Wikipedia:Teahouse

Tigraan, 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.

Help Wikipedia

How to add a picture on a article

pictures

how do add a picture on a page/article because some of then lack pictures of people and I have some of them then how do I add them I have asked many people but I did not get a response so whoever seems to be reading this please give me an answer Alisha rains (talk) 14:54, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Do you have the image already uploaded? (here or on our sister project Wikimedia Commons)? If not, you can follow one of the two links above, which will help you with the upload process. Free files should generally go to Wikimedia Commons, while non-free (fair use) images must be kept here. After that, please tell us the upload name of the image, or simply come back and ask for how to include it in an article, and we will have a look. Victor Schmidt (talk) 15:35, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Alisha rains, and welcome to the Teahouse. Thank you for wanting to help improve Wikipedia. I have a question to ask, that may avoid some frustration and wasted effort later: did you take this pictures yourself? If you did, then you can upload them to Wikimedia Commons, and license them appropriately as you do so. If you did not, Wikipedia may not be able to accept them: in particular, most images you find on the Internet cannot be used, because Wikipedia is very careful about copyright. Many articles lack a photo not because nobody can be bothered, but because nobody has been able to find a photo with suitable licensing. The whole story is at WP:Image use policy. --ColinFine (talk) 16:18, 2 September 2020 (UTC

Ok I am new so can you please explain to me about this wiki commons thing because I don't know what that is and I don't understand when you say did I upload the picture can you please explain and thank you for replying quickly

OK, Alisha rains, I'll give it a go.

• The software that runs Wikipedia will not display an image that is linked to externally: all images must first be uploaded to a Wikimedia server, and then they can be inserted into an article.
• It is possible to upload an image to English Wikipedia itself; but if you do that the image will not be accessible from other language Wikipedias, or from Wiktionary, Wikisource, Wikiquote, Wikinews etc. So the Wikimedia Foundation has a separate wiki, called Wikimedia Commons, which all those wikis can access. So where possible, it's best to upload to Commons. The upload wizard within Wikipedia can upload to either Wikipedia or to Commons, whichever you tell it to.
• Now we get to Copyright. Commons, by policy, will only accept media which it is legal for anybody to reuse or alter for any purpose. commercial or not, without having to pay or get permission (there may be a requirement to give attribution). There are two main classes of media that meet that requirement: the first is public domain material, which is usually either very old ("out of copyright"), or published by a body such as the US government which chooses to make many of the works published in its name public domain. Most images less than 100 years old, (and in particular, most images you find on the Internet) are not in the public domain. The second is images which the copyright holder (usually the person who made the image, such as the photographer, though not always) has chosen to release under a permissive licence such as CC-BY-SA, which makes them free to reuse in the sense that Commons requires. If you upload pictures that you took yourself, you can license them as you upload them; but if they are anybody else's, then you may not unless the copyright owner has explicitly licensed them. See donating copyright materials.
• Because those rules so tightly limit the images which can be used in Wikipedia, Wikipedia chooses to relax them a certain amount, but not very far. If an image, and the way it is to be used on Wikipedia, meet all the criteria in the non-free content criteria, then it is permissible to upload the image to Wikipedia (not to Commons), and use it in an article. Those criteria are quite restrictive, and almost never apply to images of living people (because there is usually a possibility of somebody going and taking another image which they can release).

Does this make things clearer? --ColinFine (talk) 22:31, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Ok thank you so much you have helped me a lot I will try doing what you said thank you and I also wanted to ask is there a place where you can chat to someone personally or not

He, Alisha rains. Please sign your posts on talk and discussion pages. As for talking personally: it depends what you mean. Every user has a "User talk" page on which you can start a discussion; but like everything else on Wikipedia, that is publicly visible (though not usually found by search engines). There is also IRC for online chatting, but I have never used that, so I don't know what it is like. Finally, many users enable email, which means that you can send them an email from Wikipedia (go to their user or user talk page, and if they have enabled it, there will be an "Email this user" in the toolbox down the side - I'm talking about using Wikipedia through a browser: I don't think this is available from the mobile app). But it is part of the collaborative nature of Wikipedia that discussions should be held in public unless there is a good reason not to. --ColinFine (talk) 17:16, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Because I would like to speak to you personally on your talk page please you seem like a very nice person ❤️ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alisha rains (talk • contribs) 18:11, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Back to your original question - how do you have these pictures? Do you mean you took them with a camera? As to you last comment, clicking on "Talk" in a person's signature takes you to their talk page, where you can leave a comment. Anyone else can go to that Talk page and see it. David notMD (talk) 18:31, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

No I did not take a use a camera to take the pictures but I took I took them from the internet — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alisha rains (talk • contribs) 19:01, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Alisha rains All of those pictures are copyright by someone else and you are not permitted to add them to Wikipedia or Wikipedia Commons. David notMD (talk) 02:25, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Ok thank you for helping me — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alisha rains (talk • contribs) 08:04, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Question

Can I use Grammarly on pages to fix it? I'm just wondering Littlemonkeyjoe5337 (talk) 16:18, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Littlemonkeyjoe5337, and welcome to the Teahouse. You may use any tool you find helpful. I do not know how well Grammarly works in the Wiki editing window. It may be better to copy into a notepad or word processor window, run Grammarly on it, and copy the resuolt back. In any case you are responsible for the edits you make, with or without a tool, so check the results before clicking "publish". DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 16:31, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi, I have Grammarly's Chrome extension installed and it works when I'm in Source Editing mode, but it doesn't work for Visual Editing as far as I know. Hope this helps.Infojunkie8675 (talk) 16:42, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

@Littlemonkeyjoe5337: Any tool, no matter how good, is only effective if it is used in the right way, and with care. It is perhaps unfortunate that some of your first edits here were not seen as being as helpful as you might have wished. Personally, I would only ever rely on the spelling tools, not the grammar ones, and I would need to be very careful never to change one acceptable spelling for another, just because the tool suggested it was wrong. A classic example would be colour and color. To me, one of them is very wrong and the other fine, but I need to appreciate that both US and British spellings are correct in the right contexts (see WP:ENGVAR). If you do decide to come out of retirement after your first 24 hour's experience here, I suggest you just stick to fixing really obvious spelling errors. (There are plenty of them!) Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:23, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

To add some more detail to what Nick Moyes said, after having reviewed those problematic edits made by the user (and fixed some more of them), Grammarly seems incapable (unsurprisingly) of knowing how to handle some things (assuming they were done by the tool or at its suggestion, not the user alone):

• It insists on serial commas instead of deciding what the article uses and sticking to it.
• It may insist on a particular spelling convention (British or American) instead of deciding what the article uses and sticking to it.
• It likes to insert indefinite articles in front of words where I don't think it's necessary, e.g., "It is sometimes prepared without a sauce". (Formal grammatical clarity on this is welcome)
• It wants to capitalize words that are sometimes used as proper nouns, regardless of context, e.g., pizza Bianca (white pizza; which should not be capitalized), as opposed to Bianca Jagger, which should be.
• Other word removals that are just awkward, e.g., removing "own" from: "... due to people who had grown up eating grandma pizza finally being able to open up their own pizzerias."

In the hands of someone who has read more than an article or book or two, has written something more formal than a tweet, and is adept at copy-editing, these false suggestions are just an annoyance that they would know to ignore. However, in the hands of someone without such experience, whose first language is not English or, is "not old enough to get a job" (in this case), such tools do more harm than good. I think that if someone needs to ask whether it's OK to use, they probably shouldn't use it. Not everyone can or should copy-edit, despite the slogan. My opinion, of course. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 09:01, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

The general issue of any guidance needed for new editors on error-checking tools is probably worth moving to our Talk page. But I have just added this to WP:SPELLCHECK. In this instance, I agree with AlanM1's assessment and think an error-checking tool was being innocently used in a way that caused a few minor problems that needed reverting. Sadly, I suspect they felt rather bitten by the firm but reasonable request on their talk page not to use Grammarly in that way, which probably curtailed their desire to continue here. Nick Moyes (talk) 10:05, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Please let me know how to make this company page work on Wikipedia. I'm open for suggestions/improvements.

I've created this AI company's page. I'm open for suggestions and improvements. Please review and let me know how to make it a noteworthy addition to Wikipedia.

Extended content

Webtunix is an Artificial Intelligence company that provides AI based solutions to companies and businesses. The company was started with the aim of solving real-world problems through programming. Webtunix offers real-world solutions to businesses related to multiple sectors like IT, Cyber Security, Healthcare, Telecom, E-Commerce, Sports, Agriculture, Automobile, Oil and Gas and Banking and Finance. People in India were not well aware of AI technology when the company became live in 2015. Webtunix is the first company to spread awareness of AI potential and provide real-world solutions to people using several technologies. The company develops software and programs that provide real-time analysis and solutions to the complex problems. Webtunix use the high-tech tools and frameworks to provide efficient solutions to help businesses run smoothly. Data has become more digitized with the help of Artificial Intelligence which was once unorganized, underutilized and considered somewhat insignificant. AI carries the capability of processing, optimizing and analyzing large amount of data.  Artificial Intelligence has reduced manual work, labor and efforts of businesses along with cutting the production cost and improving profits. AI has been significantly beneficial in the businesses and companies for its boundless capabilities. Webtunix uses these techniques in their projects like Data Science, Machine Learning, Deep Learning, Data Scraping, Data Analytics, Data Visualization, Data Annotation, Recommendation System, Digital Image Processing, Predictive Analytics, Python Development, Speech Processing, Speech Recognition, Text Analysis, Natural Language Processing, Reinforcement Learning and Human and Computer Vision Webtunix deals in providing services related to Video Object Tracking, Human and Computer Vision, Data Reinforcement & Categorization, Natural Language Processing, Chatbot Development , 3D Point Cloud, Bounding Box, Line Annotation, Landmark Annotation, Speech and Audio and Semantic Segmentation. References

Editingwork8 (talk) 04:31, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

The content is apparently a copy of User talk:Editingwork8/sandbox. Please just post a link in the future instead of copying text. Thanks. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 07:01, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi Editingwork8. Just a couple of questions.

