Wikipedia:Teahouse

CiaPan, a Teahouse host

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

Ask a question

Question forumMeet your hostsArticles to improveBecome a host

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

Help Wikipedia

How do I block a user?

 Sparklestern (talk) 16:43, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

Become an Admin. -Roxy the grumpy dog. wooF 16:45, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

You can request administrator attention, but you should first try to resolve your conflict without administrator intervention. What is the user you want to be blocked? What did they do? Anton.bersh (talk) 16:52, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

@Roxy the dog: Facepalm --Deepfriedokra (talk) 19:43, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

Sparklestern wrote on my talk page that Sparklestern wanted to block Serols. From what I see, there is nothing that would require administrator attention right now. Sparklestern, I see that Serols reverted your edit and left a message on your talk page. I agree with Serols that your edit was not constructive. Also, I see that a number of other editors were reverting your edits as well. Wikipedia is not a forum and not a messaging platform. Article Talk pages are for discussing articles and ways to improve these articles. For example, you are welcome to improve an article Naruto, but posting Hello. I want to ask:Don't you just LOVE Naruto?!! like this is not appropriate. Anton.bersh (talk) 09:23, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy link: resolution of this conflict is here Anton.bersh (talk) 07:05, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

How do I block a user? (2nd section)

I tried but it won't work… Sparklestern (talk) 16:47, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

@Sparklestern: blocking users is a right reserved for the community-elected admins and in some (very rare) cases the Wikimedia Foundation. Out of curiosity: Who are you trying to block, and for what reason? Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:53, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

@Sparklestern and Victor Schmidt: This exact question was asked a few minutes ago. Let's try to contain this discussion in one place. Thank you! Anton.bersh (talk) 16:56, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

I have merged the two sections. Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:58, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

@Sparklestern: When you say "block" do you mean you want to stop somebody from contacting you? Because on Wikipedia a "block" refers to someone being prevented from being able to edit Wikipedia entirely, and only Administrators can do that Pi (Talk to me!) 00:14, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

@Pi, that was what I instantaneously thought of when I glanced through the question yesterday and not necessarily in the conventional manner the word block is used. Hello @Sparklestern, is someone making your stay here less enjoyable? It might be helpful if you could explain the context or point out to us a scenario where the person you intend to “block” has erred. Celestina007 (talk) 17:03, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

@Celestina007 and Pi: Please see my comment above. In short, Sparklestern has never made a single constructive content edit and a bunch of different other editors reverted all his edits as vandalism. One editor reverted this edit and left a generic courtesy message on User talk:Sparklestern. Apparently, Sparklestern deemed this message offensive. Anton.bersh (talk) 09:27, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi Anton.bersh, I don't know if you are aware of this, but there seems to be another discussion that was going on here, hope it helps. Justiyaya 01:35, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi Justiyaya, I was not. Thank you for the link. Anton.bersh (talk) 07:05, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Non clickable button

Moved to Wikipedia:Village pump (technical) § Non clickable button

 – ―Qwerfjkltalk 20:51, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Declined bio of Colin Macpherson

Hello Everyone, After waiting for a total of about nine months, I've recently had an AfC declined for a second time: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Colin_Macpherson The most recent reason given was 'This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources'. I assumed this referred to a number of citations regarding reviews of the novels that CM has written. A number of these sources are not online -- being newspapers or journals that no longer exist and/or are only archived in microform. So I looked into this (the problem of 'recentism' being discussed in various Wikipedia fora) and found that providing an ISSN or OCLC within the citations -- (together with full quotations from the source) would suffice in such situations. (I have photocopies of the relevant newspaper reviews -- provided to me by CM -- so I know they are correct). So I've made these adjustments, and I'd like to get some feedback from more experienced WP editors before I consider whether to press the 'Resubmit' button or go down another path with all the work I've done. I should also mention that the WP notability requirement for this subject (CM) seems to be adequately met by his written works (particularly his novels). His music is just one of his many other endeavours-- but well worthy of mention, given that that is what he has concentrated on for the last decade or so.

I'll be really grateful for any support anyone might offer. Pomegranate Rose (talk) 02:50, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

@Pomegranate Rose, it seems you have a conflict of interest on this topic. Yet you have not made the necessary disclosures. This can be one of the reasons that causes other editors to be disinclined to assist you or assist you speedily. So, please do so.

As for the draft, based on a brief look, it is quite obvious that the subject is definitely not a musician (or at least a musician who would merit a Wikipedia article; see WP:GARAGE, admittedly takes an effort to look past the insults and focus on the salient points). You note above that the subject is notable as an author. Yet your draft begins asserting that he's a great musician, and by the way, also an author. Don't you think that that would make the draft misleading, and therefore contrary to Wikipedia's mission?

Regarding the waiting time, when it says four months, it's an upper bound. Drafts that take that kind of waiting time are hard to review, and part of the blame is on you, the author. You have got 46 references. Yet most of the references that are easily checked are not "independent secondary reliable sources" of repute, as WP:GNG demands. When you have the first sentence on Music saying "Macpherson's music has been characterized as alternative folk, " and clicking on the citation takes you to an Apple music listing categorised as alternative folk, it's obvious that this is a promotional piece employing WP:REFBOMBING, and therefore unsuitable for Wikipedia in its current form. That was just one example.

Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 03:48, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

@☎️, you refer to WP:GARAGE and looking past the insults there in order to "focus on the salient points". Yet your response above is in much the same vein. To write that "it is quite obvious that the subject is definitely not a musician" is quite clearly an insult based on total ignorance of the subject. As soon as I read that, it made any further comments by you obviously biased (nastiness mixed with what purports to be objectivity leads to nowhere). Normally, I would be happy to discuss the issues you raise -- and many of them are clearly erroneous and worthy of debate -- but your contrary and pompous attitude make such discussion not worthy of my time. What a sad outcome. In the past, The Teahouse has been a place of respect and support.

Regards! Pomegranate Rose (talk) 05:26, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

@Pomegranate Rose Whilst I agree that WP:GARAGE is unhelpfully blunt, your dismissal of @Usedtobecool’s advice and feedback is unwarranted. Perhaps you are too close to the subject to take it on board. I see nothing that makes this musician a NOTABLE Musician (which is what UtbC meant) and there is far too much trivial content to make finding evidence he meets WP:NMUSIC easy, even if it is there (hence the long delay in review you have experienced). So, my advice (assuming you do actually want to have our help) is to return and give us links to just ‘’three’’ sources which quickly prove how he meets either WP:NMUSIC or WP:NBIO notability criteria. If you can’t do that, your draft will never be acceptable here, no matter how much you try. Sorry. Nick Moyes (talk) 08:23, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes Look, I'll pass over comments about what's warranted or unwarranted, and what someone else meant rather than what they said, etc., and just say thank you for your more professional and helpful response. And, of course I want your help -- that's why I posted my original request. Getting to the issue of notability criteria, I thought that the citations of reviews for the novels, and the citations of the sample academic papers and popular print-media articles would easily establish notability. The citations for the academic journal papers give definitive online links, as do the popular-press articles (albeit sometimes via library-membership requirements); and the novel reviews are a mix of online and off-line sources (the off-line sources being an issue I mentioned in my initial post: you cannot expect reviews from twenty years ago in newspapers and magazines to all be easily available online -- but they are accessible, and they should be considered just as significant as more-recent online material). There are far more than three sources in the 'Literary works' section of the draft article that clearly establish CM's notability WP:AUTHOR and WP:ACADEMIC, some may be 'quicker' than others as evidence but that's just the nature of the sources -- all the information is there, however. I would be grateful if you would scan these to confirm notability at least, and then advise whether I should perhaps substantially alter the article so that the 'Literary works' lead the piece, with a lesser mention of the music at the end. Thanks.

