Jump to content

Wikipedia:Teahouse: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Beataph (talk | contribs)
Line 697: Line 697:
:I made the edit for you [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Unitarian_Meeting_House,_Ipswich&diff=1032632542&oldid=945822811 here]. [[User:Deor|Deor]] ([[User talk:Deor|talk]]) 17:18, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
:I made the edit for you [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Unitarian_Meeting_House,_Ipswich&diff=1032632542&oldid=945822811 here]. [[User:Deor|Deor]] ([[User talk:Deor|talk]]) 17:18, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
::{{ping|Tessa Forsdike}} Forgot to ping. [[User:Deor|Deor]] ([[User talk:Deor|talk]]) 17:26, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
::{{ping|Tessa Forsdike}} Forgot to ping. [[User:Deor|Deor]] ([[User talk:Deor|talk]]) 17:26, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

== Becky Edwards Page ==

Hey! I work on the Becky Edwards for US Senate campaign and I am trying to edit her wikipedia page so her personal information is included. I just want to add her family members and her new website, but you keep removing those changes. I'm just wondering what I have to do in order to have these changes stay up on her page. Thanks! [[User:Beataph|Beataph]] ([[User talk:Beataph|talk]]) 17:27, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Revision as of 17:27, 8 July 2021

Skip to top
Skip to bottom



Reinstating an article

The Wiki article that relates to myself has been removed for some reason https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waqar_Mohammad (there is no article relating to me {Waqar} in this page anymore) 2A02:C7F:CC41:9300:500C:A5DA:B956:1542 (talk) 12:18, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is the outcome of the discussion Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Waqar Mohammad. Wikipedia only hosts articles on topics which are "notable"—a jargon word referring to the number of reliable, in-depth, independent sources available. The community has decided that this condition is not met, and so we won't host a biographhy of you. (It's not meant to be a personal slight or an insinuation that you haven't achieved great things; we're just an encyclopedia with a very specific scope.) The page has been redirected to List of Warwickshire Cricket Board List A players, where you are listed. — Bilorv (talk) 12:27, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There are several players listed on that page who's biography remains on Wiki despite having exactly the same details and sources etc as mine. Happy to add additional details to make my page worth another review, so how would this be possible?

Please read WP:OSE. Other similar articles existing does not automatically mean yours can too. We can only address what we know about. If you would like to pitch in and help, you are welcome to help us identify other inappropriate articles for possible action. 331dot (talk) 14:57, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Rather than remove another 10+ articles from the same page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Warwickshire_Cricket_Board_List_A_players (which you can do if they don't meet the policy) it would be better to make these articles more worthwhile and useful to Wiki readers. I would suggest the option of reinstating the deleted article (Waqar Mohammad) within that page and giving the opportunity to present better content within that article and the others on the page — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7F:CC41:9300:A577:4BC0:E8C1:29B3 (talk) 17:23, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Better content would require sources, but the article was redirected because of a lack of them. Are you able to suggest any? Wikipedia's notability requirements dictate that we need substantial, independent coverage, which in your case could be profiles in newspapers or perhaps cricket magazines. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:09, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, so the suggestion is to include the content that used to be at Waqar Mohammad in that list, and do the same with the other non-notable pages and redirect them? This does seem like a reasonable way forwards. In the case of the former article about you, very little of the material actually appears to have been sourced, so we can't include that without better sourcing, but I've added a sentence to the list. I would suggest that you could redirect and move some content to the list on any players with similarly-little sourcing as Waqar Mohammad had—but looking down the first few, they're all at least slightly different situations sourcing-wise. I can't implement all of your suggestion in full because it would literally take me several hours, and I'm not going to bump something off my high-priority list for this. — Bilorv (talk) 21:44, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for responding to my query. I have a few links I could immediately find below, but can share more and obviously add textual content that would be of interest to read and share. Please let me know how this can be achieved in order for the article to be reinstated once approved: ESPNCricinfo Player Profile https://www.espncricinfo.com/player/waqar-mohammad-17899 Player stats (selected games) https://staffordshirecricket.play-cricket.com/player_stats/batting/12452?rule_type_id=179&sub_tab=batting_summary&tab=batting Player stats (selected games) https://www.pitchero.com/clubs/earlswoodcricketclub/teams/98092/player/waqar-mohamed-969142/19043 Player stats (selected games) https://waterorton.play-cricket.com/player_stats/batting/4526569?rule_type_id=179 Wazir Mohammad (father) Pakistan's oldest living cricketer https://www.thenews.com.pk/tns/detail/803728-wazir-mohammad-pakistans-oldest-living-test-cricketer B'ham Evening Mail newspaper article https://1drv.ms/u/s!AoMe2qThpkcaiW4pJzEwtzfuEXgL Extensive profile on CricketArchive - but this is subscription only Thanks again.

The problem is that most of these are just lists of statistics, which is routine coverage rather than the sort of in-depth biographical coverage required by WP:NBIO. The article about Wazir Mohammad is the sort of coverage that helps demonstrate notability, but it's about Wazir Mohammad. Cordless Larry (talk) 13:24, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but these were references and sources that you asked for. As I mentioned above, I can provide the written content that would warrant inclusion but don't know how to have the article reinstated in order to add said content. And still don't understand the basis on which around 10 profiles on the same page are still there if the criteria applied to the article in question is applied equally in those cases. However, as already said before, I'd rather have this article reinstated correctly - in line with making it interesting - than just delete more articles. I just need the access to add the content!

The written content would need to be based entirely on published sources, and I'm not seeing much evidence that enough of these exist. As for other articles, the English Wikipedia currently has 6,331,350 articles, so it's not realistic for all of the problematic ones to be identified and nominated for deletion at once. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:40, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If you believe that enough sources do exist to meet WP:NBIO, you'd be best following the instructions at WP:YFA and submitting it as a draft for review. Cordless Larry (talk) 09:05, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Looking For Wikipedia Page From Which This Equation Was Screenshot

Hello,

Looking for the wikipedia page from which this image was screenshot. All, to date, indications indicate that this equation exists somewhere in the realm of Lagrangian and double pendulum mathematics / physics. Any way to specifically locate the page, and original image, using this information?

Kind Regards,

Daisy1234 Image: https://www.flickr.com/photos/183838731@N04/51287775604/in/dateposted-public/ 86.28.166.2 (talk) 14:17, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That is a pretty specific question. You might have more luck asking at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics where editors who are interested in math topics are more likely to read it. Regards SoWhy 16:26, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Are you sure this is from Wikipedia? Searching for pieces of the syntax that would have been used to write this equation turns up nothing for me. Could it be from somewhere else? - Astrophobe (talk) 16:48, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This was asked also in a reddit post (six times actually) some ideas were given and the same question of Astrophobe has appeared in the comments but no answer was given either there which is important as it should be useful to know if the search space is empty or not before start looking. Dabed (talk) 15:57, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Primary sources in regards to esports tournament placings

Hey! I'm working on a draft article for the MC Championship series of Minecraft tournaments. So far I've just been collecting information from various sources. I do think I have quite a few good secondary sources regarding a lot of information about the topic, however, one thing I'm lacking in is sources that mention the winners of the earlier events. I feel kind of weird excluding them, however. Would it be acceptable to use a primary source for the dates and winning teams of these earlier events? I don't really feel optimistic about the possibility of a reliable secondary source covering these past events retroactively, however, I do know that the winners are always announced on the official Twitter, so there is at least some concrete documentation of the past winners.

Any insight here would be much appreciated. I'm still new to editing and I'm kind of anxious about the whole thing and wanting to make sure everything is as good as it can be, haha.. Serilly (talk) 22:15, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Courtesy link: Draft:MC Championship   melecie   t 23:09, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Serilly I think you'd get more specifically relevant advice at WikiProject Video games. -- Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 08:01, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Adding the Voice or Translation Text to the name of my Draft: Kootapuli

Hi there, I would just thank @User:Dan art for their edition of my Draft:Kootapuli. I just would like to add the translated name to the Draft. I have already added it, but kindly anyone please check if that is fine. Thank you!!! Jocelin Andrea (talk) 10:18, 5 July 2021 (UTC) Jocelin Andrea (talk) 10:18, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Jocelin Andrea, hi! Do you mean the Tamil name (கூட்டபுளி) that you added at the very beginning of the article? It is usually fine, and many many articles have such native names included. But it gets complicated in case of India. Basically, because India is so large and so diverse, allowing one translation leads to other people wanting to add translations in their own language and it gets messy quite quickly. So, there is community consensus that no Indic scripts should be added to articles about the country of India. See WP:INDICSCRIPT. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 17:41, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Everyone