1. Why do you want to create an article about this company?
2. Are you connected to the company in any way?

Basically, in order for you or anyone else to create a Wikipedia article about this company that doesn't ultimately end up being deleted, it's going to have to be established that the company meets Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies); in other words, the company needs to be deemed to be Wikipedia notable (see also Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything for reference as well) to have an article written about it.

It's not enough for the company to exist and have its own website, its product line or its own whatever because Wikipedia isn't really interested in what the company might have to say about itself and a Wikipedia article isn't intended to be a means of promotion for the company. Wikipedia is really only interested in what reliable sources, independent of the company, are saying (good or bad) about it; so, the way to establish the company's Wikipedia notability is to show that the company has received significant coverage in multiple reliable sources as explained here.

What you've written in your sandbox reads more like it's a PR release for the company and wouldn't be considered acceptable for an article per Wikipedia:Neutral point of view; however, the main problem is that you haven't provided any citations to any reliable sources to allow what you've written to be verified. So, if you believe this company is Wikipedia notable and want to try and create an article about it, then I would suggest that you take a look at Help:Your first article and Help:Referencing for beginners for reference. You might also want to take a look at this guide created by a Wikipedia administrator nameed Ian.thomson because it contains some helpful suggestions as well. You should create a draft first and then submit the draft to Wikipedia:Articles for creation for review when you think it's ready for article status. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:29, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Editingwork8, this is a completely unacceptable draft that uses the vapid and meaningless "real world" buzzword three times, then throwing in "real time". Come on. That is meaningless marketing speak. Can you imagine a notable company saying "we are not real world. We live in fantasy land". Of course not. Start by reading and studying the neutral point of view which is a core content policy. If all you can do is parrot empty marketing slogans, then you cannot possibly be successful on Wikipedia. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 08:00, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

One thing to realise, Editingwork8 is that in an article about Webtunix, Wikipedia is basically not interested in anything at all that Webtunix says or wants to say about itself, or that its associates say about it. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with Webtunix, and have no been prompted or fed information by Webtunix, have chosen to publish about it, in reliable places. If there are not enough places where independent people have done this, then there is nothing that can go into an article, and no article is possible. --ColinFine (talk) 14:05, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Page fixed

Note: I fixed two bare ref tags (with nowiki tags) in #Is there a template for ref. name = that was causing the next several sections of this page to disappear. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 05:09, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for doing that AlanM1, but for future reference you can just explain what you did either in an edit summary or in the original discussion thread per WP:TPG#Fixing format errors. Pretty much all experienced TH hosts will understand what you did; so, there's no need to start a new discussion thread to explain why. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:38, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: I'm aware (if you look at the history of the page, I do a lot of quiet work). I felt it important in this case because a non-regular had posted a duplicate section because their original one disappeared. Others might be wondering why sections disappeared and want to know that they should refresh the page and look for it again. It was an unusual, subtle, and tough to find problem. Or maybe I was just fishing for a thank you. I don't know. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 09:48, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Help creating a Wikipedia page for an actor

Help creating a Wikipedia page for an actor

Can anyone help me create a Wikipedia page for an actor? 108.89.82.111 (talk) 08:11, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia does not have "pages for actors"; it has articles about actors. Please review the special Wikipedia definition of a notable actor; if this actor meets at least one aspect of that definition, and has significant coverage(not just brief mentions) in independent reliable sources, an article may be possible. Be advised that successfully writing a new article is the absolute hardest thing to do on Wikipedia, and I would suggest taking some time to learn more about Wikipedia first. It's best to do this by spending time editing existing articles first, to get a feel for how Wikipedia operates and what is expected of article content. At a minimum you should review Your First Article, and possibly use the new user tutorial(though you need an account to do that). You can then use Articles for Creation to create and submit a draft for review by another editor before it is formally placed in the encyclopedia, so you find out any problems first. 331dot (talk) 09:15, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Cant Add pictures

Hello! I want to inquire about how can i add pictures to an article here? like i have my own non copyrighted pictures which i want to upload, but the uploader isnt allowing me, sorry for this childish question but i am new to editing Wikipedia. Ematchkay (talk) 08:28, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Ematchkay, was it Wikimedia Commons where you tried to upload them? There's no account in your name there. Also, what do you mean by "own non copyrighted"? Did you take the pictures yourself? Or are they public domain for some reason? Maproom (talk) 09:59, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Maproom, i just clicked on the on insert>image and media> upload, but it says "Failed to load the configuration for file uploads to the foreign file repository."

@Ematchkay: try using WP:FUW to upload images. If thy are under a free license such as CC-BY-SA (not yust found on the internet), you can also use c:Special:UploadWizard. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 11:26, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Adding images

I am trying to update images on a page International Bomber Command Centre. I own the rights to all the images but nothing seems to upload. I get a message saying I don't own the images, but I do and they are stored on the PC from which I am working on Wiki. How do i get over this? The images that are currently shown are out of date and of very poor quality Nicky at IBCC (talk) 09:05, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Nicky at IBCC Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You will need to review the conflict of interest and paid editing policies as you have formal disclosures you are required to make. You cannot upload images to Wikipedia itself until you are autoconfirmed(your account is four days old with 10 edits or more). You can upload them to Commons, a link can be found at Files For Upload(which you also use to get assistance with direct uploads). 331dot (talk) 09:19, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Board deciding notability

Hi. I saw there is a board where people post sources and users discuss if it's considered reliable or not. Is there something similar where you post a person and people discuss if they're notable? Or can I just ask here? Julia Domna Ba'al (talk) 09:21, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Julia Domna Ba'al Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm not aware of a central board that discusses preclearing topics for notability. You are welcome to ask here; you may wish to review the general notability guideline first(there are more specific criteria for certain subjects). 331dot (talk) 09:28, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

331dot I read that and I'm not sure. The person is called Emily Schrader. She was a director at StandWithUs, responsible for its rise online. Research fellow at the Tel Aviv Institute. She wrote columns on Jerusalem post, the forward, and others. the most sources on her are her own articles or interviews. I tried to find sources talking about her (independent) and found this, written by a haaretz editor, and another article written by electronic intifada (small time magazine). Is this enough to make an article? Julia Domna Ba'al (talk) 09:34, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Julia Domna Ba'al You would need to have multiple independent reliable sources to establish notability. Interviews are not independent sources. In my opinion this person would not meet the definition of a notable person. 331dot (talk) 09:41, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks.Julia Domna Ba'al (talk) 09:47, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Julia Domna Ba'al There is the Reliable Source Noticeboard where editors discuss whether particular sources should be considered reliable, either in general, or for specific uses in specific articles or drafts. However, this is advisory, not any sort of "clearance" and it does not usually discuss the notability of an entire topic. Indeed, when the notability of a topic is considered at an deletion discussion, which is the primary place to discuss that, it is generally in connection with the particular sources cited in the article or presented in the discussion. It is much harder to determine the notability of a topic without searching for sources, except in obvious cases. (A newly elected national legislator is clearly notable, as per WP:NPOL; a high-shool student with no non-local coverage is pretty clearly not notable.) DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 14:10, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

DESiegel do you think she is notable? Just your personal opinion. She was mentioned in some articles, like ynetnews, JP, and a French news agency. Is this enough? They are just passing mentions but consider her an expert in online advocacy. I think she's a rising star. Julia Domna Ba'al (talk) 16:11, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Julia Domna Ba'al based on those sources, no, not even close. I haven't done a general search for other sources, so there might be several out there, but none of the sources you link to constitutes significant coverage from an Independent and reliable source. The 972 Magazine piece is almost totally a reprint of Schrader's own statements, so it is not independent, and there is no need to even get into whether it is a RS. The ynetnews piece simply has a short quote from here and contains nothing about her. The Jerusalem Post piece has a somewhat longer quote from her, but again nothing about her. The decotidien piece, if my college French is to be trusted, is much the same. Normally, multiple independent reliable sources are needed, each of which having significant coverage. There are none here.