Pomegranate Rose (talk) 10:00, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

I have concerns about notability. His music appears to be self-released, and 2 of his 3 fiction books were self-published (Mopoke Publishing). On the books, the draft content reads like book jacket blurbs. Remove all the quotes. The refs can remain, even those not available online. Still unresolved is the question of whether you have a COI, meaning a personal connection to Colin. If true, state that on your User page. If not, state that on your Talk page. His website should not be a ref (currently #3 and #6). I know yo uhave been working on this for almost a year, and the review delays have been annoying. David notMD (talk) 10:47, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

Pomegranate Rose, you also need to remove any editorialising from the draft, per MOS:EDITORIAL. For example, it currently includes the line, "with the research behind the story being credible enough for the book to be used in a course on 'dark information' at a leading US university", sourced to an information page about that course. There are several problems with this, including the fact that the source doesn't tell us why the story has been included (so "being credible enough" is your editorialising) and that "leading US university" is subjective. Cordless Larry (talk) 14:27, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

I

@David notMD Thanks for your comments. I'm not sure why you mention self-release of music and self-publication of books. Long gone are the days when these forms of publication were considered inferior -- much of the modern music industry centres on indie artists who are unsigned, and many, many highly-successful authors have self-published (including CM). But leaving that aside, I appreciate your suggestion about removing the quotes in the book descriptions. I purposely formatted the descriptions this way because I didn't want to appear to be editorializing. Do you mean I should just use my own words to describe the books but keep the words in line with the refs? The COI suggestion is annoying but I appreciate your advice in that regard. And I'll take on board your suggestion of not using links to CM's website (although citing autobiographical material seems to be no different from citing from biographical works that are based on information that comes directly from the subject.) Thank you for your advice and your time -- and especially your friendly and helpful tone.Pomegranate Rose (talk) 00:51, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

@Cordless Larry Thanks for your advice about instances of editorializing: I take your point and will address it -- just leaving the facts. As with the previous three editors, I appreciate your support and professionalism.Pomegranate Rose (talk) 00:51, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

@David notMD Sorry for bothering you again, but I've just found that you inserted a signed 'Comment' at the top of the draft-CM article we've been discussing. I'm not sure why you did this without even waiting for me to respond here to your concerns, but regardless, shouldn't such a comment be in the article's 'Talk' page rather than in the body of the actual draft?...I've not seen this before, and it certainly messes up the draft. Also, regarding the actual comment, please consider what I've already said about that issue -- it really shouldn't be a concern these days. If I could, I'd move the comment to the Talk area -- where I think it should be -- but I don't know how to do that -- and I'd prefer to not simply delete it. I'd appreciate your help in this regard. In a number of ways, it seems that my initial request for advice is turning into a bit of a nightmare. I didn't think my dedication as a fan would be so draining. Pomegranate Rose (talk) 03:18, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

@Pomegranate Rose Comments in drafts are common, to help editors and reviewers. ―Qwerfjkltalk 06:42, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Queries at Teahouse can lead to information being discovered that a reviewer would not be aware of when considering a submitted draft. As Qwefjkl stated, Comments are common at drafts, either by a reviewer who declined the draft, or other editors. Self-publishing books and music albums is a relative but not absolute weakness when considering notability. The fact that Macpherson's books received favorable reviews is a positive. David notMD (talk) 11:06, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

On a separate note, I see that on your Talk page you have declared you are not being paid or otherwise compensated for work on this draft. You need to also address WP:COI. David notMD (talk) 11:19, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

COI Editing

Hi Teahouse! I haven't been on Wikipedia in a while but I wanted to jump back in quickly to ask a question. A company has recently approached me to help them build their Wikipedia page. I am still researching them to see if they would pass the notability guideline, but for future reference, how should this be properly disclosed assuming I think they pass the notability guideline? I've read WP:COI and understandably, COI editing seems to be frowned upon in the community. If I am getting paid to create an article that I think passes the guideline, should I submit the draft for publication and mention it in the talk page or the article's draft itself? Any help here would be much appreciated as I would really like the money, but I don't want to break policy. Thank you! MirzaTheGreatest (talk) 04:50, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

@MirzaTheGreatest: Welcome to the Teahouse. If you are writing an article on behalf of a company, you will need to disclose the paid relationship on your user page ({{paid}} is a template that you can use). You can mention that you are doing this for pay on the draft's talk page to cover your bases, but understand that if it gets accepted into mainspace, you are strongly recommended to suggest further changes in the form of edit requests at the article's talk page.
With all that said, does the company understand that Wikipedia is not a venue to promote themselves? You should probably make them aware that they have no control over an article about them, and that having an article isn't necessarily a good thing. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:31, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

MirzaTheGreatest I'm curious as to how this company came to approach you; I assume they didn't just ask you off the street. In any event, any article that might exist about this company will not belong to the company; it won't be "their Wikipedia page", but a Wikipedia article about them. They will have no special rights to it(less actually, as they would need to make edit requests just as you will if accepted) and cannot prevent others from editing it. Any information about the company, good or bad, can be in an article about them. See WP:PROUD. 331dot (talk) 11:19, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

A note: IF you manage to create a draft, submit that to AfC, and it is accepted, from that point in time onward, neither you nor anyone from the company would be allowed to further edit the article. Instead, you (and they) would be restricted to proposing changes on the Talk page of the article, for non-connected editors to either incorporate into the article, or decline. David notMD (talk) 11:23, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Creating article that is currently a redirect

Let me know if this is unclear––

Someone made an article for L'Rain, the self-titled album by an artist/curator whose music is released under the name L'Rain. Unfortunately, they named the article itself "L'Rain" rather than disambiguating it as an album title, and there is not currently an article for the artist; I moved the album article to L'Rain (album), but L'Rain is now a redirect to that (album) page.

I've drafted an article for L'Rain here, but I don't know how to create a new article on the page of a redirect.

[Edit: I originally also asked, "Should I publish this draft as "Taja Cheek" (given name) or "L'Rain" (professional name)?" but just reviewed her highest-profile features (in the New York Times, Teen Vogue, NPR, Pitchfork, & Bandcamp) & they *all* identify her as "L'Rain", so it seems clear that should be the article title––"L'Rain" & "Cheek" can then be used interchangeably in the article, as with those other outlets, & the top of the page can say, "for the album, see L'Rain (album)".]

Thanks! Knifegames (talk) 11:39, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

@Knifegames: Welcome to the Teahouse. I'd keep working on the draft as it is right now. Add {{subst:submit}} when you're done, and don't worry about titles at this point in time: a reviewer will be the one to determine which title the draft gets moved to if it gets approved. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 13:29, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi Tenryuu––I actually just needed to know how to create an article on the page of an unnecessary redirect, but I figured it out. :) I've published the L'Rain article, created a new talk page on *that* redirect, & have updated all internal links; let me know if you can think of anything else I should check! Knifegames (talk) 21:49, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Working

Hi, I added Working (Terkel book) to

For the 2019 book by Robert Caro, see Working (Caro book).