I am new to Wikipedia. I want to know how to be a good Wikipedian? Katie Allie (talk) 13:22, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and Welcome to the Teahouse @Katie Allie, you can starting contributing towards the wellness of Wikipedia by creating articles on your own interest. You can start editing articles and start creating articles when you become an autoconfirmed user. See Wikipedia: Your first article for more info. There are a lot more to go! Thanks!!! Jocelin Andrea (talk) 14:07, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Contrary to what Jocelin Andrea wrote, new editors find creating articles incredibly difficult, as they do not understand all the rules and guidelines. Such attempts are often declined for inadequacies or else outright rejected as having no potential for becoming an article. Better advice is to commit to improving existing articles. That can range from copyediting, to adding adequately referenced content, to removing content that is wrong or not germane, and monitoring articles for vandalism. Only with experience, consider creating an article. Newbies often find the tutorial at Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Adventure to be very helpful. David notMD (talk) 14:47, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Jocelin Andrea: ;@David notMD: Thank you both for your tips and suggestions. I will try to follow Community guideline first before editing any article. Although, I have recently edited the article Sword Art Online Progressive: Aria of a Starless Night but I am not sure that how much I have improved the article. Can you all review my edits? and suggest some addition and substraction on the mentioned link article? Katie Allie (talk) 17:14, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Katie Allie, I've looked at your edits of that article. Almost all seem constructive – as I've no knowledge of or interest in the field, I didn't check. I see you replaced "afterwards" by "afterward", which I can assume (I'm British) is standard American usage. You replaced "announced on September 19" by "announced in September 19", which I think is wrong in any dialect. But don't worry about that, it can easily be changed. It seems to me you're doing a great job. Editing articles as you have done is fine. But as David says, inexperienced editors find creating new articles very difficult. Maproom (talk) 07:35, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How to delete/remove comments from my own talk page?

Can anyone please let me know the steps on how to delete/remove comments from my own talk page? Manalijain (talk) 16:45, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse, Manalijain. The simplest way is to edit the page and remove all the sections you no longer need. Your Talk Page is your own and you can remove more-or-less anything from it (the do's and don'ts are explained at WP:OWNTALK). Anything you do remove will still be available for others to see in the History of the page and other people will assume you have "read and understood" anything you do remove. Importantly, you must never edit someone else's comment to change its meaning but of course you can just revert any vandalism by "undo" on the vandal's edit. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:08, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, thank you! Manalijain (talk) 06:25, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Can I start a business with your tea House on my place location

Buisness  Galib8076 (talk) 18:20, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a venue for promoting your business. RudolfRed (talk) 18:24, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Galib8076, hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Unfortunately, it is against our policy to use this platform for commercial purposes thus it is not possible to use Wikipedia for business(of any sort) you are however welcome to become an editor here just like myself. We are sorry if this wasn’t the feedback you may have anticipated. Celestina007 (talk) 19:24, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You are welcome to walk into the Teahouse with your laptop, buy a cup of tea, sit down at a table, connect to the free wi-fi and conduct online business: but first you have to find the Teahouse. Where is it? We're not telling. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.122.0.163 (talk) 10:46, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

emails to a User

A few times I have received emails that appear to originate from within Wikipedia. I can't seem to find out how to do this. I think there are times when Users would like to contact each other offline. How is it done? BrucePL (talk) 20:57, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Emailing users. Kleinpecan (talk) 21:17, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) @BrucePL: See Wikipedia:Emailing users. If you've provided an email address in your preferences, go to someone else's userpage and you'll find a button saying "email this user", which is located on the left hand list of links under "Tools". This only works if the other user provided an email address to Wikipedia and did not disable this function. A word of caution: Wikipedia works best through public communication (that is, through Talk pages) for transparency purposes, and I know of many users that would much prefer messages about Wikipedia to be on Wikipedia.  Ganbaruby! (talk) 21:21, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@BrucePL: You might want to check out Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-echo where you can set up automated e-mails for various events. These are mainly for system messages to inform you for example that someone has pinged you (as here) and are helpful if you don't log in to Wikipedia very often. I have mine set up to send one email a day at most. As has already been mentioned, it is best not to contact people via their email and if anyone adds something to your Talk Page you will get a system message to say so if you have these preferences set correctly. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:51, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My Edits in Prakrit

I added a reliable source with no allegation towards anyone and just a unbiased viewpoint. It was correlated to other sources as well ehich say the same thing therefore i posted it with one resource. Also, it is a mythbuster with multiple viewpoints. Why can't I post it? Akapro990 (talk) 03:39, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Akapro990: Welcome to the Teahouse. I cannot speak to the reliability of the source you used (and you should ask the reverting editor on Talk:Prakrit what their issues are with the source), but the tone of your added content is not suitable for an encyclopedia. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 04:01, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Akapro990:. Also you should not add whole paragraphs and then mark the edit as WP:MINOR, and please use edit summaries to explain your edits.--Shantavira|feed me 06:14, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why my article is declined?

Why my article on Abhijit Tripathy is rejected? Abhijit2505 (talk) 06:57, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Abhijit2505: The reason is listed in this banner that you removed from the draft. You need to include reliable, independent sources to show that your subject is notable enough for a Wikipedia article. All of your references are written by the subject, which are not independent. To better understand Wikipedia's concept of notability, see WP:N.  Ganbaruby! (talk) 07:39, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Declines and Comments must stay with drafts until drafts accepted, as which time the reviewer will remove. I restored those. David notMD (talk) 08:18, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Given your User name, I am guessing that this is an attempt at an article about yourself. See WP:AUTO. David notMD (talk) 08:29, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Fourth of July shootings

On July 6, 2021, I saw about 150 people killed on shootings accross of the United StatesLkas123 (talk) 07:14, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Lkas123: The shootings are documented in news reports, and if a specific incident is notable, a Wikipedia editor may work on an article. Do you have a specific question about editing Wikipedia?  Ganbaruby! (talk) 07:46, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Lkas123: Sadly, mass shootings in the US are very common, but Wikipedia is not the news.Shantavira|feed me 10:29, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Submission not accepted

Can I ask your staff to create an article. Because my submission are not accepted. Topsiii (talk) 07:15, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse, Topsiii. There are no "staff" on Wikipedia; it is a volunteer-run project. Employees of the Wikimedia Foundation, which runs Wikipedia and several other projects, may occasionally intervene in order to prevent legal trouble or personal harm, but creating and editing articles is not their job.
Your draft, Draft:Lillian Culver, is currently waiting for review. It has not yet been accepted nor declined. Be patient, as there are currently 3,842 other articles awaiting for review. Kleinpecan (talk) 07:39, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Need Guidance in creation of Draft:Vivek Verma.

Hello I need assistance in creating a draft of a Singer, fothat draft I am providing some references, Can someone help me in drafting it as per the wiki guidelines? also I want someone to review if these sources would be enough to make it pass or shall I drop the idea to draft it, Thanks

References
suryabeej, to establish that he's notable enough for an article, we'll need reliable independent sources with extensive discussion of him. The Times of India article is only three sentences long, and all the others are reporting what he said, so aren't independent. Maproom (talk) 07:50, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
To elaborate: most of those sources are interviews with a bit of commentary mixed in, even though they don't look like it from first glance. Interviews are primary sources and don't contribute to notability.  Ganbaruby! (talk) 07:56, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Ganbaruby, @Maproom thanks but if we talk as per User:RoySmith/Three best sources ain't This, This and This makes him pass it? cuz these three are not at all the Primary Sources Thanks Suryabeej   talk 08:02, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Suryabeej: I can't read the first one, so I'm not going to comment on it. I'd call the both the second and the third one interviews, especially since both rely heavily on what he says and build off of it to describe what he does. Both are also written in a promotional tone. The second source's last sentence uses "signs off", which also imply an interview. The general gist here is that the sources are not independent of the subject, meaning that we can't show that unrelated organizations write about Verma without him giving some incentive to do so, and therefore Verma is not notable enough as a person yet. As I understand it, Wikipedia offloads the decision of what's "important" enough for an article to our reliable sources. That being said, if the first source is and independent source and you have more like it, feel free to use them as indicators of notability; Wikipedia does not consider foreign language sources inferior. If you can show notability, information stated as a fact in these links may be used as sources to back up information.  Ganbaruby! (talk) 08:25, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

" When I edit, do I have to add where I got the info from. The exact place or link."Lookylo (talk) 07:32, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

Lookylo (talk) 07:32, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse, Lookylo. Yes, it is a core policy of Wikipedia that all information be verifiable. Happy editing! Kleinpecan (talk) 07:45, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This sandbox is in the article namespace. Either move this page into your userspace, or remove the template.

Hi. I have just moved a new article entitled "Chiral analysis" from my sandbox to Wikipedia article space. I am getting an alert: Template:User sandbox

I would appreciate if some one could assist me to resolve the issue.Valliappan Kannappan (talk) 08:13, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Valliappan Kannappan I have removed that parameter now, Cheers Suryabeej   talk 08:17, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Text edits to an artist biography - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Fiddes -

I keep adding in text he, Christopher Fiddes, has approved and it keeps being reverted by one of your editors. What's on the page now is just four paragraphs whereas I added about four more. This artist is 86 and holding his first retrospective show - I am doing his publicity for free, as a favour, and would really like this extra info to be on his Wiki page. Can I/you do anything to make it permanent and stop it being deleted? I would also like to add a pic of him to his biography box and one or two more pics of his paintings, ideally. Scolopaxs (talk) 08:55, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As was pointed out in the edit summary in the article history, your additions were unsourced. --David Biddulph (talk) 09:00, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Closing a change request

Hello, I have updated a change request from the backlog. How do I mark it as changed? Occasionalpedestrian (talk) 10:37, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Occasionalpedestrian: Welcome to the Teahouse. I assume this has to do with Talk:Trollpak. Looking at the documentation for {{request edit}}, you can either change it to {{request edit|A}} or {{request edit|answered=yes}} to mark it as implemented. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 11:15, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi everyone !