Reporters are often hard to establish notability for, unless they win a major award such as a Pulitzer or its equivalent, because they are seldom written about. It is possible, but hard, to establish notability for a person as an "often consulted expert" but this requires showing that a wide variety of notable publications treat the person as among their top experts to analyze or comment in a particular field. I have only been involved in one case in my years on Wikipedia where that route was successful. If she is in fact a rising star. then quite possibly WP:TOOSOON applies. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 16:47, 4 September 2020 (UTC) Julia Domna Ba'al DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 16:48, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

DESiegel thank you, I get it now. I think it's "too soon" then. Will get back to it in a few years when multiple independent sources show significant coverage, and when she does something notable enough. Julia Domna Ba'al (talk) 19:19, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Draft:GIG Logistics

Hi All, will any reviewer be kind enough and willing to have a look at this draft? I made the initial submission on 1 July (over 9 weeks ago) and the instructions left in the comment on the first review from Lapablo (23 July) were followed, and then a second/follow-up instructions left by Lapablo on 1 August have been addressed as well. I am yet to get another review or comment since then. Kindly review at your convenience. Many thanks. Jidara (talk) 11:46, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Jidara Hello and welcome. You have submitted the draft for review, it will be seen by another reviewer in due course, please be patient. As noted, "This may take 2 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 3,384 pending submissions waiting for review." All drafts are reviewed at random in no particular order, so personal appeals for a review have a low chance of success, as it is seen as an effort to "jump the line". 331dot (talk) 11:53, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

@Jidara Hello & welcome, As already stated by 331dot, personal appeals do indeed have a low success rate. Whilst we are at it reading WP:COI & WP:PAID might be important for you at this juncture. Celestina007 12:05, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Jidara had declared paid for GIG Logistics on own Talk page. I copied it to Jidara's User page. As Jidara mentioned above, submitted twice, declined twice. From the history of the article, no edits have been done after either of the Declined except to submit the draft again. David notMD (talk) 12:28, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for moving it from their TP to the appropriate place.

Now, @Jidara I can’t say I understand the pressure a paid editor (who is yet to deliver) is made to tolerate because I haven’t been in such situation but I do imagine it to be very much frustrating, however as rightly stated by David notMD, you do not seem to have addressed any issue since your article was declined twice by Lapablo whose initial reason for declining the draft was connected to UPE concerns. Courtesy ping to Lapablo who may want to comment about this or take another look at the article. Celestina007 13:00, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

I'm confused, as the author may be. The comment left by the reviewer below the pink decline box asked for declaration of the paid editing. However, the decline box itself complains that the subject is not notable – a whole different problem. The second decline box looks like the first, with no mention of the PAID issue (though the article author put the declaration in the wrong place), but the real problem appears to still be notability, about which nothing was done (possibly because of the talk page communication being only about PAID). —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 14:18, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

AlanM1, I think possibly @Lapablo intended to include the addendum “also fails GNG” to his UPE concerns in the pink decline box as to why he declined the article but perhaps due to normal everyday errors (which we all make) most likely forgot to include that. Can’t say for sure though, just a plausible theory. Celestina007 15:38, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Bringing a page up to date

Updating a page, not paid editing So I'm pretty new to editing wikipedia. I follow a bunch a companies in the sports betting space and I noticed a lot of their pages were out of date. I tried to update this page: FanDuel. However, the edit has been reverted as a paid edit. I don't work for them or get paid by them. Any suggestions? Sportsbettor (talk) 13:44, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Sportsbettor Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Are you paid in any capacity related to sports betting? 331dot (talk) 13:48, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

No, I work in sports but not in sports betting or for any of these companies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sportsbettor (talk • contribs) 13:55, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

(this comment is filled in after an edit conflict)Sportsbettor, hello there. The reason why said editor reverted your edit under WP:PAID is because your edits sounds advertising. Lemme quote: "diversified gaming company," "the second largest daily fantasy sports service in the country." The second example is okay if a credible source says so. You also seem to repeatedly change the first sentence, possibly making the editor feel as if you are trying to find the best words to "market" FanDuel.

If you are paid, please disclose it. If you are not, good; I suggest sourcing sources next time and using a more Neutral POV. That's all I can say I guess. Oh and remember to sign your comments with four tildes, like ~~~~. GeraldWL 14:05, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

@Sportsbettor: Sign your comments on discussion pages, that is, not articles. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 14:24, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Yes. Thanks for clarifying. (has anyone in history signed on an article before?) GeraldWL 14:29, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

@Gerald Waldo Luis: Yes. That's why I mentioned it – I try not to nit-pick without a good reason. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 00:59, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

I also just removed the word "diversified". Good point on that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sportsbettor (talk • contribs) 17:36, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Oh, and, to clarify, don't be so hard on WP:NPOV. Many editors are hesitant (based on my observations) to edit a page because they think others will revert it because it sounds like an American medicine advertisement, and crying out on "everyone has a bias!". If you feel it is okay, just publish it-- another editor will hopefully humbly neutralize it. GeraldWL 14:32, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Gerald Waldo Luis, signing an article is a very common error by a new editor, although I think it used to be more common than it seems to be recently. I have no idea why, or even if this informal observation is correct. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 15:08, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

In response to my question on User talk:scope creep scope creep posted:

Adding the word diversified into the lede along with a press-release reference. I've not done the work, but it certainly look like all the companies that the editor has worked at all in the same company group, indicating he is probably a UPE, or at the very least has a coi. Its moved from being fairly even lede, to be more like a company profile.

That should be taken into account here. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 15:16, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Sportsbettor Do your job duties involve following sports betting, even if you don't work in the sports betting field? I'm not trying to attack you, I'm just trying to help you help yourself and get this cleared up. 331dot (talk) 15:26, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Sportsbettor (talk) 17:32, 4 September 2020 (UTC)Thanks for the comments. Starting to get it. So I've gone back and neutralized it. I think it is much better now. On the question of my job, honestly pretty much everyone in US sports today is following sports betting, so I guess the answer is yes. I'll try to make sure I use a neutral POV in any edits though. On the tildes is that this page or on the article talk page. I'm putting them here and after just to be sure. :-) Sportsbettor (talk) 17:32, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Sportsbettor Use the tildes to sign your posts on any talk or discussion page such as this, and any article talk page or user talk page, but never in an actual article. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 18:12, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

pre-Columbus period?

Why not rename this period "pre-Indian removal" period, calling it for what really happened ."pre-Columbus" period is not telling the real events that put America where it is today. And yet those same Columbus people are still in control and why is it so hard to start the healing with the truth? 2600:6C55:6800:1B22:1DE0:64DB:E2A4:67B3 (talk) 15:04, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources state, and that generally includes article titles. Wikipedia will use the most common name for a topic, see WP:COMMONNAME, and will not push any sort of agenda to right great wrongs of history. If you can make a case that most independent reliable sources use the terminology you propose, you should do that on the article talk page. 331dot (talk) 15:18, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) The term "pre-Columbian" is very commonly used in histories to indicate the period prior to the first voyage of Columbus in 1492, or more generally the period before Europeans came to the Americas. In such matters, Wikipedia does not invent or popularize new terms, it follows existing practice, particularly scholarly practice. Also, this term refers to a very specific and dated event, whereas "pre-Indian removal" would be significantly more vague, IMO. But that is a side isasue, the main issue is tht we use the terms our sources use. If reliable sources start to use "pre-Indian removal" then Wikipedia should also, and not otherwise. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 15:22, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Sadas DB - Company description - Feedback request

Hello, I noticed that my previous feedback request has been canceled ( can I know the reason, please). I want to show again my trial page of Sadas company, in order to obtain other important feedback to improve the page and respect Wikipedia guidelines (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Giuseppe_Ardolino/sandbox). The page has been already changed thanks to previous feedbacks from Wikipedia contributors. Please, Can you give me other advice before the publication? Thank you for your collaboration Giuseppe Ardolino (talk) 15:48, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Giuseppe Ardolino. Your previous request has not been "canceled": it has been archived, as you were told on your user talk page. You can find it at WP:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1074#Sadas - Company description - Feedback request. As you can see, nobody chose to reply. There is no obligation on Teahouse hosts to review drafts: as you probably know, there is a formal process for reviewing: to initiate it, paste {{subst:submit}} at the top of your draft. --ColinFine (talk) 16:37, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Giuseppe Ardolino, and welcome to the Teahouse. Some comments about Giuseppe Ardolino/sandbox in no particular order.

• The text could use copy editing from someone fluent in English. For examp0le, in formal english, one does not say that a copany was "born" but rather "founded" or "created". Similarly one does not write "currently, it is led by" but rather "is currently led by" or better "as of 2020, the company is led by". Indeed relative dates such as "currently" should be avoided. Consider how the article might read in five or ten years.
• company status indicators such as "co" "inc", "corp" or "LLC" are generally noit used in Wikipedia, unless they have become an invariable part of the company name. If "s.r.l." is a simialr term from Italian, it should probably be omitted. If it is retained, it should probably be expanded on fist use.
• Please read Referencing for Beginners. Citation templates are not required, but if you choose not to use them, please give most of the same information. This means giving the title of the referenced piece; the name of the containing work (website, newspaper, magazine, or journal or the like) when there is one (note the name, not the domain); the author's name (when known); the date or at least the year of publication; the page number(s) if the source has numbered pages; the language if the source is not in English; the date accessed or retrieved if this is an online source; and the name of the publisher if this is helpful. The object is to allow the reader to find it even if the link goes dead.
• To establish notability and to pass WP:NCORP, there should be multiple independent published reliable sources cited, each of which should include significant coverage of the company. I have not tried to evaluate the sources here.