(and vice-versa) but it was removed due to WP:NOTAMB, is there not confusion if the reader cannot remember the author? (just a thought!) GrahamHardy (talk) 14:26, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

I'd suggest placing the hatnote For other uses, see Working. ─ The Aafī ^(talk) 14:44, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi @GrahamHardy, WP:NOTAMB says that a hatnote is not needed. The idea is that "(Terkel book)" or other disambiguating terms make it clear that the disambiguation page is at another location. I.e., you wouldn't end up on "Terkel book" by accident since even Working (book) goes straight to the dab. czar 00:51, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

So is the consensus that I remove the hatnote? GrahamHardy (talk) 14:07, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

I believe so, yes. czar 22:10, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Submitting a draft of article

I have just drafted a proposed article. I would like to submit a draft of this article that is in Microsoft word for consideration. Can I download a word document and input it into your system? Orangecholo (talk) 17:39, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

Orangecholo Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I don't know about a direct upload, but you could copy and paste the text; you will want to use Articles for creation to submit a draft. 331dot (talk) 17:51, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

Orangecholo, click on this link and you will arrive at your "sandbox". Paste the text there. Click on "Publish" (which will save it, not publish it in the normal sense). Format it, and follow the advice at Help:Your first article. "Publish" (save) again. -- Hoary (talk) 02:09, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

But I'm afraid, Orangecholo, that if you wrote your draft without being aware of the advice in your first article, it's likely that you will need to more or less start again. It's like building a house without building the foundations first, or even surveying the ground to check that it is stable enough to build on. --ColinFine (talk) 11:03, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Weird font for foreign language

Revisiting Kasuri, I note that the Japanese language words are now shown in a larger font/typeface. My perception is that although the individual words are larger, the chosen font makes them lighter in "color" (grey vs black) and more difficult to read.

Any ideas about what's going on here? I don't recall seeing other non-English words appear in this manner in other articles. Usually, articles feature a consistent font. The examples shown here for foreign words don't have this appearance. I tried using the recommended MOS:FOREIGNITALIC markup to substitute, but saw no change in the preview. Perhaps it reads differently on different devices? I've never seen this before. Thanks. Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 04:44, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Tribe of Tiger. Using the desktop site on Chrome running on a fairly new Android smartphone, everything looks perfectly normal to me. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:55, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

As an example, tate-yoko gasuri in that article is {{transl|ja|tate-yoko gasuri}}, which Mediawiki converts into HTML <i lang="ja-Latn" title="Japanese-language romanization">Tate-yoko gasuri</i>. You should check what your particular browser does with lang="ja-Latn". It's also imaginable that it does something to the font where there's a "tooltip" (HTML title). -- Hoary (talk) 06:07, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

I suspect I will have to learn to live with it. Cullen328, I checked my desktop computer, and it looks okay there. But, I always read/edit on an IPad, 14.6 software, using Safari as a browser. Also, I am a dummy...I have tried Hoary's suggestion, which I don't understand. Here's what I tried: {{lang="ja-Latn"|Kasuri}} {{tranl|"ja-Latn"|Kasuri}} {{tranl|ja-Latn|Kasuri}} , all are obviously wrong, because I get red Template "text". I don't understand the reference to "a "tooltip" (HTML title)", either.

I assume the {{lang}} template is preferred because it automatically detects the language, per MOS:FOREIGNITALIC? But now, I wonder if other readers on similar devices/browsers are seeing what I am seeing. Or, is my experience an anomaly? Anyway, thanks for your consideration and assistance! Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 02:29, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Tribe of Tiger, I was assuming (wrongly) that you'd be using a computer. I suspect that iOS and Android either don't let you make changes or will make such changes extraordinarily difficult. That aside, where you write "tranl", I'd written "transl". "Title" is an (X)HTML attribute (like "style" within your own signature). Most browsers interpret title text as popup messages; these are commonly called "tooltips". ("Title" is also the name of an (X)HTML tag, but that's irrelevant here.) My simple suggestion is: Use your computer (particularly as, even without reconfiguration, what it shows you does not irritate you). -- Hoary (talk) 03:31, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Hoary, I am so very embarrassed by my tral vs. transl error! So sorry! For the past few yrs, I have been unable to use my desk computer, because of physical problems, just too painful for any length of time. I really miss it, but the Ipad has been a boon, as I can read/edit on the sofa, or in bed...no sitting. I shall deal with the irritation of one article's font! Thanks again. Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 05:53, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

I'm sorry to hear this, Tribe of Tiger; I'd had no idea. I know that Apple likes to keep tight control of the devices that it sells, but does it let you install alternative browsers? (My own Android toy comes with Chrome, but I instead use Firefox Focus and Ghostery.) -- Hoary (talk) 08:35, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Information forum

Hi, I just want to ask about this. I saw pretty negative content. However, I don't know how to replace it because I can't find the correct information. Is there are any forums for you to discuss informations on Wikipedia? If there are, please send me the link. H0MARUP (talk) 05:05, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, H0MARUP. Please mention the specific article so that experienced editors can look at that particular article. For finding high quality references, try the Reference desks. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:19, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

https://vi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeon_So-min That. The second sentence means: Jeon So-min (singer) (born 1996), Korean F-class actress, the actor with the least-watched movie in Korea. You might not know Vietnamese, so please tell me the name of that movie, and I will edit the page.Cullen328 H0MARUP (talk) 05:40, 16 July 2021 (UTC)H0MARUP

H0MARUP, that is Vietnamese Wikipedia and this is English Wikipedia. They are separate projects with entirely separate administration. You will have to raise your concerns there, not here. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:45, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Oh. Thanks for telling me that... I will tell the admins there then.H0MARUP (talk) 07:16, 16 July 2021 (UTC)H0MARUP Cullen328

Draft:Moon Taeil

Hi, can you rewrite my draft? I want it to be accepted. Moontaeils (talk) 05:28, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Moontaeils, I see that Draft:Moon Tae-il is by you. Your username and his name have a remarkable resemblance. Is this an autobiography? -- Hoary (talk) 06:11, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

No, it is not an autobiography. I am a fan, a supporter of the subject. I am writing an article to give more recognition to him while still being neutral. Moontaeils (talk) 06:28, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

@Moontaeils: Welcome to the Teahouse. If you're not writing about yourself, you should abandon this account and start a new one, as your account would contravene Wikipedia's username policy. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:52, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Golygu ar declyn symudol Golygiad gwe symudol

The above has been appearing in edsums on my watchlist all morning, various editors. Isn't this the english language wikipedia? What does it mean? Is W?F doing something odd, or rather more odd than usual? -Roxy the grumpy dog. wooF 05:47, 16 July 2021 (UTC).

According to your friend Google Translate, it means Editing on a mobile device Mobile web editing in Welsh. I know no more than that. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:51, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

@Roxy the dog: Are you using en-gb as your interface language, by any chance? This is a noted issue (T286679) and should be resolved soon (hopefully). There's a discussion over at Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous)#Tags in Welsh that talks about the issue. Temporary solution is to change your interface language to en (Sauce). —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:00, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Brilliant! Thanks for that pointer, Tenryuu, I didn't have my prefs set to en-gb, for some reason, but having changed them, I get the Welsh edit summaries as well. (I understand it is annoying to most non-Welsh speakers, but for this non-Welsh speaker it is a feature rather than a bug.) --bonadea contributions talk 08:06, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Newyddion rhyfeddol! When do we get also Kernewek?? Martinevans123 (talk) 11:45, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

It's official: the Welsh are setting their plans of world domination into action. Pretty soon every city in the world will have names like Llanfairpwllgwyngyll. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 12:38, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Lol. "Bring it dude!!" Pah! just wait until the Maoris get here! Martinevans123 (talk) 13:56, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

@Martinevans123: The Maoris are already here, and they got here first: whilst "wiki" is a Hawaiian word meaning "quick", it's the same in Maori, which isn't surprising - both languages have a recent common ancestor in Central–Eastern Polynesian. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:26, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Wow, thanks Redrose64, I never knew. Should have guessed, as it's an anagram of kiwi!! Dame Wiki Te Kanawa 123 (talk) 10:02, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

I want my article to be removed from speedily deleted category

Previous discussion : #My article with brief biography was deleted, Why was that done>

previously there were errors to this page and content was not as per the community guidelines but now I have disclosed a COI and have added a connected contributor, now the article is simple and brief information about Mr. Deepak Sood with reliable sources.