I've tried to add a link in an infobox using the double square brackets, but the text only show as... simple text.

Have I missed something ? Motherofcities (talk) 11:50, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Motherofcities - without knowing the article, it is difficult to comment, which article is it?
I suspect the article has WP:Pending changes protection, so your edits will not be visible until a confirmed editor has approved them - Arjayay (talk) 11:59, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Motherofcities Assuming you're talking about Eva Yaneva (the only article you've edited), then links to articles are case-sensitive. The article is Volero Le Cannet (with capital L), and you were trying to link to Volero le Cannet (lower case l). Joseph2302 (talk) 12:01, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I hate to say it Joseph2302, but Volero le Cannet would appear in green (as shown), as it is a redirect, whereas, if there was no redirect, it would appear in red, not in "plain text" as described above - Arjayay (talk) 12:08, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
(@Arjayay: not too important but I think it's a user script or preference that makes you see redirects in green. I see that link as blue, same as an article link, but DAB pages as orange because of some script I have somewhere.) — Bilorv (talk) 17:40, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The orange disambiguation links are probably due to a gadget in Special:Preferences. ―Qwerfjkltalk 18:48, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your answers. It seems to work with the lower case l, thanks, but what's strange is that the article in question (and its address) both use a capital L (which is the correct way to spell it, as Le Cannet is the name of a city in France). Is there no way to spell it correctly in the infobox ?

Well I changed the infobox from Volero le Cannet to Volero Le Cannet, and it works for me - I don't know what is different to when you tried - it may have been some hidden mark-up ? - Arjayay (talk) 12:30, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I created the redirect to the lower case article a few minutes beforehand. Which is why it works now. Joseph2302 (talk) 12:41, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but I've just removed the links to Volero Le Cannet : the article it sends to is not about Volero Le Cannet at all but about Volero Zürich (I should've seen that earlier, I might be a bit more tired than I thought :) ). The title of the article "Volero Le Cannet" will have to be changed to "Volero Zürich", but I don't know how to do that.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Motherofcities (talkcontribs) 12:38, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Motherofcities: If you read the article you will see that it is the same club. I have reinstated the links which you removed. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:56, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm definitely more tired than I thought ! Thanks everyone !— Preceding unsigned comment added by Motherofcities (talkcontribs) 13:00, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Can I write Wikipedia page about the company where I work?

Can I write Wikipedia page about the company where I work? I have lot of knowledge about this company and the company does lot of innovative products. I am not paid by my company for writing the Wikipedia page. I like to do it as self interest or hobby. How can I begin and what must I keep in my mind thte page wont be deleted? Rohan von Indien (talk) 12:32, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Rohan von Indien Hello and welcome to the Teahouse and thanks for asking first. There are ways to do what you are asking, but I'm not sure you realize what you are potentially getting into. First, if you work for the company, you are a paid editor, you don't have to be specifically paid to edit or specifically directed to edit, so you will have to declare as a paid editor. Please also review conflict of interest.
Please understand that a Wikipedia article about a company must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a company, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. Wikipedia is not interested in what a company says about itself or in your personal knowledge of the company- we want to know what others completely unaffiliated with your company have decided on their own to say about it. So no press releases, annoucements of routine business activities like the opening of a location or the raising of capital, staff interviews, or other primary sources. In essence, you would need to set aside everything you know about the company and only write based on the content of independent sources. Most people have great difficulty doing that, but it is possible.
Also understand that a Wikipedia article is not necessarily desirable. There are good reasons for your company to not want one. Any information about the company, good or bad, can be in an article about it as long as it appears in an independent reliable sources. You cannot lock it to the text the company might prefer, or prevent others from editing it.
If you still think that you can write such an article, you should first read Your First Article and then go to Articles for Creation to create and submit a draft. You should also gather at least three sources with significant, independent coverage of the company to summarize. 331dot (talk) 12:41, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much. Rohan von Indien (talk) 12:55, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Can we add information regarding media (instagram & youtube) records/achievements?

I wanted to ask that can we include information regarding social media (instagram & youtube) records/achievements made by the popular person on the wiki pgae? Manalijain (talk) 12:55, 6 July 2021 (UTC) Manalijain (talk) 12:55, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Manalijain: Yes you can, and {{Infobox YouTube personality}} and {{Infobox Instagram personality}} gives you structured ways to do so. GoingBatty (talk) 13:54, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Gorilla Warfare - On Dick Ellis page.

I hope I didn't mess up your home page where I tried to respond to your comments about citations. I have two constructive criticisms. One is that you have a citation regarding the authorship of the 'Origins' book. It says it is proven but offers no proof and attempts to obtain this proof have failed. Why not cite it? Attempts to access the paper have not been responded to.

Secondly, the reason I doubt that it is proven is that by going to the publishers papers I find Konni Zilliacus received the royalties and wrote similar books. But I have no citation because it is original research although I did specify where the papers were held. Why would Dick Ellis write a book, as an MI6 officer, for somebody later suspected of being a subversive agitator National Archives - and so again no citation barring (KV 2/4415-4417) .

What is the point of as citation that says nothing meaningful- or could that user be asked to expand?

 Wikihgd (talk) 13:31, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You want it on the page, you need to include a strong third-party source that corroborates it, particularly if it is contentious. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 13:36, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging GorillaWarfare, who this message seems to be directed at, and ParticipantObserver, who seems to have undone Wikihgd's edit on Dick Ellis. (Wikihgd, this is a general help desk. You can talk about edits on the talk pages of articles, here Talk:Dick Ellis, and you can get a user's attention by linking their username in a message where you sign your comment.) — Bilorv (talk) 17:35, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I believe this falls under Wikipedia:No original research. As per Wikihgd's comments above, this would be original research, and so is not allowed. That being said, this may be a useful discussion to have at Talk:Dick Ellis. ParticipantObserver (talk) 18:57, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Submission deleted

Hello, I am writing to ask why my submission was deleted. I submitted an article with important information regarding both a historical building and providing provenance for a large collection of guitars which belonged to a well-respected guitarist. The explanation given was that my article would need to be re-written because it was promotional. I am simply trying to establish a wikipedia page where works of art are created similarly to those which are featured on metadata sites such as Musicbrainz, discogs and allmusic. Please advise. Angeleenie (talk) 13:47, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Angeleenie: Welcome to the Teahouse! See the message on your talk page about the deletion of your draft. If you have any further questions, then please contact the deleting administrator. GoingBatty (talk) 13:51, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Angeleenie Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I can view your deleted draft, and I agree with its deletion, as it was little more than an advertisement for the studio. Wikipedia articles (not just "page") must do more than merely tell of the existence of the subject and what it does. An article about a company must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about it, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. The sources you offered told little about the company itself. Not every recording studio merits an article, even if some do. Please see Your First Article.
If you are associated with this company, please review conflict of interest and paid editing for information on required formal disclosures. 331dot (talk) 13:54, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How to change my user name?

Hi,

How can I change my username? I was too excited about creating my account in Wikipedia and I never had time to think of a better username. Your response will be highly appreciated.

Thank you. Wbmanaois (talk) 13:52, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Wbmanaois Please read WP:RENAME for the instructions on how to do change your username. Paper9oll (🔔📝) 13:55, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Wbmanaois You can also just create a new account and abandon your old one. 331dot (talk) 13:55, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Draft disappeared

I've been working for a few days on a draft article (using the visual editor). This morning the interaction with the editor was being "weird", e.g. would not accept carriage returns, changing a section type would jump to another part of the document, and others.

I decided to do a page refresh (ctrl-F5) and upon return the entire draft article has disappeared. I'm unable to find any trace of it. Needless to say this is very disheartening.