I hope that is a bit helpful. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 20:31, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

@DESiegel: FWIW, in my previous life, I came to the conclusion that, outside the U.S., tacking on the JSC, AS, cie, Pty Ltd, Gmbh., etc. is more common, as if to emphasize that a company is a "proper" business. I think sources probably adhere to that. I'm not sure I want to see someone try to spell out GmbH. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 01:14, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

AlanM1 MOS:MISCSHORT says (f "Co.") It should only be used in the names of companies (like: "PLC", "LLC", "Inc.", "Ltd.", "GmbH", etc.), and can usually be omitted unless an ambiguity would result. It does not need to be linked. and Wikipedia:Naming conventions (companies) says: The legal status suffix of a company (such as Inc., plc, LLC, and those in other languages such as GmbH, AG, and S.A.) is not normally included in the article title (for example, Microsoft Corporation, Nestlé S.A., Aflac Incorporated, and Deutsche Post AG). ... In some cases, leading articles (usually The) and suffixes (such as Company, International, Group, and so forth) are an integral part of the company name and should be included... As a matter of style, the MOS takes precedence over how names are styled elsewhere, and particularly by the owners if commo9n usage in sources drops the legal status indicators. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 01:31, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

How To Change Username?

Hello! Iam Muhammad Husayn. I Want To Ask Question: How To Change Username In Wikipedia Account? ItsMuhammadHusayn (talk) 16:18, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi @ItsMuhammadHusayn, welcome to the Teahouse. For more information and instructions on how to change your username, see Wikipedia:Changing username Ed talk! 16:24, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

The OP is evading a block. 331dot (talk) 16:25, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

to publish my new article

Hey , It's my first time to publish an article on Wikipedia. but it' seems difficult to me. it a bibliography article. I finished to write it but when publish it I can't find it when I make a search. I would like to know if it tooks days to be available on the internet.tahnks Tnt05 (talk) 16:31, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to The Teahouse, you have not submitted your draft for review yet, but I strongly suggest you do not, it will be rejected as it gives no indication that the subject is notable. Theroadislong (talk) 16:38, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Tnt05 (ec) Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I think you mean a biographical article, not "bibliography". Is it about yourself? There are special rules about that here if it is. You have not yet submitted your draft for review, but if you did, I think it would be rejected quickly, because it has no independent reliable sources with significant coverage to support its content. Wikipedia is not a place to just tell about someone; it summarizes what independent sources with significant coverage have chosen to say about a subject, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability.

Successfully writing a new article is the absolute hardest task to perform on Wikipedia. I would suggest that you read Your First Article and use the new user tutorial. You may also want to spend time editing existing articles in areas that interest you first, to better understand how Wikipedia works and what is expected of article content. 331dot (talk) 16:38, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Your effort is an unsubmitted draft, and even if revised, submitted, reviewed and approved, there is a lag time before internet searches on the person's name would find the Wikipedia article. David notMD (talk) 21:47, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

How to change wrong Wiki photo popping up at Google search?

If one googles for "Aeolic order", the wrong, Ionic (!) capital image appears along with the Wiki article's lead. This wrong photo used to be at the top of the article. I've replaced it with a better suited photo, but Google didn't react. Can that be modified? Or is it a case of wait and it'll happen? Anyhow, there's no "short description" tag at the top, that I know about, but not about photos. Who knows what to do? Thanks, Arminden (talk) 16:39, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

@Arminden: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Google and Wikipdia are separate entities; Wikipedia has no control over how Google presents search information. Try contacting Google. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 16:44, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Arminden Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. It takes time for Google to index articles and update. If it is pulling the image from Wikipedia, it will eventually update. It may also be something on Google's end that we here have no control over, in which case you will need to contact Google. 331dot (talk) 16:45, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

There's a feedback button at the bottom of all Google Knowledge Graphs, Arminden. You could use that to report the issue. See here for more info. Cordless Larry (talk) 16:50, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Article Rejected

 Mdahmedqamer (talk) 17:20, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Mdahmedqamer and welcome to the Teahouse. Is this about User:Mdahmedqamer/sandbox. That was rejected and then deleted largely for being promotional. It was also insufficiently sourced, and not in a proper format for a Wikipedia article, but those issues could be dealt with. It was also signed, which articles and drafts should never be. But promotion was the main problem. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 18:40, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Am I the right person to write this article?

I've recently had a book published about the actor Guy Standeven (1928-1998). Should someone else who isn't as connected to the subject matter write his Wikipedia entry? He currently doesn't have one. I think he fits the criteria with regards nobility as he has an extensive filmography and although I'm the leading authority on the man I was concerned that it wasn't my place to write the article. Marcus J Heslop (talk) 17:21, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

hello, Marcus J Heslop There is nothing wrong with writing an article about a subject you know well. If you have a personal connection, that would be a conflict of interest and you would need to disclose that, and be careful in your writing. If such an article would tend to promote your recent book, that would also be a CoI, and you might in that case want to avoid creating the article. if it can be created with proper citations to sources other than your book, perhaps to sources that you used in writing the book, that would be fine. Sources need not be online as long as they are published and a reader could, by taking some trouble find or buy them.Also, please read WP:NACTOR if you haven't previously done so. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 18:21, 4 September 2020 (UTC) @Marcus J Heslop: DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 20:49, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Marcus J Heslop, WP:EXPERT may be of some help. Try using other WP:RS than your book, and if your book is WP:SELFPUBLISHED, don't use it as a source at all. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:21, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

WOW that's a lot of uncredited. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:25, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Profile Page

This is not about a specific article, I just need help with navigation.On my profile page I want to be able to put one of those boxes that people put on the side of their profile pages or articles. I am not talking about userboxes. I am talking about the informational boxes that have different stuff about the user or the subject of an article. Thank you for your help. JP3205 (talk) 18:51, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

JP3205 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Are you referring to your user page? Wikipedia does not have a single profile. 331dot (talk) 19:01, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello JP3205. You are probably thinking of Template:Infobox person. Be careful that your userpage does not look like a encyclopedia article. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:04, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

I think an infobox was what I was thinking about. Thanks for your help.  JP3205 (talk) 18:51, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

@JP3205: There's apparently an infobox specifically designed for user pages: {{Infobox Wikipedia user}}. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 07:45, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, this helps. I will start working on it soon.  JP3205 (talk) 12:47, September 2020 (UTC)

Article stealing

Hello, some one stole a page by changing the name of the to a completely another state. It was Bharatiya Janata Party, Rajastan before with data of rajastan and now it is Bharatiya Janata Party, Tamil Nadu with tamil nadu data. What to do? Aaravan (talk) 19:00, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

@Aaravan: thanks for pointing this out. It has been resolved and the article on the BJP Rajastan is back where it belongs. Nthep (talk) 19:31, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Hebrew money compared to USA money

I was wondering if anyone can tell me where to find (or do you know) what value a gerah or a shekel of Hebrew money is in relation to United States money. Is there some way to make a comparison?

gerah - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerah

shekel - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shekel

BibleGateway.com (NIV) - Exodus 30:13 - "Each one who crosses over to those already counted is to give a half shekel, according to the sanctuary shekel, which weighs twenty gerahs. This half shekel is an offering to the Lord."

What is the value of a gerah or shekel compared to US money?

Thanks for any help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elteral3 (talk • contribs) 19:56, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Elteral3 The Reference desk might be able to give a better answer to this kind of question. But I doubt that any accurate comparison can be made to biblical accounts of sums of money, as opposed to current money in Israel or other countries. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 20:58, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Per DESiegal above, but a basic google search reveals $0.30 to 1 Israeli New Shekel, or 3.37 Shekel to the Dollar. Currently. But this is OR and isn't accounting for inflation or true gold value etc given the dollar didn't exist in Biblical times so we are comparing two FIAT currencies. Koncorde (talk) 21:01, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Trouble finding reliable articles for an esoteric subject

Hello! I'm trying to create an article about "Time Out Dolls". These things will sometimes pop up in flea markets and secondhand circles online, and they're usually met with a lot of confusion. So I want to create an article that could help explain things and clear said confusion. While I can find a lot of content about them online, ranging from sewing patterns, to blog posts, to photos, I'm really struggling to find reliable, verifiable resources. What can I do now? Maddielovescolours (talk) 20:46, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Maddielovescolours, and welcxome to the Teahouse. I am afraid that if you cannot find independent published reliable sources about a topic, that cover that topic in some detail, then in most cases Wikipedia cannot have an article about that topic. There are a few cases, such as elected officials above a certain level, and inhabited places, where a single source proving that the topic exists will do, but not for dolls or most other subjects. Sources need not be online -- if you find a book which discuss es such dolls that could be a good source -- but they are needed, and the articles content should largely come from independent sources. Note that fan sites or one-person web sites are generally not considered to be reliable sources. and that personal letters, emails, and phone calls are not published sources. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 21:04, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