Please guide me more as am not receiving a reply from chat. Ronitsunny 07:48, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

@Ronitsunny: welcome to the Teahouse, and thank you for declaring your connection to the topic you were writing about. I think this is what happened: the page Draft:Deepak Sood was deleted about eight hours ago, as unambiguous advertising. You created a new page, which contained only a "connected contributor" template, and then you removed that template again, leaving the page empty. Another editor then tagged it for speedy deletion because you had removed all the text from the page. In most cases, a page's creator should not remove the speedy deletion template, but in this particular case it would be OK for you to do so, if you intend to add sourced information about the person. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 08:30, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Foreign language source

On Mao Anying an edit I made a few months ago was deleted, with the reason that it 'non English language source. cannot be verified'. The source I added was http://news.sina.com.cn/c/sd/2010-11-11/103121453469.shtml , which disputed his death as resulting from cooking rice. BLP doesn't apply, a number of other sources on the page are also in Chinese and the source is not deprecated so I can't tell why it was reverted What should I do here? Gorden 2211 (talk) 07:59, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

@Gorden 2211: I can't see any reason why the sourced information (and the source) should have been removed, but the best thing to do is probably to ask the editor who removed it, on their user talk page. From the edit summary, it looks like the only issue they had with the source was that it isn't in English. While sources in other languages are allowed (and often necessary), many editors are not aware of this, and maybe it is just a matter of making the other editor aware of WP:NONENG. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 08:17, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Auto-confirmation of account

Why has my account not been auto confirmed yet? I've made close to a dozen edits now. I've given proper references for each edit and justification in its summary. My account has also existed for quite some days at this point. So when will it get auto confirmed?

Can someone please guide me? Somethingsomeoneqwerty (talk) 08:17, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

@Somethingsomeoneqwerty: welcome back. Your user rights log shows your account as being autoconfirmed. Why do you believe that it isn't? --bonadea contributions talk 08:35, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

@Bonadea: I'm sorry. I didn't realise that. I'm new to editing on Wikipedia. BTW why are some accounts shown in blue, and some in red? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Somethingsomeoneqwerty (talk • contribs)

@Somethingsomeoneqwerty: The red link in your username simply means you have not created a user page yet. You may click on it to create a userpage, with content in keeping with the user page guidelines. There is no requirement that a user create a user page, many users never create one.

331dot (talk) 12:24, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

BibTeX

Hey. Is there a tool / service for converting a bibtex entry to a wikipedia reference? I looked on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Citation_tools but couldn't find anything suitable. Thanks Lukemarris (talk) 08:28, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

May I create an article about my proprietary software?

Hello,

I created a software, it is ready, but not yet released, it is in pre-order state. I started a describing web site for it and made a public movie about its features. May I create an objective article about my proprietary software which refers to this publicly available web page and movie content? (The site is: https://BencsikRoland.hu/english/organizer -- please delete this comment, if not allowed.)

Thank you, Roland BencsikRoland (talk) 08:36, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

@BencsikRoland Please read WP:NSOFTWARE. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 08:40, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Short answer: No. Longer answer: You should never create or edit an article if you have a conflict of interest in regard to the subject. To have an article you have be "notable" in the sense that wikipedia understands that term. You can not determine that. It has to be determined by others. --Bduke (talk) 08:54, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Content at Teahouse is not deleted. However, content is archived on a regular basis, so that anyone perusing recent Teahouse entries will not see the older stuff (albeit, still accessible by visiting the archives). Searches within Wikipedia or external (Google, etc.) do not 'see' Teahouse commentary. David notMD (talk) 12:01, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Ok, thank you! --BencsikRoland (talk) 13:14, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Please reconsider the publication of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Continuous_Innovation_Framework

Dear Robert,

I received notice that you declined my proposed article for the Continuous Innovation Framework. I would like to ask you to reconsider, as I believe that the article's references do meet the criteria of significant, reliable and secondary (see below). In addition, I would like to point that the subject is non-commercial, and published in open source. Also, in line with your remarks, I have made changes to what may have been construed as 'commercial' or 'self-promoting' content about training.

I do believe that the publication has significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject, for the following reasons

I feel that this coverage qualifies as significant: through the coverage it reaches the vast majority of the relevant industry experts and practitioners and it covers a broad range of publications, such as scientific publications, conferences, communities and published media.

I feel that the sources meet the criteria of being published, reliable and secondary sources: the sources are published and reliable in the sense that they are all long lasting, professional publications. They are secondary in the sense that they discuss the subject from an independent perspective and analyse its value against other options in the market (Portman), analyse its usability in practice (Consultancy.org) and argue its value for the market segment of SME's (InnovateGO).

There are several of such publications mentioned in the article. None of these were paid for or in any other way commercially influenced.

- A scientific study by H.M. Portman, describing and positioning the framework alongside other frameworks. The author H.M. Portman is fully independent from COIN or its founders and they have never met or communicated - An interview with a corporate staff member of a Ducth company that has implemented the COIN framework. The interview was executed and published by global publisher 'Consultancy.org', written and published independently from COIN or its founders - An article published by a Dutch government agency, InnovateGO, about their application of the COIN framework in a government program. The article was written and published without knowledge by and independently from COIN or its founders - An interview with COIN founder Arent van 't Spijker at a global community of practice 'The Innovation Cafe', which is independent from COIN and which happened at the request of the community. - An interview with COIN fonder Arent van 't Spijker on a global public webcast 'Invincible Innovation' by industry expert Adi Mazor Kario, at the request of mrs. Mazor Kario. - A post-conference publication on the COIN Framework (unpaid, unsollicited) from the Innov8rs Unconference, the world's largest conference on corporate innovation. Published without prior knowledge and independently from COIN or its founders. - An article on the SWICH method, written by COIN founders on request, published in the industry-leading independent, non-commercial publication 'InnovationManagement.se'.

I do hope you want to reconsider publishing the article on Wikipedia, as I believe it will help people to find their way to non-commercial, open-source content that is already being used by thousands of innovation practitioners across the globe every month.

Thank you very much,

Arent van 't Spijker Arentvantspijker (talk) 09:46, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello Arentvantspijker, this is Wikipedia Teahouse where you can discuss general topics about Wikipedia with the whole Wikipedia community. If you want to talk to Robert McClenon, I recommend you go directly to User talk:Robert McClenon. I looked over the draft you wrote Draft:Continuous Innovation Framework and I agree with rejection for publiction (Robert McClenon provided sound and ample explanation for rejection, as did multiple other reviewers before). Courtesy pong for @Robert McClenon:. Anton.bersh (talk) 10:20, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Arentvantspijker. You say above I believe it will help people to find their way to non-commercial, open-source content that is already being used by thousands of innovation practitioners across the globe every month. That is called promotion, and is fundamentally contrary to the purposes of Wikipedia. --ColinFine (talk) 12:10, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Please also note, Arentvantspijker, that the draft has only been declined. This means the reviewer(s) judged that it is not yet suitable for Article status, but has the potential to become suitable if the problems described are successfully addressed.

If reviewers think that, at least for the present (see WP:Toosoon), an acceptable article about a particular subject probably cannot be created for other reasons, they instead reject the draft (and may in some circumstances delete it), meaning one should not waste one's own and their time by persisting with it (or trying to re-create it). This is not the case here, so you are welcome to try to improve the draft. I suggest you leave it alone for a couple of weeks (it won't be deleted for "abandonment" until 6 months of inactivity), then come back with a fresh eye, mindful of the requirement for a Neutral Point of View. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.122.177.31 (talk) 13:50, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

I will comment that the author resubmitted the draft with only very minor changes within hours after I declined it. That isn't usually useful, and in this case User:Theroadislong promptly declined it again, and put a conflict of interest tag on it. I will also ask User:Arentvantspijker what their affiliation is with the framework. I will also say that if the author had posted such a lengthy advertisement for the draft on my talk page, I would have said that it was a lengthy advertisement for the draft. I thank User:ColinFine for being concise. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:02, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Adding & changing disputed facts with no citation

Why is it not possible to change facts without proper references, but sometimes it is possible to add new content without a reference?