Am I going to have to just start over? ThatMarcC (talk) 14:45, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ThatMarcC, hey there. Can you explain in detail as to the draft topic and the editor interaction? How is it "weird", what are "carriage returns", etc? That should give more understanding to your perspective. GeraldWL 16:26, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Could you also clarify whether you saved the draft (by clicking "publish") during those days, or did you keep the edit window open the whole time? Cordless Larry (talk) 16:35, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Gerald Waldo Luis:: Carriage return. @ThatMarcC: unfortunally, since you don't seem to have saved anything on Wikipedia servers you will have to start over. Note that "Publish changes" is meant to understood as "save changes", not "publish this to the main encyclopedia. The button was renamed a while ago to remind you that everything here is public if one knowns where to look. I have two recommendations for you in future: 1) Regularely hit that publish changes button, so that your progress is saved onto Wikipedia servers, and 2) when the editor bugs out, try to switch to source editing via the pencil icon in the top right. You might also want to make sure that in your preferences, under "Editing", the dropdown "Editor Mode" is set to "Show me both editor tabs" so that you can switch between editors as much as you like. Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:38, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Suggested improvements for draft article

Hi, I am the new Wikipedian in Residence for Annual Reviews (publisher). While working on something else I came across Draft:Knowable Magazine which appears to have been started by a student for a class. It was submitted for review but refused due to not demonstrating notability. I have suggested two new paragraphs, with inline citations, on its talk page to address the notability issue. I have also tagged the creator of the page about this, but I suspect they are unlikely to return since the spring semester has ended. Since Annual Reviews publishes Knowable Magazine, it would be a inappropriate under COI guidelines for me to move the text and resubmit the article myself. (Note: I did fix some incorrect information that was in the draft.) I am hoping that someone else can step in to help. Thank you. MaryMO (AR) (talk) 14:57, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Providing that you make the required COI declaration, MaryMO (AR), I don't see why you can't submit the draft yourself. Part of the rationale for the drafts review system is to allow editors with a declared COI to submit articles, so that they get checked by an independent editor. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:21, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Opera fan help with COI

Hi all, I am an opera fan and want to support artists / opera houses by keeping their wikis up to date. I have registered a conflict of interest as I know people in the business, I write in a very neutral way and it's mostly historic updates. I would appreciate any tips / words of wisdom on how to manage COI when you're in a very connected industry / fanbase. I am a trained researcher, who is now worried all my edits / content won't be approved.

Thank you for any tips Marblewatcher57 (talk) 16:06, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Marblewatcher57 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I might suggest that you state what your COI is on your user page (User:Marblewatcher57). You may wish to review this plain language explanation of COI for some guidance. If you wish to edit an existing article, you should make a formal edit request(click for instructions) on the article talk page. If you wish to create new articles, you should use Articles for Creation. Please understand that Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources state about topics. 331dot (talk) 16:09, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Marblewatcher57 I'll add that people do not have "wikis". A wiki is a type of entire website of which Wikipedia is one example. Individual pages here that have encyclopedia content are called articles. 331dot (talk) 16:11, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You might also want to read Neutral Point of View or 5 Pillars for some fundamental principles Wikipedia operates under, but it's good that you're aware of this COI possibly causing an issue and we do welcome experts and people with industry knowledge contributing. Edits don't need to be "approved"—they generally go live immediately—though volunteers try to keep an eye on changes and undo any that make an article worse. To double down on what 331dot says, the key point is sources, sources, sources: we've all been in situations where we know something is true but can't find a source for it, and in that case you just can't write it in an article.
If you're worried about a particular article or edit, people with COIs can still make uncontroversial/housekeeping edits directly, but you can describe exactly what change you want to make on the talk page of an article in a new section that begins with the code {{Request edit}} and someone without a COI will come along and see if they want to make the change or take issue with it. Where everyone's threshold for this is will vary—I'd say you don't (necessarily) have a COI if you met someone in passing or know someone who knows someone who knows them, but if their career success/failure matters to you or your friends then you do have a COI. — Bilorv (talk) 17:27, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'll make a different point from 331dot about that same phrase, Marblewatcher57: Nobody has a Wikipedia article: a Wikipedia article does not belong to its subject, and is not (except incidentally) for its subject's benefit. If you want to help Wikipedia by improving articles about opera, that's great; but if your purpose is to support the subjects of those articles, that is a COI. Note, for example, that verifiability is far more important to Wikipedia than either completeness or being up to date. --ColinFine (talk) 17:29, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Fair points, I guess I need to be more specific by the term "support" ie. the edits are updates based on current events / what has happened recently that I see is missing. I use citations on my edits as it's all documented updates like new shows etc. Maybe I am ultra paranoid. Thank you for the reading suggestions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marblewatcher57 (talkcontribs) 20:37, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Marblewatcher57: Lest you feel the answers you've received might be a little negative, please may I suggest one particular area in which your personal knowledge and contact could be immensely helpful? It matters not one jot whether you are best buddies with anyone, but for those notable operatic figures for whom there is already an article about them, or for anyone likely to someday have one, why not approach your contacts to take a photo of them that you can then add to a current or future article. So often we struggle to get good images of famous - or not so famous people- and having them already available on Wikimedia Commons (our image hosting project), can be terribly helpful. Any further help or advice you need: just ask. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 19:52, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @NickMoyes that is a good suggestion, I have noticed this is a common issue on a lot of pages. Will be easier when the pandemic isn't raging. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marblewatcher57 (talkcontribs) 20:21, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  1. Please sign your posts on talk pages (such as the Teahouse) by typing four tildes (~~~~) after them, this generates a signature block with your username and the time of posting
  2. Do not mark your edits as "minor" if you are not sure - "minor" means "only changes formatting, no added content", so adding a reference is not minor
  3. Regarding Draft:Matthew Toogood: creating a new article is very hard, and while you did a better job that most newbies, I still think it is not going to be accepted
    1. You should check if the subject meets Wikipedia's "notability" criteria before working on the draft. The criteria are at WP:NARTIST and WP:GNG and they are intentionally quite hard to meet. Your most likely chance is to find multiple independent reviews of their work in magazines such as Gramophone (mainstream press would be good too but that is where I would search first). (The reviews do not have to be good, we have an article about Florence Foster Jenkins; they have to show that someone "took notice" of the subject's work.) If such reviews do not exist, it is irrelevant that they have collaborated with famous people - notability is not inherited.
    2. If you have sources that support notability, you should add some dates in your draft, and use the {{ill}} template for your links to German-wikipedia pages (right now the links will silently take the reader to a German page).
TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 09:34, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An IP heard from

 42.113.3.10 (talk) 16:34, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

section title added. Do you have a question? David notMD (talk) 16:41, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How can i edit longer?

 VaxRiser (talk) 16:52, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@VaxRiser: Welcome to the Teahouse. Could you please clarify your question? I'm not sure what you mean by longer. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:53, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Tenryuu, maybe it's regarding something in his talk page, where an editor, WikiDan61, brings up "You appear to be editing articles merely to change a few words, but without any real aim to improve the articles. Many of your edits have been reverted because they actually detracted from the quality of the articles. Based on your user page, I have to ask if you are here to build the encyclopedia at all?" GeraldWL 16:56, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's because i have an grammar error. could you help?VaxRiser (talk) 17:01, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

VaxRiser, if it's true that your edits are gramatically wrong, then the only solution would be, well, improve your grammar. Take online tutorials. It's entirely on you. GeraldWL 17:03, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If your English is a bit wobbly, can I suggest that you concentrate on factual editing (finding references for things that need citations, adding to articles that are too short, or need extra explanation) rather than copy-editing? There is no shame in doing what one is best at. It is very hard to copy-edit/correct grammar in a language where your own writing is not quite perfect, but WP desperately needs people who can check references and find good ones! Grammatically wobbly writing that is nevertheless comprehensible and factually correct is super valuable. Elemimele (talk) 21:28, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@VaxRiser You can find links at the Task Centre, or using this: (ignore the spelling and grammar section)

You can help improve the articles listed below! This list updates frequently, so check back here for more tasks to try. (See Wikipedia:Maintenance or the Task Center for further information.)

Help counter systemic bias by creating new articles on important women.

Help improve popular pages, especially those of low quality.

Qwerfjkltalk 06:22, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Acquiring a photo for a BLP

I've been working on the Lex Fridman draft and it should get approved soon but I want a photo. Can I just contact him for a public domain photo? I assume I can't just grab one from his twitter... Thanks in advance. SmolBrane (talk) 16:53, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@SmolBrane, you assume correctly. You can ask. The simple way is that he takes a selfie and uploads it himself with the process that starts here. The photo must be "donated" by the copyright holder, and that is usually the photographer. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:06, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, taking a new unpublished photo for use here is fine, or the photographer of an already-published image (like from a photoshoot) can release the copyright in this process: https://relgen.toolforge.org/. It's important that it's the photographer and not the subject. We don't quite need it to be public domain, but we do need it to be available for anyone, inside or outside of Wikipedia, to reuse for commercial purposes and derivative works, with URL attribution (see commons:Commons:Licensing). — Bilorv (talk) 17:18, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Great, thank you both. I have also since learned that YouTube screenshots are an option so that might be the best way. I'll get around to it. SmolBrane (talk) 17:33, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Learned from where, SmolBrane? Most YouTube videos are copyrighted—only a minority with explicit CC-BY-SA licensing (or similar) can be used (for instance, see the licensing in this video's description; but most videos won't have that there). — Bilorv (talk) 17:43, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I was just looking at the origin of the Bret Weinstein photo as an example. I will be sure to assess the licensing regardless. SmolBrane (talk) 17:53, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, youtube looks like it probably won't work. If I contact Lex directly, how do YOU know that he's licensing an image in the way that I state? SmolBrane (talk) 18:03, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, SmolBrane: the copyright holder (who is probably not Fridman himself, unless it's a selfie) would either have to upload it himself, or send a mail to OTRS as explained as donating copyright materials. --ColinFine (talk) 18:36, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Okay thanks. SmolBrane (talk) 18:46, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@SmolBrane: I direct people to this page, which has the verbiage the permission holder has to send to Wikipedia, when they send in the image. Wikipedia:Declaration of consent for all enquiries Don't be surprised if the heavy legalese intimidates Fridman. I've started a few biographies of living people and reached out to the subjects for a photo, only to be rejected. You'll have to explain that the language is to protect Wikipedia from charges of copyright infringement, and it doesn't mean that the photo will be abused. After all, as you pointed out, there are already photos available of him online that someone could take and abuse anonymously. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 22:04, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, honestly I probably won't bother to facilitate an upload myself, it's not critical that the article have a photo. But I may send him a message if the article doesn't get a photo within a few months after approval. Something appropriately licensed may already exist. SmolBrane (talk) 23:06, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Subject Deleted