The things definitely exist. You can buy them on Amazon and on Ebay. A Google search shows that people write about them – but not in serious articles that Wikipedia would regard as "reliable". (This is the first time I've ended up feeling that WP's notability standard can give the wrong result.) Maproom (talk) 23:01, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

https://www.ozy.com/good-sht/whats-with-creepy-time-out-dolls-at-classic-car-shows/88074%7C This article cites an academic collection of essays called "Doll Studies: The Many Meanings of Girls’ Toys and Play", and if I looked through google books I saw that they've been mentioned in Readers Digest a few times. I can't get my hands on a copy right now, but could those potentially work?Maddielovescolours (talk) 23:43, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Lots of things exist, but are trivial variations that no one has written about, Maproom. No doubt there are red-haired, left-handed dolls exactly 6.25 inches tall, but I doubt that we should have an article about them. As for these "time-out dolls" I don't say they aren't notable, only that like most topics, an article about them would need reliable sources, Maddielovescolours. The sources you describe might well work, depending on whether they give these dolls more than a passing mention, and whether they seem to be reliable, and not engaged in selling such dolls. I had never heard of them before, but I don't know everything, so that proves nothing. Reader's Digest usually reprints compressed versions of things that appeared elsewhere, and I would think it was better to cite the original, if that can be found. If the sources can be found, an article is perfectly possible. I am not sure if OZY.COM would be considered an RS or not, it might be. There is a someehat similar story at https://drivetribe.com/p/why-are-creepy-time-out-dolls-a-DY3foVaPTECHf8lCD-VCiA?iid=IBLPkl3dRFWIcurt8JEhQw which might or might not be an RS. I would try for the book, myself. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 00:59, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

VisualEditor

I enabled "VisualEditor", went through the "wizard" > "practice in the community sandbox", then... "edit page visually"> and then I "published" in the sandbox. It looked fine ..but how does one then submit this bit in the sandbox when it is ready, or change it to see if the code is correct? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.237.173.191 125.237.173.191 (talk) 22:47, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

@125.237.173.191: .Your edit will be reversed now. Try not to do in the sandboxes. Do the true one.Wizard > done trial > I am not connected to the subject and it is done! Nihaal 07:02, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

@Nihaal The Wikipedian: Please see WP:INDENT – if you don't do so, your response gets tacked onto the end of the previous paragraph, making it difficult to see who wrote what. Also note that pings don't work on IPs. Thanks. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 07:39, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Donald J Trump Wikipedia Page bias and personal opinions.

Hello in the Donald J Trump Wikipedia page I see a lot of clear one sided bias. Misaligned facts concerning his policies. The policies you do have are presented in a half truth form. And the fact checking aspect is also disproportionately displayed as you make him out to be a liar when in truth he’s only been partly wrong borderline taken out of context in a few statements over the past few years. I think it is disputable at best as for example Joe Biden is constantly making deliberate false statements sometimes full on unintelligible but you don’t see anything resembling fairness when comparing the two. Trump didn’t bring about the coronavirus he wasn’t slow at handling it he’s not out to get your editors please take a look at the obvious varieties of favoritism going on. Of all the democratic presidents who has served and have done nothing at all with the time they had or brought about bad policies you don’t see that on there page. You’re talking about fact checking when you don’t even fact check your own work. 2602:306:8BB8:2280:7DF5:8EAF:9FDE:4609 (talk) 09:04, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources state about article subjects. Any bias in sources will be reflected in Wikipedia; we present the sources to the reader so they can judge them for themselves as to any bias. Wikipedia does not deal in truth, as truth is in the eye of the beholder, but we do deal in what can be verified. If you have specific concerns about article content, please discuss them on the article talk page.

I don't know anyone who claims Trump brought about the virus. 331dot (talk) 09:08, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Talk:Donald Trump has many discussions on the neutral versus non-neutral point of view of the article. David notMD (talk) 09:10, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

(ec) For issues with a particular page, please discuss it on that article's talk page (if the article is Donald J. Trump, the talk page is Talk:Donald J. Trump), where you will reach editors with interest and experience editing that particular article. You'll need to be specific about what you say is wrong (i.e., exact quotes from the article), and provide reliable sources to support your case. It's worth searching through what I imagine is a massive amount of discusion already there, to see if your issue has been covered, and if you have anything new to add, to avoid wasting your time and that of others. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 09:11, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

For some reason, Donald J. Trump is a redirect to Donald Trump, but Talk:Donald J. Trump is not a redirect to Talk:Donald Trump. Thus, I am recommending discussion at Talk:Donald Trump, not the near-empty Talk:Donald J. Trump. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 09:15, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello, IP editor and welcome to the Teahouse. It sounds like you have quite an opinion and agenda of your own that you want to express here. I'm really sorry, but Wikipedia does not act on broad 'point-of-view' opinions, so the way to influence the content of any article you feel is unbalanced is to cite specific statements included in the article that you are concerned about, then find and challenge them with better, more reliably-regarded sources, and then make your suggestion for alternative wording, and post your detailed recommendation on the article's talk page for other editors to consider. I'm afraid the Teahouse is a help forum for those needing advice on the mechanics of editing. We, here, are not responsible for the content of individual articles. I don't wish to be rude, but when you say the Wikipedia article about Trump "...make[s] him out to be a liar when in truth he’s only been partly wrong borderline taken out of context in a few statements over the past few years" I really do have to wonder what narrow selection of sources and opinions you have been accessing. More advice on what we regard as 'reliable sources' can be found here. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 09:20, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Question

How to make page about something Uirpor77 (talk) 09:57, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Uipor77, if you would like to create a page, take a look at WP:YFA and follow the guidelines there. Please note that the vast majority of articles that get declined or rejected (they are different things) are due to people not following the guidelines. Also, it appears you have created a promotional draft which was recently rejected at Articles for Creation (and nominated for deletion). I don't know what topic you are intending to write about in your new article, but please do not try to re-create a draft which has been recently rejected, or else it will just waste people's time. If the subject of your article is different, then feel free to read through the linked page and start writing, otherwise I suggest you abstain. Regards, Giraffer (munch) 10:27, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

You have been given useful advice on your user talk page. Try reading that, & follow the links (the words in blue) to further guidance. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:29, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Article resubmitted

Hi. Salvio giuliano was kind enough to recently undelete a rejected article, at my request. I've added what I believe to be reliable sources, and fleshed it out a bit. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Jatbula_Trail Does it seem okay now? Is there anything else I need to do after resubmitting the article for review? Thanks Canberranone (talk) 10:56, 5 September 2020 (UTC) @Canberranone:.

One logical thing is that you should expand it during the Time.Nihaal 12:12, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

During the what? Canberranone (talk) 13:31, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

I am guessing Nihaal meant during the time that the article is waiting for a reviewer. David notMD (talk) 14:21, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

@Canberranone: That looks pretty good now. I'd be happy to see it in mainspace. You seem to have repeated one or two key links to sources, which isn't necessary (especially the 'website' in the infobox. You should hyperlink Northern Territory in the lead, and include Australia in that line (as I initially guessed it was in Yukon, or somewhere similar!) You've mentioned hazards in the infobox, but these should be cited and only mentioned if they are very real and specific risk(s) to that particular route. (We are not a guidebook, so standard risks applicable to all such trails are quite unnecessary) That said, I would clarify this is a multiday trail, aimed at backpackers, with wildcamping spots at set intervals, or whatever the sources actually say. You could start to think about (but not yet insert) which Categories to add to the article, and which WikiProjects to add to the Talk page. Well done! Nick Moyes (talk) 14:42, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Incorrect facts about 'Kapil Kak'

In the article 'Kapil Kak' it has been wrongly mentioned that he was court martialled which is absolutely incorrect.The retired Air Vice Marshal of Indian Air Force was never court martialled. 120.57.252.240 (talk) 12:33, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

The unsourced addition has been reverted, & the editor warned. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:38, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Helping to Fix Formatting on Discography for Arash DeMaxi (Very easy)

Hi, I hope whoever looking at this is doing well. I am trying to make a Discography for the first time and am having difficulties getting the formatting correct for Arash DeMaxi and I was wondering if someone could help with this? Thank you! Slasher2point1 (talk) 16:09, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

@Slasher2point1: Have a look now. There was a table-closing }} instead of row starter |-. I also stripped some unneeded styling to let the browser do "the right thing" for the data and display device. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 16:21, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Admiral Halsey's telegram following the battle in Vella Gulf on 8/6-8/7 1943

 2603:9001:5105:845:C139:BAA8:EEB9:A4CA (talk) 16:18, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Do you have a question about editing Wikipedia? —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 16:26, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

"Do you wanna build a snowman..."-- NO! GeraldWL 16:28, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Answered on his Talk page. David notMD (talk) 02:31, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Uploading images

Hi, I just wanted to know what the correct way is to upload a picture from Instagram? Its a page that is open to the public. So is it possible to upload an image from that Instagram page to the Wiki page? Since the owner of the page is a celebrity, I have no way to get their consent. So I am really confused how to upload a picture to their Wiki page from their Instagram page. Please let me know how to proceed. Any help would be much appreciated. BLfan93 (talk) 16:27, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, BLfan93, and welcome to the Teahouse. Please have a look at the long answer I gave another user yesterday, above at #How to add a picture on a article. Note that "open to the public" means nothing, legally. Some pictures on Instagram may have been released under a suitable licence, but you should not assume so without checking their status. --ColinFine (talk) 16:51, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Some time in the next day or so, that answer I pointed to will get archived. If the link doesn't take you anywhere, go to "Most recent archives" just under the contents list at the top, and pick the latest archive - probably 1076. You should be able to find the section by the title "How to add a picture on a article". --ColinFine (talk) 16:54, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