I ask because on the Heineken page it states the the founder of the original Heineken Brewery got the money from his wealthy mother, however there is no citation or evidence to prove this.

How did this get approved in the first place and can it be changed without overriding evidence? Occasionalpedestrian (talk) 10:26, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Occasionalpedestrian Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. That some particular content is on an article does not necessarily mean that it was approved by someone. Given the nature of Wikipedia almost anyone can add anything to almost any article. I'll note that the content you mention is marked as needing citation- this is done to give people the chance to find and add a citation. If those markings have been there for some time without anyone finding a citation, you can remove the information outright. 331dot (talk) 10:31, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

@331dot Thank you for your comment. What would you say counts as some time? Weeks or months? I have a conflict of interest with Heineken which is why I know it is a disputed fact. Would someone else be able to change that or could I make that change even with COI? Occasionalpedestrian (talk) 10:48, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Occasionalpedestrian If you have a conflict of interest with Heineken, you will need to declare that on your user page per the conflict of interest policy. If you are employed by Heineken in any capacity, you will also need to declare as a paid editor per the paid editing policy. In your position, I would make a formal edit request(click for instructions) on Talk:Heineken requesting that the information be removed. If you have a independent reliable source (nothing from the company itself) with correct information, that could replace the incorrect information- but even if you don't have that, the uncited information can be removed. 331dot (talk) 10:56, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

I've removed it. It was added five years ago (2016 edit found with WikiBlame) I think that's a long enough wait. - X201 (talk) 11:08, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Take a look at a newly created article

Changdeva Temple , I created today, I need a native speaker take a look it for grammer and tone. If something wrong you found, fix it. Huge Earth (talk) 11:26, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

It was moved to Draft:Changdeva Temple minutes after your last edit, with a comment that it is not yet of article-quality. Among other problems, the refs are all just URLs. David notMD (talk) 12:04, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

I've had a look at the grammar and writing; I hope I haven't messed up the meaning of anything (do change things back if needed; I do not know the local geography and may have made mistakes in interpreting your text). I'm not going to attempt to do the references as I can't judge which are likely to be deemed reliable secondary sources. But I personally liked the article and thought it interesting and well-balanced. If you can sort out the references so they show the newspaper/site etc. from which they're derived, then maybe it will be a good addition to WP. Good luck! Elemimele (talk) 12:30, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Hiii,fellow editors, I added some best references; for my edits from newspaper website's articles. I think anyone can go and verify source of information. I think you can move it to main space. If any improvement is needed, I'll try to do it and you can edit this article for its betterment.Huge Earth (talk) 13:38, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

@Elemimele and Elemimele: @David notMD and David notMD: someone moved Changdeva Temple Arti from main space. Will you move it to main space.

STATUS: An experienced editor/reviewer moved it to draft, several editors and the creating editor worked to improve it, and then the editor/reviewer returned it to main space. Congrats on going from creation to approved in one day. For this, and the other articles you have created, please learn how to properly reference rather than just bare URLs. David notMD (talk) 14:42, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

@Huge Earth:, just a hint from a non-teahouse-host! The easiest way to do references is to use the tool in the editor. I use the non-visual editor, so that's the only one I can describe. The top line has the Bold B, Italic I etc. icons, and at the far right end, the word "Cite". When "Cite" is selected, as it is by default, the next row says "Templates, Named references, Error check" If you click on Templates, it offers you a choice of four reference-citation styles. Pick whichever seems most suitable, and a little window will pop up with boxes where you can type all the relevant details. Fill in as many as you can (don't worry that not all boxes are relevant to all references) and the tool will do the work for you. Congratulations on getting this article accepted into main-space! Elemimele (talk) 19:27, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

@Huge Earth @Elemimele I also find Citoid helps. ―Qwerfjkltalk 20:48, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

@User:Elemimele Thankyou for information sir.Huge Earth (talk) 05:21, 17 July 2021 (UTC) David notMD Hiii editor, You said that I have to use different kind of sources not just bare URL's. ok, I have some book reference, but a book don't have ISBN number anywhere on it. So can I use that book for reference without writing ISBN number. Or can't use books that doesn't have in Eng and don't have ISBN??? Huge Earth (talk) 07:21, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Huge Earth. International Standard Book Numbers have been used by book publishers worldwide since 1967, although self-published books may not have them. So, they are not expected for books published over half a century ago, but if a 21st century book lacks an ISBN, that may call the reliability of the source into question. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:49, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Roofit.solar draft re-submitted

Hello My draft Roofit Solar was declined once and the comments were that some more sources needed to be provided. I did so and resubmitted it. However, now some other reviewer wrote that it has not been accepted because it included copyrighted content, which is not permitted on Wikipedia. How is that possible that the first reviewer did not see that copyright issue but the second one saw it? I am really confused. Tea Mariamidze (talk) 11:46, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Tea Mariamidze! Issues like insufficient sourcing are easier to spot right away than plagiarism, so they'll typically be noticed earlier in the review process. Either way, you need to fix that, as plagiarism is a huge problem. Bsoyka (talk · contribs) 12:23, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Your confusion surprises me, Tea Mariamidze. In my own everyday life, it's common that somebody I'm with notices something that I don't notice, and on occasion I notice something that nobody else notices. Anyway, who noticed it, and when, is a trivial matter. What does matter is that Bogger warned about copyright violation and that you haven't subsequently reedited Draft:Roofit Solar Energy to remove this material. Or are you saying that no, there is no copyright violation? -- Hoary (talk) 12:29, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

I just need more explanation of where the copyright problem is as I am willing to fix the flaws.Tea Mariamidze (talk) 12:59, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

The following text is copied directly from the Roofit Solar website "Roofit.solar got EUR 378,423,36 (without VAT) grant under the NUTIKAS project aimed to investigate the degradation mechanism in chosen polymeric encapsulants used in the photovoltaic industry. The implementation period of the project is 1.05.2020-31.08.2022 and it is supported by the Estonian Research Council and the Archimedes Foundation." Delete all of that. You could state that Roofit Solar received a grant via the NUTIKAS project, but even that needs a ref other than the Roofit Solar website. David notMD (talk) 14:56, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy: Draft:Roofit Solar Energy. David notMD (talk) 21:50, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Yet again, an editor directly contradicts the source, presents his own belief as the status quo and claims that his beliefs were not found in the source because of someone's motivated reasoning (i.e. myself)

Yet again, an editor directly contradicts the source, presents his own belief as the status quo and claims that his beliefs were not found in the source because of someone's motivated reasoning (i.e. myself)

It's high time that a veteran editor on Islam steps in and sorts out the mess in the article Iblis. Kindly check the edit history to understand why.