Why is my input removed? WikiBoyne (talk) 17:21, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your first attempt was reverted because it was unsourced. Your next attempt was reverted because it included misplaced external links. To learn how to provide references, please read Help:Referencing for beginners. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:42, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@WikiBoyne, coupled with what my senior colleague @David Biddulph has told you, except I’m seeing this incorrectly, it appears you are merely 6 hours old on this collaborative project or am i missing something? Generally speaking, it is a good idea not to edit live articles (articles on mainspace) just yet. I recommend you practice a little in your sandbox before attempting to edit live articles. Celestina007 (talk) 17:52, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Valid Sources

Recently I got to know that Youtube and Facebook links are not considered valid ones. Which all sources information are considered to be valid ones? 2409:4073:287:A39D:4E4:DD4F:F34B:3CF5 (talk) 19:31, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Have you read the advice at Wikipedia:Reliable sources? --David Biddulph (talk) 19:34, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
For YouTube, it's all about who uploaded by video. My kid's YouTube channel isn't a reliable source, but a channel run by a reputable news organization could be. See Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources#YouTube and others on the list to get a flavor of what sources are reliable and what aren't. GoingBatty (talk) 04:01, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Re-creation of a deleted article

If some article that was created by someone in Wikipidea was deleted after a discussion, then can I re-create that article? 2409:4073:287:A39D:4E4:DD4F:F34B:3CF5 (talk) 19:33, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:G4. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:36, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, IP user. If you have read the deletion discussion, and you believe that the subject now meets Wikipedia's criteria for WP:notability, and you can writ about it in a non-promotional way, I advise you to create a draft using the articles for creation system. If your draft is acceptable, then a reviewer will accept it as an article. --ColinFine (talk) 20:01, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Chit chat

Good evening to all the WP editors. I would like to ask if there exists any WP policy related to the chit chat, as it is substantially depracated in the Homepage talk. Reasonably, it shall be extended to the whole encyclopedia, except for a limited numbe rof thematic bars for the free time or similar, if existing. Thanks in advance for any eventual help. Have a good football game. Let me say: Forza Azzurri!Theologian81sp (talk) 20:34, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Theologian81sp. Please read WP:NOTAFORUM and WP:NOTSOCIALNETWORK. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 21:16, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Theologian81sp: Editors who are interested in chit chat are welcome to use Internet Relay Chat (IRC) - see Wikipedia:IRC. GoingBatty (talk) 00:34, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The Discord server also serves a similar purpose, IIRC. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:26, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Tenryuu and GoingBatty:, thanks for your replies. I will try it in a second moment. Now, I am busy and I am going to finish studying for an university exam.
Have a good day in the holy Name of the Lord Jesus Christ God. Theologian81sp (talk) 06:33, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
let me say in brackets this edit has disappeared (oldid 1031005919 of 29th June). I don't know the reason.Theologian81sp (talk) 09:06, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You removed part of it yourself here. The rest of that post was archived with the rest of the thread, and is now located at Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1114#Category talk:Freemasonry in the Roman Catholic Church. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 09:20, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
300 or more victims are destinated to a so special archive (Archive 1114)? It is self-commenting. No other words to be added, for the moment. Regards, Theologian81sp (talk) 11:50, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Er, what? All Teahouse threads are automatically archived when there has been no new activity in them for a few days. Topics are not archived based on their contents, so the natural disaster you mentioned in that post has no bearing on the fact that it was archived, nor on which archive it ended up in. Archive 1114 was started by the archival system when archive 1113 was full. --bonadea contributions talk 12:08, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

acceptable and unacceptable uses of primary sources

Hi, sorry for this being lengthy, but I wanted to check, does the following suggest a correct understanding of rules about primary sources?

Imaginary article about a (pseudo) scientist:

"During her time in Germany she published, in a journal her friends had started, an article claiming that the world was square shaped. [reference to paper she published in an online pseudoscience journal]. Upon return to France her work took a new focus. Papers she published during this period in fringe science journals focused on the theory that the moon was cylindrical. [Reference to a paper she published in an online pseudoscience journal.]"

Here, the primary sources - the articles in the online pseudoscience journal - are simply characterized by the Wikipedia editor, in a way which future editors can verify. This is an acceptable use of primary sources. Yes?

In contrast:

"She proved that orthodox views were flawed and that the most likely shape for the earth was square [Reference to a paper she published in an online pseudoscience journal.] A few years later she was able to deduce that, in contrast to what mainstream textbooks teach, the moon is likely to be cylindrical shaped. [Reference to a paper she published in an online pseudoscience journal.]"

Here, two assertions are made by the Wikipedia editor: 'Earth is square, the moon is cylindrical.' This passage cannot be published in Wikipedia as it violates guidelines relating to "Do not rely on primary sources to support assertions..." (In addition to the source not meeting quality standards.)

I know that in a real life scenario the question of notability might come up, and the lack of secondary sources might mean there is an objection that this fictional passage would not notable enough for inclusion, but besides that, does it look like I have correctly understood this aspect of Wikipedia policy on acceptable and unacceptable uses of primary sources?

Many thanks. VorsprungDurchReden (talk) 00:58, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@VorsprungDurchReden: Erm, not quite. This is quite a fringe example so it might not be that applicable to actual editing, but I'll try. You're correct about the last paragraph, which is that Wikipedia relies on secondary sources to determine if something is important enough for inclusion (note that "notability" has a very specific meaning around here and I'm actively avoiding that word). For that reason, I wouldn't even write like the first example unless there's a secondary source that tells me why this paper matters. The wording in the second example is actually not that problematic if you replace "proved" and "was able to deduce that" because of in-text attribution; we're not saying that the earth is really square, we're saying that she said the earth is square (but then again, we want a secondary source). But this example isn't actually so great. If you have something that you're working on, either a draft or an existing article, provide a link and we can give you better advice. Also, my advice for beginners is to avoid primary sources unless you really, really know what you're doing, because what's NPOV and what's not is pretty difficult to discern.  Ganbaruby! (talk) 02:16, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your work in replying to my question, Ganbaruby! Sorry if my question was poorly written. (For one thing, I really didn't mean to say '...the question of notability 'might' come up'. I am mean to say. the question of notablity 'would certainly come up', if there were no secondary sources.)

I don't mean to push you, but could you say if this seems to match what you were saying?

'If we're not saying that the earth is really square, we're saying that she said the earth is square, then this would remove one problem, But we really want a secondary source, to enhance reliability and to establish that the topic deserves coverage.'

In any case, thanks for the help, and I will think about how to make any future requests for help easier to understand.

My examples did not relate to anything I am working on. I suppose that all I was trying to get to was - if notable enough - an editor can say that a pseudoscience or fringe science article exists and describe that article. But as you say, without secondary sources, it would be difficult to justify inclusion. VorsprungDurchReden (talk) 03:25, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@VorsprungDurchReden: Yes, you seem to have the right idea. To elaborate, there are lots of fringe theories out pushed by many different people, but most of those are not within the encyclopedic scope of Wikipedia. Instead, we use secondary, reliable sources to tell us what's important and what's not, and we use those sources to build article content. Sometimes, that content is in the form of a new article, and we consider notability via reliable sources. Other times, we're adding content to an existing article, where we consider due weight and put more emphasis on topics that is prominently discussed by reliable sources. You may want to read WP:FRINGE for a better idea.  Ganbaruby! (talk) 06:39, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have just started adding references with URLs to newspaper acrticles that show the developing FINSIA story, as it badly needs updating.

But while the number annotations 7,8,9,10 have been accepted in boxes like these [], they haven't synched to be same as the previous references. Looking through the editorial guide, I couldn't find anythig that would fix this.

Any help gratefully received. Finsiacomms (talk) 01:07, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

At FINSIA, you are doing it wrong. For examples of how to insert references, go to the Structure section and click on Edit. That will show references that are properly embedded in the body of the article. Doing it properly automatically creates superscripted numbers and numbered refs under References. Check out WP:Referencing for beginners. David notMD (talk) 01:45, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The article seems to promote the organisation. Please try to tone down the promo language. And the Memberships section can easily be removed, as Wikipedia is not a mirror of its subjects' websites.
PS: based on your user name, have you any connection with FINSIA? COI declaration is mandatory if you are not unconnected to FINSIA.--Quisqualis (talk) 03:48, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Is a news report that relies entirely on a Twitter user's screenshots to accuse someone of bigotry (and could not be verified by myself) reliable?

