::::*Definitely mention in edit summary, or in any discussion you're involved with about the article. <span style="color: darkgreen"> ~~ </span> [[User:Alex Noble|<span style="color: darkgreen">Alex Noble</span>]]  [[User talk:Alex Noble|<span style="color: darkgreen">- talk</span>]] 16:34, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
 == citing sources ==