}} Sulṭān ʿAbdullāh al-Hindi ^Talk 12:38, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

@Sultan.abdullah.hindi: Welcome to the Teahouse. Please discuss the point of contention at Talk:Iblis and don't argue through edit summaries while reverting; edit warring is not beneficial to either party. If you're unable to come to an agreement, you may want to check out some of the venues for dispute resolution. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 12:50, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

@Tenryuu: I was hoping that an experienced editor would be able to understand and take hold of the situation. Appreciate the tips! - Sulṭān ʿAbdullāh al-Hindi ^Talk 14:11, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

@Sultan.abdullah.hindi: You could try asking at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Islam to see if any interested editors are willing to chip in. I don't know how active they are, though. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:36, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

There's also Wikipedia:WikiProject Religion. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:44, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

@Tenryuu: and @Gråbergs Gråa Sång: Appreciate the tip! I'll try talking to the editors of those projects. - Sulṭān ʿAbdullāh al-Hindi ^Talk 15:42, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

You and VenusFeuerFalle have each edited on many article related to Islam. The proper place to have a discussion is on the Iblis Talk page. Please be patient with each other, as I am willing to believe that you are both editing in good faith. From looking at VFF's Talk page history, I saw that the status of Iblis has been discussed (heatedly) in the past. David notMD (talk) 15:06, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

@David notMD: I will move this there, in shaa ALLAH ta-'ala. And that's an extremely important point that you've raised actually. This difference of opinions among scholars and academics is exactly the reason why Dajjal is a VERY good example of what an article should be like. It totally clarifies the sect-relevant beliefs instead of convoluting everything together and presenting the different opinions A, B and C as D in one paragraph prioritizing one scholar over the other. Why I mention this 'prioritization' is because the other editor clearly states in his user page that he BELIEVES that in Islam, Iblis is an angel and this is actually reflected in the article itself as well. :( - Sulṭān ʿAbdullāh al-Hindi ^Talk 15:42, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict)User:Sultan.abdullah.hindi, I don't know anything about this, but let's see... your first edit was to remove File:Encounter_by_Candlelight_(with_black_man).jpg on grounds (I gather) that since he can't be seen by humans how can we have a picture of him, or else that anyway the people who made the picture don't have standing to say what Iblis looks like.

But we aren't saying "Iblis looked like this". I mean, of course not: he doesn't look like anything, he's made up. We're just saying "Here's a picture that somebody made of Iblis". That's all. (And that the picture if from a historically/culturaly significant source so it's worth showing.)

(As to the "made up" part, sorry, and doubly sorry if I hurt your feelings, but we're a secular Enlightenment entity and we can't trim our sails to spare anyone's feelings. It doesn't mean we don't describe all kinds of things about Islam and Islamic culture with respect and attention to various subtleties, or that we don't respect the beliefs of Wikipedians like yourself, or that we're going to be in people's faces about our secularism, just that we're not going to take religious documents such as those saying Iblis is real) on faith (since we don't anything on faith).)

I didn't explore beyond that first edit, but since that first one was probably wrong by our standards, you might want to meet people halfway and consider that you might be wrong about other stuff too. Not that you are (I haven't checked), but that you might be. That'd be a attitude of humility which might be a good start to working things with other editors on the article talk page. Good luck and happy wiki'ing! Herostratus (talk) 15:25, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

@Herostratus: I mean, this is a wholly different philosophical discussion and me being a radical skeptic at one point would argue that you can't really prove anything at all and it's all about believing and stuff but that's not really a path I want this conversation to take. Moving on to the main point of the discussion, I would really encourage going beyond that edit because while I did remove the image, I also said that it should rather be placed in a different section on that matter (of the depiction of the said entity in "Islamic" art) so as to represent the beliefs of different sects properly and of course, to be considerate and respectful of them. Of course, I have made mistakes and my mistakes have been reverted by other editors - from which I have moved on trying to be better at this but yeah, basically what I said before. Kindly check the reply to David NotMD above to understand my position a bit better. Appreciate the tips. - Sulṭān ʿAbdullāh al-Hindi ^Talk 15:42, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

re "I also said that it should rather be placed in a different section on that matter", oops my bad, I just went by that edit summary (yes it was very shallow view). I believe that the general agreement in academic philosophy is that some things probably exist, altho I suppose we can't be sure. Herostratus (talk) 20:24, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Here is a point I want to interfer: Where did I said this things (for example I hold Iblis to be an angel)? This is not my personal opinnion but this reflects both Muslim sources as well as the academic studies of Islam. The sources are given within the very article, I once extented about this subject massivly. If there is any bias, I appreciate any support to remove them, but please not by twisting context, ignoring the sources or blaming me for things I have not done! Regarding the images, we can disagree about if "Arts" can be called "Islamic" or not, depending to whom we give more weight; the Muslim jurisprudence (who usually agree that images are forbidden) or the experience of Muslims themselves (who obviously have not hesitated to make images nevertheless, but not statues. There are also angels in Art, not only Siyah Kalam's demons). For this debate I would recommand you to read Shahab Ahmed's "What is Islam?", before heading into a pointless discussion biased by personal preferences, to have common ground. He pretty much adresses this issue. I actually feel kind of assaulted by the claim "Yet again" and "the users personal beliefs are reflected in the article", which is not true. I do my hardest to harmonize contradicting statements and always consult further sources, which analyzed these issues. You are always welcome for criticism but please do not state or imply something about me what I did not. Regarding the rest of the text, I agree with @Herostratus: the place of images is something for the IslamProject itself. Otherwise, I would just go with the sources. Details can always explained by the image description. No one claims, for example, that iconographic representations are "real" images of devils, demons, angels or the like.--VenusFeuerFalle (talk) 21:03, 16 July 2021 (UTC) Edit: I added a list of quotes, which I used to verify my edits, when @Siltan.abdullah.hindi: claimed, I would contradict the sources. They might point out exactly there I am supposed to be wrong about, on the talkpage. Also note, it can take some time until I respond, I am still quite busy.--VenusFeuerFalle (talk) 22:12, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Citations when Subject is both Subject of a case study and Author of a case study

I cited a Harvard Business Review case study about Carol Fishman Cohen, authored by Myra M Hart, Robin J. Ely, and Susan Wojewoda (2003). Carol Fishman Cohen then authored a Harvard Business Review case study titled 'The 40-Year-Old-Intern' in 2012 that is also relevant to my topic.

Right now, I have the study about Cohen as a 'Further Reading' item and the study by Cohen as a citation but I could really use both studies as citations.

Is it acceptable to cite both the study 'about' and a study authored 'by' the same subject? Thank you. --Tchula65 (talk) 15:35, 16 July 2021 (UTC) Tchula65 (talk) 15:35, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Returnshp.   Maproom (talk) 16:35, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Wayne_Doba

C I have submitted a page and the reason for refusal was " There were also no references added since last decline other than a reference to a Wikipedia article which can never be used as a reliable source. CNMall41 (talk) 22:18, 14 July 2021 (UTC)" I do not understand why CNMall41 wrote this. There are no references to Wikipedia and I added 6 new citations with links to online newspaper articles. Thanks for any help you can give me. Carol CarolSusanHalls (talk) 15:54, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

@CarolSusanHalls: I am pretty sure CNMall41 refers to ref #5, which is just a link to another Wikipedia article, as well as ref #9, which is a link pointing to the edit link of this very draft. See WP:CIRCULAR for more info. Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:11, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, CarolSusanHalls. Your current "reference" #5 is a link to the Wikipedia article The Texas Chain Saw Massacre, a film that Doba was not part of. Why is that even mentioned? Your SFGate reference #9 links back to your draft, not to SFGate. I read several of the Seattle Times articles, and they just mention Doba briefly. As does the other SFGate article by Philip Elwood at #15. Which are your three best sources that devote significant coverage to Doba and not just to projects that he has been involved with? Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 16:21, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

@Cullen328:, @Victor Schmidt:, @CarolSusanHalls:, I apologize as I looked at this closer which is the difference between the previous decline (prior to mine) and the resubmitted. There were references added but they are from Wikipedia, IMDb, TV Guide, and TCM. None of them show notability of the topic however. --CNMall41 (talk) 23:08, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Atomated robot

This automated robot removed all my content and reports it as "vandalism" tho I am just adding traditional dishes  Franco tradisionele disse (talk) 16:22, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Franco tradisionele disse Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The bots detect your edits as vandalism because they appear to just be adding random information even though that is not your intention. Part of the problem is that most of the dishes you are adding to the list do not have articles associated with them or some other citation. The lists like that are not for adding every possible member of the list, just those with articles. 331dot (talk) 16:28, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Franco tradisionele disse, in one case, you mentioned Amarula, an alcoholic beverage which has an article, but did not link to it. There is also an article about Sclerocarya birrea, known as the Marula tree. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 16:33, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Franco tradisionele disse another "clue" that could trigger Cluebot is that none of your additions included a reference to a source. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 16:36, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Where you typed "version straks", maybe you meant "venison steaks"? Maproom (talk) 16:45, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Oof

Colleagues, most of what you said is correct, but the new editor was mistreated by being called a vandal or possible vandal, and if a human being had done that she would have been scolded. Robots do not a get a special pass to insult.