Note: I had asked this before at this archived question and no one answered it back then

While on a different IP address in this range, I had removed some information from here a long while back, which was re-added by another user, "Faisal" at this revision with the edit summary "reinstate section removed by IP,see talk page". His talk page comment is here, and I am the 2nd IP he is talking about.

I have two issues here:

  • That user's reference, while being from a newspaper, is also completely reliant on screenshots from Twitter and does not directly link to the posts. Also, for what it's worth, the article is vague on who wrote it (I remember that OpIndia, a highly unreliable "news" site that is in Wikipedia's spam filter, also hides writer names to avoid legal liability for fake news, but then again I don't know why the Free Press Journal chose to hide the writer's name). I went through the LinkedIn page of D K Goel, the person accused of Islamophobia in the information I removed and the three publicly accessible articles by him don't show him writing "Jaahils continue to endanger our lives - A Muslim man removed his mask and spit on a Manipuri woman. Arrested by the Mumbai police. Still don't believe in the terrorism, Jalalat of these Jaahils? Be ready to suffer in future," (at least according to my browser's Ctrl+F function) which Faisal's reference claims was written by the accused. The accused's articles do show (in my opinion) that the accused probably is an Islamophobe, but I would be violating Wikipedia:SYNTH by calling him an Islamophobe and using his articles to draw that conclusion.
  • Faisal says on the talk page "Also the right-wing Hindu nationalist government is encouraging these islamophobes in India. Sad." which looks like a personal attack since he may have intended to call me an Islamophobe (though he may have also intended to call D K Goel an Islamophobe).

So, is Faisal's news report reliable? And am I overreacting by assuming that he made a personal attack? 45.251.33.169 (talk) 03:24, 7 July 2021 (UTC) (don't message me on my talk page to inform me that you've replied, I'll be checking this page periodically and I am on a dynamic IP range)[reply]

That’s quite an attack article. I’d discuss on the talk page, and do a request for comment if you need broader participation. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 03:42, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • At a first glance, The Free Press Journal seems like a reliable source. Why they decided to publish an attack piece is not for us to speculate: the fact remains that the subject has been credibly accused in a reasonable source, and the article should reflect that. (Though I could be convinced that it should be put in the journal's rather than in Wikipedia's voice.)
It is common to use screenshots of Twitter or other websites to avoid them breaking after the posts are deleted by the subject (though screenshot and link would be better). It is also somewhat common for newspapers not to give the name of the authors of some articles, especially when the article is controversial (this does not avoid legal liability because the identity of the author would be uncovered if a prosecution occurs, but it avoids internet trolls). TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 10:34, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Article rejected

Hello, I've created a draft article Draft:Prasanth Nair few minutes ago. A user rejected it after my submission and stated that the article is deleted via AfD before and I'm a sock. Prasanth Nair is an Indian actor and have provided evidence. Anyone please help. 27.59.238.19 (talk) 06:24, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The best advice we can give you is to stop repeatedly recreating that article. Yes, he is an actor. That doesn't mean a Wikipedia article is appropriate. Please see WP:NACTOR.--Shantavira|feed me 08:43, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, rejected. There is a history of an article about this person being created and deleted several times. And sock activity. After your draft was rejected, you removed the rejection tag and applied to AfC. That was reverted. Removing rejections (and declines) are not allowed. David notMD (talk) 14:52, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@David notMD, I too would have rejected the article that was a good call. Celestina007 (talk) 20:57, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What is the proper recourse?

Hello, on article Dissociative identity disorder I find user 2001:8003:A8F9:0:6D5E:7227:B87F:A94C is stating that the disease is fake, while not providing any resources as seen on the diff. I reverted the addition, but he revert back and forth, and I already reverted 3 times so I can't revert more per WP:3RR. As of now, the article is still showing his version that are unsourced. What is the proper resolution on this? I have made attempts on the Talk page on the article, but there is no response. Reporting to the edit warring noticeboard is wrong, as he haven't violated the WP:3RR. And reporting to the WP:AIV is wrong too as he haven't got the 4th warning. Thank you! SunDawn (talk) 06:52, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@SunDawn: I'd call the IP's edits vandalism, and reverting vandalism isn't considered violations of 3RR. You're also allowed to skip levels in the Template:uw-vandalism tree if the user refuses to get the point.  Ganbaruby! (talk) 07:39, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I reported the editor at WP:3RRN, as they made four reverts after receiving the edit-warring Twinkle warning. TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 10:21, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Ganbaruby and Tigraan! Have a nice day! SunDawn (talk) 14:57, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Account

How is it possible to get a German Wname1 Wikipedia account again? Wname1 (talk) 10:46, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Wname1: Editors at English Wikipedia cannot help with questions about other Wikipedia or Wikimedia projects, as each project is separate and has different rules. You will have to address your block over at de.wikipedia. --bonadea contributions talk 11:52, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Wname1: de:WP:SPP. Victor Schmidt (talk) 12:11, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

list of oldest living major league ballplayers. Charlie Gorin listed as 25th oldest living player died on 2/21/2021 in Austin Texas. Reported by Dignity Memorial and Baseball Almanac.

 2603:7000:7702:10FA:E5E5:68A2:BED2:622E (talk) 10:51, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Which article are you referring to? There is no Charlie Gorin listed at List of the oldest living Major League Baseball players, which in any case is not a list of living players, but the longest lived. (Most of them are deceased.)--Shantavira|feed me 12:15, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Article looks to be List of oldest living Major League Baseball players (very similar name, but different criteria). Needs someone to investigate claim of his death, as his article (Charlie Gorin) still has him as alive. Joseph2302 (talk) 12:23, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Gorin is indeed dead. I've edited his article to reflect this and removed him from the list. Cheers, Pichpich (talk) 19:51, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Which date to use in Cite web template

Sometimes, online news articles have an "Updated" date as well as the date the article was originally published. Which is best for filling in the "date" parameter in the Template:cite web template? And does the "orig-date" parameter factor into this somehow? Undead Shambles 🧟‍♀️ (talk) 13:41, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think that the "date" parameter should be the updated (most recent) date in this case, with use of the orig-date to clarify if necessary. The detailed instructions in the template page you cite says "orig-date: Original publication date or year; displays in square brackets after the date (or year). For clarity, please supply specifics. For example: |orig-date=First published 1859 or |orig-date=Composed 1904. As |orig-date= does not support automatic date formatting" Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:06, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict)@Undead Shambles: Welcome to the Teahouse! When I create a reference using {{cite web}}, I use the "Updated" date in the |date= field, and don't populate the |orig-date= field. (I would use |orig-year= with {{cite book}}.) There was a similar conversation at Wikipedia:Help_desk#Dates in citations. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 15:08, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Help with Kiwi Camara article

Hello! Sarah here, attempting to update and improve the Kiwi Camara article on behalf of DISCO. I've disclosed my conflict of interest and shared a link to a draft article at Talk:Kiwi Camara, but so far I have not received any feedback from other editors even after posting similar requests for help at WikiProject Biography, WikiProject Tambayan Philippines, and WikiProject United States. I've outlined problems with the current article, which is mostly a Background section with two Controversy sections related to the same incident. I've also worked to draft a more well-rounded biography which relies on news organizations over student newspapers. Is someone here able to review the concerns I've identified alongside the draft, then update the live article appropriately? Thanks in advance! Sarah DISCO (talk) 15:27, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

information Note: Draft scored 69.5% on earwig Justiyaya 15:53, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Sarah DISCO: Welcome to the Teahouse! Some editors shy away from reviewing such a large change. You may be more successful attempting to make a series of smaller changes. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 16:05, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Sarah DISCO: Also, I suggest adding the {{Request edit}} template at the top of the section on the talk page to get more attention from other editors. GoingBatty (talk) 16:08, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I forgot to enter copyright information on a image file that I uploaded in my sandbox. A bot then sent me a message that the file would be deleted unless the proper copyright information was entered. I tried to edit the information, but I do not see how to change the copyright information on the uploaded image: FarrisandJuliaBryantHorse.jpeg. How do I edit the copyright information? Thank you.Attu43 (talk) 16:03, 7 July 2021 (UTC) Attu43 (talk) 16:03, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Attu43: The original photograph came from Florida State library, which you correctly cited.[1] Their website says it is a public domain image. As such, it would be much better to upload the file to Wikipedia Commons using their Wizard commons:Special:UploadWizard and following the instructions so you can include the source and its license. The reason Commons is a better place for the picture is because it can then be used in any article in any language. Uploading to English Wikipedia is usually reserved for "fair use" images only intended to be used here. Once you have placed the image in Commons, you can allow the bots to delete the one you previously uploaded. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:20, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
A similar file has been uploaded here on Commons, so that's how your addition should look: but try to give it a less cumbersome name! Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:28, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Difficulty in creating an article