I have tagged the photograph for speedy deletion as a copyright violation. The safest way is only to upload photographs that you yourself have taken. Theroadislong (talk) 17:00, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

@BLfan93: Here's a permalink to that section to which ColinFine referred (which will not require digging through the archive): Special:Permalink/976665629#How_to_add_a_picture_on_a_article. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 20:16, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you and extremely sorry for the inconvenience. I will look into it :) - much love BLfan93

Need your help

Hello admin, I just saw an article have no reliable sources so I was tring to move it on draft but I couldn't successful so can anyone help how to move a article on draft. Article link - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saheb_Chatterjee Bijoyonline30 (talk) 17:36, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello @Bijoyonline30:, and welcome to the Teahouse. Sorry for the long wait for a reply. No, what you tried to do is NOT an acceptable approach for an article that has been here for many years. Moving an article to Draft space is OK for brand new articles (see WP:DRAFTIFY), but quite wrong for older pages, as it could bypass any deletion discussion and simply result in a worthwhile page being deleted without community input. The article does actually have one reference, albeit to IMDB, which we don't accept as reliable. If you think the person is not notable enough, then you should first look for better online sources which show he either does or doesn't meet WP:NBIO or WP:NACTOR and only having failed to find them (we call this process 'WP:BEFORE') should you then consider putting an article up for a deletion discussion at WP:AFD. A lack of sources for a long-established page is never a reason for moving it to draft. Does this help? Regards from the UK Nick Moyes (talk) 19:45, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

There are dozens of "Times of India" references that come up on a Google news search, and I'm in the US. Google searches are regionalized. A search in India should turn up tons of sources. Improving the article should not be hard. Go for it! John from Idegon (talk) 21:07, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Questions if I may:

Hi I'm RuStr12, joined today on wikipedia, Question : How can I improve my user page (with pictures and so on) I've seen a lot of cool backrounds from other editors RuStr12 RuStr12 (talk) 17:49, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

@RuStr12: One simple trick is to find another userpage that you like and copy some of the code (via edit source) and change the relevant bits to suit you own editing interests. Hint: Do preview your edits before publishing them, and please avoid copying so much that you look to be virtually impersonating the userpage of another editor. i.e. you don't want to be including things that say you're an adminstrator, or have been here 10 years when you clearly haven't - people get suspicious when they see that happening! But a cool way is to visit this inactive, but still useful, page for some design and layout ideas: Wikipedia:User page design center. I'm not implying anything, but it's best to avoid spending all your time on your userpage and not on contributing to the encyclopedia itself - new editors who use us just for making fancy userpages tend not to last long here! All the best, and do pop back if you need any further help. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:20, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Enter Email address after signing up

When I signed up I did not enter an Email address. Is there a way to do so, now? Truth Is King 24 (talk) 17:58, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

@Truth Is King 24: Yes, go to the very bottom of this page where you can enter, change or remove your email address. Nick Moyes (talk) 18:15, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Ok first time here

Hey my name is RuStr12, joined today, do I need to paraphrase every material that I post ? My first edit was a clash with an editor today who insisted that I should not copy paste sentence from material but to paraphrase because of copyrights RuStr12 (talk) 18:15, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, RuStr12. Yes, absolutely, you must re-write factual content in your own words. Both copy/pasting and close paraphrasing of another person's work is not acceptable. Nor is it OK just to change a few words here and there, whilst still keeping the original structure of whatever it was that you're trying to base content on. You need to rephrase in a different manner than the original, without losing its original meaning. See WP:PARAPHRASE for more guidance on this. Just like copying and republishing an image as if it were your own, using someone else's words is copyright theft and we do not tolerate it. When you press 'Publish' here you are releasing the content under a licence that says it is your own work and that you freely release it for re-use. Unless you can show that the original source was published under that same licence (and include a link to clearly demonstrate that fact), we not only have to remove your edit, but then an admin has to go to the trouble of deleting it from your editing history, too, so there's no trace of someone else's work anywhere on Wikipedia. But there's no harm done if you've been advised not to do so, and appreciate how to do things from here onwards. Regards,Nick Moyes (talk) 18:31, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

I am a student...

Wikimania 2017 Women in Red presentation. (See 6min 30sec in for a perfect example of the power of Wikipedia as a research tool)

...doing an essay on basically why Wikipedia should be a valid and valuable research tool. If anyone has any input in that it would be awesome. I am doing my own research so I'm not trying to get an essay out of anyone I just think it would be pretty dope if I could put in my essay that I actually asked the community and got feedback. :)

 2605:AD80:30:5091:4198:635B:9C89:A9A0 (talk) 18:20, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello IP editor. Welcome to the Teahouse, and what an exciting question and a brilliant essay to write! You are clearly able to Google the general topic, so I won't insult your intelligence by suggesting you go off and do that. But, boy, there are so many ways that Wikipedia is a valuable research tool, and to so many different groups of individuals. In fact, there has been a lot of serious academic research done on Wikipedia (some of it listed here, or the social aspects of why people contribute. This Teahouse itself has been the subject of a number of research papers)

But as a 'direct' tool to aid research I can do no better than embed this video which I produced a few years ago. At 6 minutes 30 seconds in you'll find a cut down version of a much longer interview I filmed, showing how Cambridge University's Sanger Institute chose to share research and knowledge on the Human Genome Project on Wikipedia, for the simple reason that it gave free, unrestricted, worldwide access to scientific knowledge which might not otherwise have been available to scientific institutions in some poorer countries. I found that one of the best reasons why Wikipedia should exist!

On a more general level, you might like to look at Wikipedia:Researching with Wikipedia and Wikipedia:Research, Academic studies about Wikipedia. I'll end of the simplest note of all by saying that Wikipedia never recommends anyone directly use/cite Wikipedia as a Reliable Source. So, you might like to consider reading Wikipedia:Citing Wikipedia. Yes, Wikipedia is a great starting point and 'look-up' tool, but the oft-overlooked gem in almost every one of our 6,000,000+ articles here is the 'References' section. It's a collation of excellent sources, distilled and presented allow verification of what is in each article, and it enables anyone to go off and do their own in-depth research into almost any topic. Good luck with your essay, and maybe you'll consider joining up and contributing here yourself someday soon. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 19:00, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

This guy has some thoughts on that. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:50, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi, IP. When I taught, I would not allow Wikipedia as a source, and still wouldn't. Not due to accuracy issues (in hard science and medicine, studies have shown Wikipedia is far more accurate than other encyclopedias), but due to the dynamic nature of Wikipedia. Ironically, that's the reason for our accuracy in the areas we're most accurate. In any areas where promotion is an issue, we are very weak. Promotional editing is rampant on Wikipedia and under the rules the Wikimedia Foundation forces on us, we're completely ineffective at combating it, despite ridiculous amounts of editor time expended on trying. John from Idegon (talk) 20:56, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

@John from Idegon: OK. I give up then. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 04:30, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

@John from Idegon: I've been struggling to understand the full logic behind that comment. I guess you're saying that you would have been happy to have encouraged Wikipedia to be used when starting to research into a given topic, but not to directly cite a Wikipedia article, per WP:CITEWIKI? I think even that approach is too broad-brush. Take, for example, a class of 7 to 14 year olds, asked to investigate a topic in school. As a parent (and were I a teacher, too) I would be happy to see those children citing Wikipedias as a source of where they got their information for their essay or homework project. OK, when they move up in years, I would expect them to have been taught to start at places like Google or Wikipedia, but then to follow and read the sources we use to create that article, and then to base their project work on those sources, not on our pages. If, through their research, they found differences in content, or wanted to present evidence to demonstrate an argument about how different social, ethnic or political groups interpret a topic, then, again, it would be fine to cite Wikipedia a source to show where that interpretation came from (and, preferably, to link to the individual version of that article on the date they accessed it). Yes, Wikipedia is a target for individuals, companies and political groups to promote themselves or their pet topic, but that is not the whole of Wikipedia's content base, and certain topic areas need treating more carefully than others. Just as here at the Teahouse, when we say to new editors who ask whether a given publication can be used as aReliable Source, that it all depends upon the context as to whether that source can be regarded as 'reliable' or not, so it also depends upon the context in which it may or may not be appropriate to cite Wikipedia as a source, as well as the age/educational level of the person doing the citing. And if original, reliable sources cited in Wikipedia are only available in print in limited parts of the worlds, are out of print, or are written in another language, I might feel my only recourse would be to cite the interpretations of Wikipedia editors (published within Wikipedia) who have themselves cited that original source, and to do so I would be perfectly confident to cite a given version of Wikipedia as my source of those quoted interpretations. In short: I think your dismissal had some truth to it, but was overly blunt. (And look how you've upset poor AlanM1, too!) Nick Moyes (talk) 13:23, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Nick Moyes, your concept was something that occurred to me back when I first started editing. It seemed to me that one could consult the online refs present in various WP articles, and then use them to write an "original" essay, paper, etc. For people who did not have access to libraries, but had internet access, the online sources would be an excellent source of information. No need to "cite WP", (which is an encyclopedia, in any case, as User:John from Idegon seems to note), as a source, when one can read and then cite the original sources, as provided in the Reference sections of various articles. I will read the info you have provided, thanks! Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 07:11, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Slipping in: When doing an essay/research, I use two encyclopedias: Wikipedia and Britannica. I use Britannica first to get a feel, and then Wikipedia. I then go to the sources cited and fact-checks it. If the source has more relevant sources, I go there (if I have time). I then wrote some points on a note, and then wrote about it in the paper or text editor. I see Wikipedia as a landing page, not a "source" in general. GeraldWL 13:33, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Regarding Copyright