I think that's main point we want to bring forward to be as welcoming as possible.

Hello User:Franco tradisionele disse. Yes you have been poorly used. Were I you, I would be distressed and angry, and properly so. Your contributions were 'NOT vandalism, and it was an egregious insult for anyone to say that, robot or person.

OK, so let's talk about what happened. User:ClueBot NG is a robot, and generally a very good one. In this instance it went out of control. I have not seen this before, and I am worried. So this is not a typical ClueBot interaction.

Let me also say that your edits were fine. They were quite acceptable for a brand new editor, and thank you, and welcome to the Wikipedia! Please understand that this is huge and fast-moving website and people (and robots!) are trying their best to be as welcoming as possible, but there's lots to do and we can't always take as much time as we'd like for each individual case. Our apologies.

So, regarding ClueBot. I will report the error, but it won't do any good. ClueBot is not really under human control anymore. Nobody can really go in and tweak the code to "fix" it. It's a (specialized) artificial intelligence. Once created, and after a certain amount of human-assisted tweaking I suppose, it was told to go and teach itself what is or not vandalism. The original creators themselves don't know exactly why it does things anymore and can't change it. That is what they told me.

OK. My point so far is that your edits should not have been characterized as vandalism.

Now, as to the actual contents of your edits. First of all, (attention [[User:331dot) they were not "random information". There exists a section called "Typical South African foods and dishes" which consists of a bulleted list of scores of dishes. Most have links to articles but many do not. User:Franco tradisionele disse added a few more bullets of the same kind of dishes in the same format. This is what we want editors to do: add useful information to the Wikipedia.

Colleagues, reasonable people can disagree whether that information is actually useful (I think it is), and whether the list should be trimmed, or made longer, or deleted altogether, or moved to its own article, or kept as is but with further additions discouraged, or the text trimmed, or turned into prose, or whatever. I think it's fine, but reasonable people may disagree, and maybe they can get it deleted. And fine. NOT fine: keeping it (thus implying that it's fine and may be added to), but then rolling back new additions on slim grounds and, especially, calling the person a vandal, or maybe a vandal.

Now, User:Franco tradisionele disse, your contributions were fine but not perfect. (I mean of course they aren't, since you are brand new.) They didn't have attached sources, which are supposed to be required (altho unfortunatly millions of statements here don't). Wikipedia:Reliable sources explains this in some detail. User:Dodger67 is correct about that. But if it was me, I would have probably just tagged them with "citation needed" since 1) they are probably true, and 2) they are not really key points like the date of the Franco-Prussian war or whatever, and 3) obtainable sources probably exist, and 4)the material is brand new, so let's give it a little time for somebody (maybe you, maybe not) to come along and add sources.

But it wasn't me. It was robot violating the First Law of Robotics, assuming that "injure" includes "insult".

User:Maproom, getting one world wrong (possibly an autocorrect, venison->version) and then misspelling a single word by a single letter is grounds for a correction being made, not the entire entire contribution rolled back and the contributor called a vandal.

Herostratus: I made several constructive changes to one of the items Franco tradisionele disse had added to the article. He has thanked me for them. I have rolled nothing back, and called no-one a vandal. But I was not confident of my understanding of "version straks", particularly in a context that includes "Amarula" and "roosterkoek", so I mentioned it here in the hope that he would read this thread and correct it. But I forgot to ping him. I have done so now. Maproom (talk) 20:29, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

[[User:Cullen328, you wrote "in one case, you mentioned Amarula, an alcoholic beverage which has an article, but did not link to it". Well how the heck is a brand new user supposed to know that's useful, and there are millions of terms here that have articles that aren't linked to, and I've never heard that linking is required (in fact overlinking is our main problem), or that not doing is is grounds for reverting edits (rather than adding the link yourself or just moving on), let alone saying they are vandalism. That it's a robot rather than a human is no excuse whatsoever, and if the robot isn't able to handle that the robot -- not User:Franco tradisionele disse -- needs to be scolded. If the robot is going to continue in this direction it needs to be turned off and looked at under the hood.

User:Franco tradisionele disse, I'll look at some of your edits and be back presently. Herostratus (talk) 19:34, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Herostratus I didn't say the information was random, I said it appeared to be random. And I certainly understand that the user is new, which is why I explained that lists typically list existing articles. Perhaps I could have added "or the prospect of being an article" 331dot (talk) 19:39, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

User:331dot does it really look random to you? It's additions to a list in similar format to the list. You could call it trivial I suppose, but 1) that's way different from random, and 2) only if the other items (or anyway the non-bluelinked items) on the list are also trivial, which how is an editor supposed to know that since they haven't been removed. Accept the edits then being a process to trim the list equitably. Herostratus (talk) 20:21, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, not to me, to the bot. 331dot (talk) 20:22, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

User:331dot, right, the bot. I love ClueBot, it is almost always spot on, like 99%+ percent of the time. The one or two missteps I've seen are reverting bad edits which definitely should have been reverted but weren't actually vandalism. (I'm going to suggest it change "vandalism" to "unacceptable edit" or something, that would solve most of the rare problems). But in this one case what it did, if it was a human, would have made me complain to her.

So, I don't think we should even be looking like we are defending the bot in this case, is my point. It's liable to chase this promising new editor away.

I get that we're all super busy. I don't work the teahouse much, and many thanks to those who do this critical task, but when I drop in for an occasional visit I usually pick one thread and dig into it (as here) and write a lot. That's how I roll, but I get it that if everyone did that we wouldn't be able to handle the volume. So, looking at it a bit more, I deduced that (IMO, but pretty sure I'm right) that the user deserved an apology in this unusual case. Herostratus (talk) 21:28, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Herostratus, the message that ClueBot left at Franco tradisionele disse's talk page does not use the word vandalism or any synonym. It is not rude and openly acknowledges that there are a small number of false positives. Franco tradisionele disse must have clicked a link to learn that it is an anti-vandalism bot and construed that they were being accused of vandalism. I believe that their use of the word "mosbeskuit" triggered the bot. This is an Afrikaans language word and its only use on English Wikipedia is in Franco tradisionele disse's restored edit. A quick Google search shows the word used in Afrikaans articles and websites but no easily findable English language sources. As for your claim that overlinking is a problem, perhaps that is true but not in this case. We have a genuine problem with people adding inappropriate entries to lists. It is a major problem, for example, in alumni lists where the names of non-notable people are added constantly, and a reasonable and common solution is to remove all entries that are not blue links. In this particular case, a good solution may be to allow list entries that are blue links or where a reference to a reliable source had been furnished. I also agree that citation needed tags are better than deleting plausible new good faith content, and most of Franco tradisionele disse's recent edits still stand. We do not want vandals to clog up this list with "rat fried in petroleum" rendered in Afrikaans or Zulu or any other such phony content. Also worth noting is that Franco tradisionele disse is conversing with Dodger67, an administrator who is fluent in Afrikaans. So, the situation is not nearly as dire as you portray Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:53, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Please edit this template

In this template, is it possible to replace the name Haute-Normandie to Upper Normandy? Or just add this link to it? Excellenc1📞 16:31, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Excellenc1, you can edit the template by clicking at the "E" in the upper-left corner of the template. You can yourself replace and edit the template. Lightbluerain❄ (Talk | contribs) 16:34, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Lightbluerain, I have added the link. Excellenc1📞 03:14, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Welcome. Lightbluerain❄ (Talk | contribs) 06:44, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Please see this page and rectify the errors

Please see this page and rectify the errors. I have all the reference links, please get them from me wherever it is required. Munna Singh is a very famous Bhojpuri singer. I don't know how to add this page to a proper Wikipedia page. Please correct it. Thanks https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Munna_Singh_(Bhojpuri_Singer) Chandan.kaushik (talk) 16:42, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Without having access to the sources, we can't tell which source should be cited in support of which statement. You'll have to do that yourself. Maproom (talk) 16:49, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

My Article is Reading More like an Advertisement

Previous discussion : Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1116#Source suggestions

Hello!