I wanted to create an article for American actress Kathleen Mulqueen, but it was created as a draft by a user who is already blocked, can you turn that draft into an article if you can? Or can I intervene in this case, is there any problem to create it? Topsiii (talk) 16:06, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Topsiii: you can edit Draft:Kathleen Mulqueen yourself to bring it up to a sufficient standard to post. Mjroots (talk) 16:40, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Setting up a new entry for Institute of Event Management and linking all items on 'events'

I would like advice on how to establish an entry for the Institute of Event Management and all its activities and developments - also to link all entries on Wikipedia which reference the business of events Jilly Ashton-Bridge (talk) 16:57, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Is this "the Institute of Event Management" next door to the Idle Working Mens Club in Idle, West Yorkshire, or another one? Do you work for them? -Roxy the grumpy dog. wooF 17:01, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Jilly Ashton-Bridge, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid "an entry for ... and all its activities and developments" is not something which Wikipedia would hold. Wikipedia is not social media or a directory, but an encyclopaedia. If the Institute meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability - roughly, that enough has been published about it wholly independently of it, then Wikipedia could have an article about it. This article would not belong to the Institute, would not be under its control, would not necessarily contain what the Institute would ike it to contain, and should be almost 100% based what those wholly independent sources had published about the Institute, not on what the Institute says or wants to say.
If, having read the above, you think that it does meet the criteria, then you are welcome to try the (extremely difficult) task of writing a draft article about it: start by reading WP:your first article. If you have any connection to the Institute yourself, you need to read about editing with a conflict of interest first, and possibly also about paid editing. --ColinFine (talk) 22:13, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hiding categories on mobile view

There's just this strange and weird view since few days lol. I just wanted to enquire if there's any way to hide the categories from being displayed in the mobile view? Thanks ─ The Aafī (talk) 17:50, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How do I create a 2nd article? My sandbox has no blank space.

Sandbox seems full How do I write a second article when my sandbox seems to be filled with a redirect message related to my first article (which I wrote years ago.) Link to my sandbox: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Busypencil/sandbox&redirect=no Busypencil (talk) 18:14, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Busypencil Just replace the text with {{User sandbox}}, as I have done for you. ―Qwerfjkltalk 18:20, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Qwerfjkl

Combined sections. GoingBatty (talk) 18:44, 7 July 2021 (UTC) Many thanks Thanks to Qwerfjkl for promptly answering my question. I'll probably be back with more![reply]

—Busypencil Busypencil (talk) 18:29, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

To add to that, you don't nessesarely need to develop new articles under User:Busypencil/sandbox, you could also do it as User:Busypencil/sandbox 2, User:Busypencil/future article name here etc. I am going to insert a form below:

Note that the input box above does not actually create a page until you hit save for the first time. Note that you can edit this particular section by clicking the edit link in the section header. Victor Schmidt (talk) 18:35, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

{{msg:Template}}

What does {{msg:}} do? Example:{{msg:example}} produces

This is an example of a template. For help with templates, see Help:Template.

Qwerfjkltalk 18:29, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It inserts a template, same as {{Example}}. See Wikipedia:Template namespace § History. Kleinpecan (talk) 18:42, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Kleinpecan Would there be any point in mass-removing msg:? ―Qwerfjkltalk 21:34, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I know, the "msg:" prefix does not affect the templates in any way, so mass-removing it would fall under Wikipedia:Bot policy § Cosmetic changes. Kleinpecan (talk) 21:44, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

adding a credit

Hello, I am trying to add my name to the supporting cast list for HALSTON. I made the edits while I was logged in but I still don't see the changes. Am I missing something? Dinosaurjunior (talk) 18:55, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse, Dinosaurjunior. Are you talking about those May 21 edits to Halston (miniseries)? They were reverted by Kingsif; you can leave a message on their talk page and discuss those edits. Kleinpecan (talk) 19:30, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Need guidance on page "Mahalingam Thangavelu"

Hello, I have edited the page "Mahalingam Thangavelu" including adding in line references. Could you please provide guidance on what additional details or formatting is required to make it acceptable.

Thank you. Mukherjee27 Mukherjee27 (talk) 19:22, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Courtesy link: Draft:Mahalingam Thangavelu
@Mukherjee27: If you have any conflict of interest, you must disclose it on your user page. You can use {{UserboxCOI|Draft:Mahalingam Thangavelu}} for this. Please change every instance of "Dr. Thangavelu" to "Thangavelu" per WP:SURNAME. Please remove the external links from the body of the article per WP:ELPOINTS. Please move the references to be after (not before) the punctuation, per MOS:CITEPUNCT. Please provide references that state "he was keenly aware", "made significant contributions" and "contributed significantly", or reword the draft. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 19:44, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Twelve Forever - Tweet and Tumblr Citing

I used an internet archive called Archive.org, also known as Wayback Machine, to retrieve screenshots of a person's Tweets and Tumblr posts and it was dubbed unreliable, whereas in the same post, an editor used them elsewhere and it was dubbed reliable. I was using it to show what the creator posted that inadvertently caused the cancellation of their TV series, while they used a tweet to prove the show has no further seasons coming. Could someone explain what I'm doing wrong?


My citings would be these, and it would fall into pedophilic behavior from a children's show creator:

https://web.archive.org/web/20190831184129/https://juliavickerman.tumblr.com/post/529260500/nothing-gets-me-more-worked-up-than-a-bear-affair

https://web.archive.org/web/20100801061227/http://twitter.com:80/juliavickerman

http://web.archive.org/web/20100406171955/https://twitter.com/juliavickerman

https://web.archive.org/web/20190901040822/https:/twitter.com/juliavickerman/status/27854166419?s=20

https://web.archive.org/web/20190901041514/https://twitter.com/juliavickerman/status/9695589665?s=20

https://web.archive.org/web/20190901041331if_/https://twitter.com/juliavickerman/status/12487443815?s=20

And there is a lot more, but it seemed like that would suffice.

I am not 100% absolute if this was where they wanted me to ask, but they sent me this while the conversation was being discussed, so I presumed this is where they want me to ask maybe. FairyKingCorn (talk) 20:45, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I see that this is already under discussion on your user talk page and at WP:BLPN, so it doesn't need discussing here as well. --David Biddulph (talk) 21:00, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I navigated away from my sandbox page, lost my draft and can't figure out how to retype it

I'm writing an article, my second after a hiatus of several years. I navigated away from my sandbox page after writing a lengthy draft. (Fortunately, I have a copy of it in Word.) I did NOT press "publish changes" because the draft wasn't ready for editorial review. I need to add many references and links.

My questions:

1) How can I get another blank form on my Sandbox page to copy my draft back in? My Sandbox page currently has no blank form for a new article. Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Busypencil/sandbox

2) What's the RIGHT WAY to navigate away from an article draft WITHOUT submitting it for review. This is going to be a multi-day process, and I don't want to see my draft disappear again?

Thanks in advance, Busypencil Busypencil (talk) 21:42, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You, along with with many others, have been confused by the decision of WMF to change the wording of the "Save changes" button to "Publish changes". This button does not publish to mainspace, or even send it to review, but merely saves the page so that you can continue to work on it. It's only when you use the blue "Submit" button that the draft is submitted for AFC review. --David Biddulph (talk) 22:11, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) @Busypencil: Common misconception; in the edit window, the blue "Publish changes" button at the bottom really means "save". On mainspace articles, the changes that are saved are instantly public (with exceptions), so when editing the mainspace you should only hit "Publish changes" when you're sure about those changes. That is not the case for drafts and userspace sandboxes; in fact, nobody cares if you take one edit or a thousand to arrive at a complete draft. You also have {{User sandbox}} at the top of your of your sandbox. The "Submit your draft for review!" button there is actually different: it puts a template at the bottom of your draft that notifies Articles for Creation reviewers that this draft is ready for review. So to summarize, when you're working on a draft, hit the "Publish changes" button to save your work, even if it's half done; when you're done, hit the "Submit your draft for review!" for review.  Ganbaruby! (talk) 22:18, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
For what it's worth, it was changed from "Save page" because people complained that their edits were visible. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 22:30, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How to gain Corporate notability

 111.98.81.161 (talk) 02:56, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, IP editor. Please read Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). It is all about the quality of the coverage of the corporation in independent, reliable sources. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:01, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Courtesy: This is about Draft:King Street Sounds, created by JSJS 22. I suggest editors continue to look at articles about other recording studios to see what types of references conveyed notability. As mentioned in one of the refs, King Street Sounds has been in existence for 25 years. David notMD (talk) 10:48, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Make MILC page?

Hi, I was wondering if I could move the text from the section Minor League Cricket to it's own seperate page as the season does start July 31st of 2021 and more information will come from more reliable sources as the season approaches. Minor League Cricket is currently a redirect to Major League Cricket. Please let me know soon.