I added content before in wikipedia and one person removed it and said copyright. But recently I found everything in this page -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basilica_of_Our_Lady_of_Snows,_Thoothukudi is copied from https://tamilnadu-favtourism.blogspot.com/2016/07/our-lady-of-snows-basilica-thoothukudi.html .I think it is copyright too. So why is it there? 157.46.66.133 (talk) 18:37, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, IP user. Thanks for pointing this out. However, if you look at this version from 2016-06-22, you'll see that it appears to be older than the blog you posted, so it looks as if that blog copied the Wikipedia page. (This would be permitted, if it gave attribution, but since it doesn't, it appears to be a copyright infringement. However, only the Wikipedia editors who created the text have standing to pursue that). So it is not Wikipedia that is violating copyright! I will put a template on the article's talk page explaining this. --ColinFine (talk) 18:55, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

User:ColinFine There is also a reference in that revision now it is not available --http://snowschurch.org/about-shrine/history/ but it is available in the website archive.org from 2015, so it is surely copied

Archive.org link - https://web.archive.org/web/20150806040458/http://snowschurch.org/about-shrine/history/ 157.46.86.38 (talk) 19:19, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

@ColinFine: Could be a copyvio here. The text of the Basilica of Our Lady of Snows, Thoothukudi#History section was added by Meendoctor at Special:Diff/575962020 at 2013-10-06T09:03:03Z. It pre-exists in the earliest archive of the church site at 2013-08-13. Earwig comparison is here. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 20:40, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

IP user, do you realize that 100% of the entire 6 million plus articles on Wikipedia are created, edited and maintained by volunteers? The are at least 10,000 more copyright violations looking to be found. I'd suggest you register an account and get to work helping find them. John from Idegon (talk) 21:00, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

“username”

 JabrielAtOmoMusicGroup (talk) 18:39, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, JabrielAtOmoMusicGroup. Do you have a question for us? I can see you've already had a discussion about your username (which looks fine to me). What problem do you need help on? (I might suggest you change your WP:PAID disclosure on your userpage to Draft:Lil Kei, though, so people can find it). Nick Moyes (talk) 19:07, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Not sure of what you mean ? Maybe I made two different articles I was confused I have this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Lil_Kei JabrielAtOmoMusicGroup (talk) 19:24, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi, JabrielAtOmoMusicGroup. I have moved over your reply which you put on my own userpage (and at the top of the page, not the bottom, which is where we put new posts), so that it appears here. No, those are the same articles - your hyperlink is simply the mobile view to Draft:Lil Kei. It was only that on your userpage the PAID disclosure links to Lil Kei, which doesn't yet exist. I or another Teahouse host here can change it for you so the everything's above board, or you're welcome to fix it yourself. But I am still unclear if you had a specific question you need help with. Just in case it's about our key criteria of meeting 'Notability' - without which no draft article can be accepted - you might want to check out WP:NBIO and WP:NMUSIC. These are our way of writing shortcuts to important help or policy pages (I probably won't reply directly myself as I'm just off to join the rest of my family to watch TV with them) Cheers, Nick Moyes (talk) 19:35, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Account creator and administrator for Death of Eleanor de Freitas

I would like to find out who created this page and who is the current administrator. I have made edits, which were verifiable and had references attached, which have subsequently been deleted. How can I stop these deletions? RobinEllie (talk) 20:31, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi @RobinEllie, you can use the "page history" feature to see who made a page and who has edited it. To answer your query, the page was created by McPhail (talk · contribs), but it looks like an IP user (somebody who wasn't logged in) who is now blocked for disruptive editing removed your edits. I've now restored them, but it's important to keep in mind that anyone can edit Wikipedia, and therefore moderate it. Many thanks, Ed talk! 20:38, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

RobinEllie, Wikipedia articles do not belong to their creators and adminstrators do not decide content as a part of their duties. Content disputes are decided on the article talk page and they are established by CONSENSUS, and administrators do participate in consensus building discussions, but when doing so, they have no more rights or privileges than any other editor, and are specifically barred from using their administrator rights while doing so. John from Idegon (talk) 20:45, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello RobinEllie. Your question implies that you may think that an administrator is assigned to each article. That is not the case. Administrators (like me) are just editors who have been trusted by the community with certain extra tools such as protecting or deleting articles, and blocking disruptive editors. Therefore, the concept of a "current administrator" for an article does not exist. Talk:Death of Eleanor de Freitas is the best place to discuss any concerns about the article. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:47, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you all for your very prompt and informative help--RobinEllie (talk) 21:58, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

My correction was rejected...

...telling that it is not true. However, it is a fact that Joseph Ferenc’s never was crowned as Hungarian king you can check it in the real history books. 2600:8800:2080:20A:158C:3197:E7B2:23A7 (talk) 20:52, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

You changed content to: The old Hungarian Constitution was restored, and Franz Joseph never was crowned as King of Hungary. It is the reason he was named as “King with Heat.” but you did not provide a reference. Stuff gets reverted even if true if there is no verification. If you can add a reference that Franz Joseph was not crowned, try again - with the reference. Lastly, did you really mean "King with Heat"? David notMD (talk) 20:58, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

I want to create a Wokipedia Page for an aLUMNI aSSOCIATION

Ifechoice (talk) 21:33, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Ifechoice. I fear it will be highly unlikely that Draft:Egbeoba High School Ikole-Ekiti Alumni Association would ever meet our notability criteria (see WP:NCORP). A brief mention within an existing school/college article might be appropriate, but always base content on what other, reliable sources have written about it. See WP:YFA for further guidance. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:06, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

I've rejected the draft. I've never seen an alumni association for a high school recieve significant coverage. Very few college alumni associations even do. Please understand notability has nothing to do with importance or accomplishment and only a corollary relationship with fame. Notability is established when you've shown that the subject (the alumni assoc.) has gotten significant coverage in multiple reliable independent sources. Coverage must be detailed, as every single fact in the article has to be paraphrased from reliable sources without exception. If it isn't written somewhere else you can source, you cannot put it in a Wikipedia article. Also, for companies and organizations, at least some of the references must be from out of town. Can't speak to your country, but in my country, the newspapers in Chicago don't usually cover even Chicago high school alumni associations, much less those from other cities. Don't feel bad. Few who aren't already Wikipedia editors have any notion of what it takes to get an article here. John from Idegon (talk) 05:53, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

James Cloyce Chadwick, I am new to Wiki.

Hello, My name is James Chadwick. I am new to wikipedia. I created an account named James Cloyce Chadwick, which is the name of my Deceased father. I want to create a page for my father with the same title. As you can see, my fathers name is also the same as mine, we have different middle names, I am not a Jr.

So My first question is... Will the host editors recognize that this is my father and not me, since we have the same name? (this will not a biography of me, which I know are not allowed on wiki).

2nd question... I also know that I need references, Books, Newspaper ect. to verify who the subject is. Is this link to a newspaper article good enough to verify who my father is?

https://www.dailybreeze.com/2016/01/06/90-year-old-former-ucla-running-back-holds-intruder-at-gunpoint-until-hawthorne-police-arrive/

I also have newspaper clipping from the Herald Examiner Newspaper in Los Angeles in 1949 to verify who my father is. I made these clippings into images to upload to wiki with captions to verify that my father played football for UCLA as a running back.

3rd Question... Why am I unable to upload these images of the newspaper articles to you of my father? When I try to upload the images, I get a message that the image is nonconstructive.

4th Question... When I create a sandbox page, Can I use that sandbox page as a draft and send it to you as a finished page to be publish as an official live page for the web?

As you can see, I am a green rookie. I truly would appreciate your help and patience. Thank you so much. Best regards, James Chadwick James Cloyce Chadwick (talk) 22:58, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

• James Cloyce Chadwick, welcome to the Teahouse and Wikipedia. I admire your willingness to learn, but if you want to learn how to properly edit Wikipedia solely so you can write a biography of your father, I'm sorry, but that's not a good idea. First, you have an undeniable conflict of interest (FYI, blue words are links you should follow to applicable policies and guidelines). Second, you cannot add anything about your father from personal knowledge. Every single thing that goes into a Wikipedia article must be paraphrased from reliable published sources. It's admirable that you want to write about your father, but a tertiary encyclopedia such as this isn't the place to host your original biography. Everything here is paraphrased from somewhere else. John from Idegon (talk) 06:03, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
• To answer some of your questions, you cannot upload newspaper clips because they are copyrighted and it isn't necessary. You can cite offline sources. Use Template:cite news, Template:cite book etc. (The source editor contains a wizzard for citations that will access the most used ones). However, before your father can have an article here, you'll need to show much more than he existed and had a dust up with a crook once. You have to show he meets one of the guidelines for notability. The main guideline is called WP:GNG, but biographies are mainly discussed at WP:ANYBIO. The clip about the robber mentioned he played football at UCLA. That may be a starting point, as there are some Special Notability Guidelines (WP:SNG) for athletes. If he played in the NFL (or any earlier "big league" leagues like Arena Football, both AFL's and Canadian professional football), he will be considered notable per WP:NGRIDIRON. If he was a consensus All-American in college, he's notable per WP:NCOLLATH. Otherwise, you'll need to produce multiple reliable independent sources that discuss him in detail. The links you've offered here are transactional (ie, about a single event), not detailed, and hence do not speak to notability at all. And as I said above, you, by definition, cannot be a source here. John from Idegon (talk) 06:36, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
• @James Cloyce Chadwick: Though I understand that you probably chose your username thinking this was like social media, where there is no distinct article name that is different from your username, that is not the case here, and we do have a policy against use of the name of a real person by someone who is not that person (see WP:REALNAME). While I might ordinarily suggest you just abandon this username and register a new one because you have no other edits, it might be better to change it instead because it represents a real person's name. Perhaps an admin (like Nick Moyes) can comment. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 06:53, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