(EDIT) Please note this does follow under WP:NSEASONS

Cheers, WellThisIsTheReaper (talk) 03:12, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@WellThisIsTheReaper: Welcome to the Teahouse! Two of your options could be to ask on Talk:Major League Cricket and/or start Draft:Minor League Cricket. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 03:26, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know why this kind of list shows by defect on the empty values the words 'Lorem' and specially in the second value the word 'borem'. In fact, I searched help in this template → Template:Drop down list/doc but I see the same problem on the examples.



How can I change that? Thanks a lot Mauriziok (talk) 04:57, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Mauriziok The reason is because the list is hard-coded to display Lorem or Borem by default if the value are not given, the workaround is to add declare other value as blank (taking the first example, the code should be of such {{Drop down list|Name=Examples|Value1=One|Value2=Two|Value3=Three|Value4=Four|Value5=|Value6=|Value7=|Value8=}}). Not sure, what you are using that template for as I don't see the use case for it. Hopefully, that answered your question. Paper9oll (🔔📝) 05:27, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Paper9oll Oh, thank you so much for the info. That helps me. --Mauriziok (talk) 05:52, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Mauriziok Welcome. Another thing I would like to point out, when you are replying to another editor in the future, please don't copy their signature like you did when you replied to me. If you would like to notify the editor you are replying to, use the Template:Reply template (see the link for further instructions) or simply use @[[User:USERNAME|USERNAME]] (example @[[User:Mauriziok|Mauriziok]]). Thanks you and happy editing! Paper9oll (🔔📝) 06:08, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Paper9oll All right, I get it. Thanks. --Mauriziok (talk) 06:26, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Mauriziok: May I ask what you're using that template for? This is not a commonly-used one; in fact, it is not used in any mainspace article at all. Also, note that article content should not be collapsed by default except for very specific scenarios (MOS:PRECOLLAPSE).  Ganbaruby! (talk) 08:11, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hidden in plain sight (idiom)

In Plain Sight is way less popular than say, for example, Friends. I don't understand why it isn't In Plain Sight (American TV series)(to differentiate from the British series of the same name). While IT IS possible that it has more page views than the other pages in the disambiguation (like Community, it is still not the main topic. The main topic is the idiom!!!! --Ireadbooks12 (talk) 07:16, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Ireadbooks12: The idiom, "hidden in plain sight", doesn't have a Wikipedia article (and shouldn't; that's what Wikitionary is for). The primary topic only goes to existing articles with the exact name "in plain sight", which are the four at In Plain Sight (disambiguation). You could make the case that there is no primary topic between the American show and the British one and you could file a requested move for that. However, my first impression is that since the American show had 5 seasons and is therefore slightly more significant than the British one, with just three episodes. If you're curious, the pageview data can be seen at [2] (might wanna tick "logarithmic scale" to see it clearer).  Ganbaruby! (talk) 08:00, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Renaming draft

Hi, how can I change the name of my draft? Also is that specific characters like dot(.) allowed in draft name?

Thanks in advance Kamesh Aravind P (talk) 09:06, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Kamesh Aravind P You may leave a note for reviewers on the draft talk page; if the draft is accepted, the reviewer will place it at the correct title. I know dots are allowed in article titles. 331dot (talk) 09:08, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Kamesh Aravind P, if this is Draft:Rubaru Mister India, you'd better concentrate on specifying reliable, independent, published sources for everything that it says. -- Hoary (talk) 11:48, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm in a rut

So i'm going to add a sentence on the Action 52 page stating that even if Ooze was beatable, the contest would have likely been immposible to win, due to the fact that the "personal code" provided is the same across all copies of the game. Naturally, i'll need to back this up with a source. The problem is, the only source I can find is this one: https://tcrf.net/Action_52_(NES) (You can scroll down the page to see the bit mentioning the contest).

As TCRF is a wiki and therefore user-generated content, its not reliable, but i can't find any other source for this claim.

What should I do? --185.73.65.98 (talk) 09:10, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. If you cannot find a reliable source for the claim, it cannot be on Wikipedia. There is nothing else that you can do about that. 331dot (talk) 09:12, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Review my drafts

I made 3 drafts that are waiting for review (List of Atlas LV3A launches, List of Atlas LV3B launches, and List of Atlas LV3C launches). Can someone review them? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 100.2.238.109 (talk) 11:28, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, in due time. -- Hoary (talk) 11:45, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse hosts are not necessarily also reviewers, and even if are, asking here does not accelerate a review. David notMD (talk) 13:50, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Article upload

Hello, this question is in related to this piece: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Naza_Alakija. I thought I uploaded the article but I never heard back about it, and when I checked just now it still says 'draft'. Does that mean it is still undergoing the review process? Or has it not been submitted/published? Thank you Shepherdonhydra (talk) 12:03, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You haven't submitted it for review. -- Hoary (talk) 12:33, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for making me aware- how can I submit? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sheperdonhydra (talkcontribs)

I've added a header that gives you a button to submit, Shepherdonhydra. --ColinFine (talk) 12:44, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shepherdonhydra (talkcontribs) 12:48, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

While you're waiting for review, one of the things which you ought to do is to remove the misplaced external links from the body text. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:51, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Grateful for your help, have done so, thank you David Biddulph — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sheperdonhydra (talkcontribs)

Article getting rejected for unreliable sources/no sources

Hi all. I recently submitted an article for a local amateur senior football club in Ireland - Newtown Rangers AFC. It was rejected this morning based off not having reliable/or any sources to back up the club's honours list. The issue is the online archive of such leagues and titles for Irish football is shockingly poor. All I have is the 60th Anniversary annual which has a complete list of all the club's honours since 1957 - 2017. It's printed and published locally but not online. I don't know what to do now. I can take a picture etc of the annual but I am unable to find an online location of it. It's really disappointing as this club is over 60 years old, has a great history but now I can't disclose the actual awards it has won. Any suggestions at all? Tommymul (talk) 12:12, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry the article in question is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Newtown_Rangers_AFC — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tommymul (talkcontribs) 12:13, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is no rule saying that a cited source must be available online. But will you be able to demonstrate that the team satisfies WP:GNG? -- Hoary (talk) 12:26, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
To amplify what Hoary said, Tommymul, sources do not have to be online, but they have to be reliably published, and to establish notability, they have to be independent. The club's yearbook is a self-published source, so while it can be used to establish certain kinds of uncontroversial information about the club, it cannot contribute to establish that it is notable. If you cannot find sources (on or offline) that meet the criteria for notability, then no article will be accepted. --ColinFine (talk) 12:49, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both for your comments and help. It's fair RE the yearbook - so I have removed all honours list from the page until it becomes available online via an independent source and resubmitted. Thanks again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tommymul (talkcontribs)

I think you've misunderstood, Tommymul. Sources don't need to be online, and while the yearbook isn't independent and therefore doesn't contribute to demonstrating notability, you can still use it as a source for uncontroversial information. Cordless Larry (talk) 14:59, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wanted you to check a few sources.

Hello! I wanted you to check these few sources [1] [2] [3] [4] and let me know that whether I could add them to Avneet Kaur's wikipedia page - media section. Kindly do tell me which ones from these 4 I could add which ones I can't (if any). Thank you. Manalijain (talk) 12:50, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

References

Manalijain, you may add any or all of them. But only the third one does anything to help establish that the subject is notable, the others just list her name. Maproom (talk) 17:19, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How do I get my page approved

 AJTANDY (talk) 15:06, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse, AJTANDY. Presuming you're referring to User:AJTANDY/sandbox/The Truth About BDS, there's likely no way to get it approved for publication as Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and what you've created isn't an encyclopedia article. You might find it helpful to read Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:11, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
AJTANDY An article on BDS already exists: Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions. David notMD (talk) 15:16, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Citation error showing on Mc Donald's history page in the "Timeline" section

Hi, please help to edit/correct this page

In the timeline of Mc Donald's there's this citation error in bold red showing up as follows:

"Cite error: The <ref> tag has too many names (see the help page)"

Also the 2000 timeline is not showing properly on the specific "Mc Donald's history" main page.

Although the html text is all there in edit mode. The "2002" event is not appearing completely i.e initial portion of the description is missing on the Front end page.

Please help to correct this error.

Thanks

 Ashwini Chhetri (talk) 15:17, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Courtesy link: History of McDonald's. The citation for the first in Estonia is completely misformatted. --ColinFine (talk) 15:26, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
 Fixed. ColinFine (talk) 16:02, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting old information in a box at the side of the entry

Under the Unitarian Meeting House, Ipswich,there is a section (in the box to the right) entitled Clergy.I need to delete this section as we currently have no Minister and the one named on the page - Lewis Connolly- left over two years ago. I can't find a way to edit anything in the box ...? Tessa Forsdike (talk) 16:45, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I made the edit for you here. Deor (talk) 17:18, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Tessa Forsdike: Forgot to ping. Deor (talk) 17:26, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Becky Edwards Page

Hey! I work on the Becky Edwards for US Senate campaign and I am trying to edit her wikipedia page so her personal information is included. I just want to add her family members and her new website, but you keep removing those changes. I'm just wondering what I have to do in order to have these changes stay up on her page. Thanks! Beataph (talk) 17:27, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]