• @James Cloyce Chadwick: I'm just dropping by as I was 'pinged' AlanM1 and asked to comment. It is, indeed, slightly unfortunate that you chose your username to be that of your father, and not simply your own. Had it been the latter, I'd have said not to worry, providing you declared your connection to him. But reading WP:REALNAME, and to avoid all confusion (and assuming you decide it is still appropriate to carry on trying to create an article about him), then I feel the best advice I could give you is simply to abandon this account completely and create a brand new one. You've only made one edit, thus far, so it's no big deal. Just forget the old account password, never log on or edit with it again, and just create a new account with a less confusing name, and use only that one from now on. Then please declare your connection, as detailed in our guidance at this page about having a conflict of interest. I am not convinced from what little you've told us that he would be regarded as notable, but then I know nothing of sports notability, which John has made comments on. I am sorry for the passing of your father in recent years - it would certainly be his sporting achievements (per WP:NSPORT which would dictate his notability here, not that single newspaper account of dealing with an intruder). It is certainly not OK to try to upload a copyrighted image from a newspaper and claim it as your own (which is what you would be doing if you scanned a newspaper article or photo). Just link to it as inline citation. Brand new editors who know nothing of our processes and protocols experience extreme disappointment and lots of wasted effort when they try to create a new article from scratch, directly moving it from their sandbox to our main article space. It can be done, but you are best advised to create any draft via our 'Article Creation Wizard' at this page. If there are problems, you will receive helpful feedback, rather than have all your efforts 'speedily deleted'. Hope this helps. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 13:43, 6 September 2020 (UTC)  

Angela Christine Mack and son Thomas Michael Rettew (2002)

https://wreg.com/news/arkansas-missing-child-mom-case-re-opened/amp/

https://bolivarmonews.com/home/woman-unborn-baby-killed-in-car-wreck/article_7f3d3ef3-20a7-57ee-803b-e85e4193c2a3.html

https://www.kait8.com/story/2801350/crime-lab-bones-found-in-fulton-county-well-arent-human/ FultonAR (talk) 23:03, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Is there a question related to these news items? David notMD (talk) 00:31, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Yes, FultonAR - please tell us what this is about. The edit that created this section is the only contribution you've made. There isn't even any basis for us to guess from as to how to help you. John from Idegon (talk) 06:44, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Delete misspelled AFD

I started an AFD for the page Lloyd Montgomery Garmadon. However, when starting the AFD, I misspelled it as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lloyd Montgomery Garamadon, with an extra a between the r and the m. Is it possible for the misspelled AFD to be deleted? Thanks. Unnamed anon (talk) 02:09, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

 Done Nick Moyes (talk) 05:36, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

locking an arcticle

hey guys the article Ryan Satin over the past few days has repeatedly been vandalized by a Facebook group. is there a way that we can soft lock the article so random people don't vandalize it? w1n5t0n (talk) 03:25, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

 Done Another admin fixed this. Nick Moyes (talk) 05:20, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

WP age matters

Hy RuStr12 again, regarding WP: AGE MATTERS policy does it implies to an old historical letters or documents written between two governments or persons and how old must material be to be considered that is not significant in historical matter RuStr12 (talk) 06:04, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

• Courtesy link: WP:AGE MATTERS, a subsection of WP:RS. First time in almost 9 years I've seen that, but I avoid science articles like the plauge (actually, bad metaphor. I'm doing pretty well at actually avoiding the plauge, PTL) John from Idegon (talk) 06:17, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks man RuStr12 (talk) 06:20, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

@RuStr12: I don't think a general rule is possible for documents written between two governments or persons. It all depends on the subject and the entities involved. If you have a specific case, I'd suggest WP:RSN. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 07:07, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks man ,this link will be useful for my research RuStr12 (talk) 07:16, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

RuStr12, my understanding is that WP:AGE MATTERS applies to secondary and tertiary sources — as more evidence is found and more examination is done, our understanding of a topic improves. It doesn't apply to primary sources such as letters contemporary with the event. Maproom (talk) 07:47, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks man somehow I understood like that too, the more sources mentioning the material the more is reliable regardless how old it is, but still is a little bit confusing i.e. if I would buy the the book from Lazaro Soranzo a 17th century historian and used it as a source, would it be better to quote newer historians which using him as a source or can I go directly to him. The same question would go for Tacitus who is even older RuStr12 (talk) 08:09, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Not everyone here is a "man". David notMD (talk) 10:12, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Editing an existing article rejected as 'not constructive'

I tried adding a paragraph to an article about a public figure I know.

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

This was the reply I received.

Hello, I'm Serols. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —specifically this edit to Graham McIntosh—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help desk. Thanks. Serols (talk) 08:04, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

I added a paragraph about Graham Mcintosh's sons and their current work, nothing controversial.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Graham%20McIntosh&diff=976988151 Third Way Communications (talk) 08:11, 6 September 2020 (UTC) Third Way Communications (talk) 08:11, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Third Way Communications, in this edit, you must reference a reliable source that says the claim. In this edit, do not add external links to the article, instead, put it at an "external links" section at the very bottom of the article. This edit is so essay-ish and advertising. That's all I can say, maybe. GeraldWL 08:44, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Non-controversial is not the point. None of the information about his sons is relevant to this article, which is about Graham, so all is deleted. David notMD (talk) 09:43, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

I see. Apologies, I just looked at how long the paragraph is and just immediately thought of . GeraldWL 09:57, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia

When you contribute to Wikipedia where does the money go to Alisha rains (talk) 10:17, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Alisha rains, you don't get money. GeraldWL 11:01, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

It goes to the Wikimedia Foundation, a multi-million dollar industry based in San Francisco.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 11:59, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Then what do you contribute ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alisha rains (talk • contribs) 12:34, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Contributing to Wikipedia.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 14:03, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Alisha rains, um.... the encyclopedia? GeraldWL 14:04, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

“Page help “

How soon will my draft article be published for my client? Also, can anyone help me with more content? I have information I need to add as well for earlier life, ect. Please and thank you Team❗️💙

 JabrielAtOmoMusicGroup (talk) 10:44, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

@JabrielAtOmoMusicGroup: Draft:Lil Kei is not submitted for review. As long as it is not submitted for review, noone will make the draft go published. Take as much time as you need, In my experience most attempts to rush the job fail quickly. Victor Schmidt (talk) 12:00, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, JabrielAtOmoMusicGroup. You seem to have a common misapprehension that a Wikipedia article about your client is in any way for your client's benefit. If your draft gets accepted and your client gets some benefit from it, that is lucky for him; but Wikipedia has no interest in furthering anybody's career, or complying with anybody's timetable. If your client meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability (Wikipedia's, not yours) then it is possible to write an article; if he doesn't then any effort you put into the draft will be wasted effort. I see that a very experienced editor has added a comment that he probably doesn't meet these criteria: I am not sure why you think it helpful to remove that comment (twice). Rather than adding more information about earlier life, you need to find places where people who have no connection with Lil Kei, and have not been prompted or fed information by him or you, have chosen to write about him at some length and been published in reliable sources. (I am dubious whether the HHR piece is either independent or has sufficiently significant coverage, but in any case, a single source is not enough.) --ColinFine (talk) 12:39, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Changing page title

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/RememberKLMauthausen

Hello

I am new here. Wanted to make a page in memory of my grandfather Stanislaw Proczko. My username is remberKLMauthausen. Unfortunately my username is also the title of the page. And this is wrong. It shouldn’t be this way I do not know how to change this into Stanislaw Proczko. For sure I am overlooking something, but I do not know what. Any help is appreciated. Thanks RememberKLMauthausen (talk) 11:43, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

@RememberKLMauthausen: you would move the page. If you don't see the move option, you can use WP:Requested moves. Howewer, the article currently doesnt have any form of source. Therefore, I have moved it to Draft:RememberKLMauthausen for now. More on this on your user talk page. Victor Schmidt (talk) 11:55, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, RememberKLMauthausen. I'm sure you have pride and sadness remembering your grandfather; but Wikipedia is not a memorial site . It is an encyclopaedia, which contains neutrally-written articles about notable subjects. Has you grandfather been written about in books from reputable publishers? Have there been articles about him in major newspapers? If not, then I'm afraid that an article about him will not be accepted. Please write about him elsewhere, not here. --ColinFine (talk) 12:46, 6 September 2020 (UTC)