I am writing about Penn State's College of Nursing due to it's importance to future nursing students and the greater medical community. One issue I am running in to is that the article is getting declined because it reads more like an advertisement. Because I work closely with the college, I'm not sure if I am unintentionally adding any sort of biased language! I am gathering most of my information from Penn State sources, but that is simply because those sources give the most detail about the program itself, therefore allowing me to write a more complete and accurate article. Does anyone have any suggestions for ways to avoid using this language, areas I can edit, or any other advice? Here is my article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:The_Pennsylvania_State_University_College_of_Nursing Thank you so so much! Annalisemara (talk) 17:07, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

@Annalisemara: Before you start getting into the details of the program, a more glaring concern is that the draft isn't cited correctly; you're going to want to see Nick Moyes' easier referencing for beginners for how to do that.
If you're writing about this subject because of it's [sic] importance to future nursing students and the greater medical community, you're going to have an incredibly hard time keeping the writing neutral. A thing that jumps out to me as ad copy is talking about people and then listing their credentials right afterward. There shouldn't be a need to do that, as that makes it sound like you're persuading others about how wonderful the program is, which is not Wikipedia's purpose. As I have hinted it before in the previous discussion, try and find sources not connected to Penn State, because those sources have a better chance of being independent from the subject, and thus better reliable sources.
Reading your reason as to why you're creating this draft, please disclose your conflict of interest; there are details on how to do so here. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:25, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

@Annalisemara: It's easy to get burned by overeager deletionists - I quit proposing anything because of that. I would suggest that, since it has a new name, Ross and Carol Nese College of Nursing, a start class article could be created with https://www.centredaily.com/news/local/education/penn-state/article252814728.html as a reference. Let others work on your concept of an article on this tough to enroll in school. To an extent, it's possible to use Wikipedia as a PR vehicle, but it is cheating to do that. Start a new draft containing very little content. - 66.102.220.134 (talk) 17:48, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

I disagree with what IP 66 (not a Teahouse host) recommended. However, you MUST first address the query about PAID and COI on your Talk page. Neither preclude your creating an article, but if either true clearly state that on your User page. David notMD (talk) 18:57, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Notable persons, but very few in English sources as of yet? Agegnehu Teshager

Greetings! I have a question in general about notable people who don't have a lot of coverage in English sources, can i for example use Amharic sources to create articles instead? I thought about creating a article about Agegnehu Teshager the regional president of a Ethiopian region, who has been getting in the Ethiopian news a lot recently, but there are still very few English sources about him. Can i use Amharic sources? Dawit S Gondaria (talk) 18:16, 16 July 2021 (UTC) Dawit S Gondaria (talk) 18:16, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

@Dawit S Gondaria: You can use reliable sources that are not in English, though if there's an equivalent English source, the latter will be preferred (as WP:NONENG describes). Issues may arise if the sources' verifiability is called into question and not many editors are familiar with the language, but that's another issue. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:33, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

@Tenryuu Okay thanks! Dawit S Gondaria (talk) 18:43, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Draft sounds like advertisement

FYI

 – Heading added by Tenryuu.

Hello, can someone please review my page (Richmond Triangle Players) and tell me what about it makes it seem like and "advertisement" per the reviewers who have rejected my submission? Think804 (talk) 18:24, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Think804. Your draft contains entirely unreferenced promotional language like, Richmond Triangle Players was created initially as a haven for gay and lesbian actors and artists to produce work. Its audiences at the time were made up of Richmond’s community and others interested in the material. As early as its first full season, its programming was noted by the local press, and the theatre soon began to be discovered by the community at large. It is the only professional theatre company in Central Virginia and the longest continually operating one in the Mid-Atlantic region which regularly serves the LGBTQ+ community. Evaluative language like that needs to be referenced to reliable independent sources. There are other examples of unreferenced promotional language as well. The entire section about the history of the Pink triangle is superfluous since there is already a well-developed article on that topic that any interested person can read. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 18:59, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Also, your draft has not been rejected, Think804. It has just not been accepted at this time, and that is an important distinction. If you pay close attention to the core content policies Neutral point of view and Verifiability and No original research, and edit accordingly, I think your draft will be accepted. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:06, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

My article submission is failed

Hello, I'm new editor here. I created a article here but it's declined. I added so many independent source. Why it's declined? anyone say me? here is my wikipedia draft. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Shovon_Ahmed Baghdas3 (talk) 18:46, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Holy citation overkill! —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 18:49, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

@Baghdas3: I can't read Bengali, but the English sources there do not appear to demonstrate notability. This is the info that was left when the draft was declined. The English sources except for one seem to be brief fan profiles. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 20:01, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Welsh tags

Why have some edit tags started appearing in Welsh on the English Wikipedia? Murgatroyd49 (talk) 18:58, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Rwy'n dychmygu ei fod yn rhyw fath o nam? —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 19:08, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Murgatroyd49. It is a known error that is related to a language selection issue. It is being discussed in several places and people with technical skills are working to resolve it. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:11, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

That's not helpful, @Jéské Couriano.

@Murgatroyd49: Please see WP:VPT#Tags; chances are you've set your interface language to en-gb. It's being worked on, but you should change your interface language to en for the time being. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:13, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Murgatroyd49 (talk) 19:17, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Where is the "interface language" setting? --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 19:41, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

John Maynard Friedman under "Preferences" and "User Profile", if you scroll down you will see "Internationalisation". Under that is Language with a drop down box. You can choose your language preference from there. --ARoseWolf 19:45, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

TYVM, I swear I searched every line of every tab and somehow managed to miss that. "None so blind as those who will not see". I guess was expecting to see Cymraeg or similar. Dwi'n gochi nawr --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 20:04, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

John Maynard Friedman, Oh, you blush easily too? (lol) --ARoseWolf 20:21, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Links working strangely

Here, wikilinks are displaying as external links, probably because of the /. Example:[[//U//'e language]]produces [language]. Any idea how to fix this? ―Qwerfjkltalk 20:44, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

@Qwerfjkl: Insert a semicolon at the start of the link, e.g [[://U//'e language]] produces //U//'e language. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 21:04, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

That's a colon. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:13, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Correct, seems I made a typo. Not sure how I got that wrong. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 21:19, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Making an article public

Hello! I managed to move my article into Wikipedia's live space but it is not discoverable on Google. How can an article be found on Google? What are other further changes needed? Thank you! Sângeorzan Adrian (talk) 20:48, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Google indexing is not instantaneous. You need to declare your WP:COI. Regards, Ariconte (talk) 21:02, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Sângeorzan Adrian It was inadvisable for you to move the draft yourself; it failed one review at AFC. I strongly advise you to move it back for further work and an independent review. 331dot (talk) 21:08, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

An article is indexed by searchengines after it has been ok:d by a New Page Reviewer, or a certain time has passed, I think it was 90 days. Adrian Sangeorzan largely lacks inline citations, that's bad, especially for a WP:BLP, and you need to remove the WP:EL:s from the article text. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:12, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Actually, Sângeorzan Adrian never moved the draft to mainspace. It exists at Draft:Sangeorzan Adrian. Also, when instructed to remove external hyperlinks, removed refs - which I restored. DEclined once. Some sections have no references. David notMD (talk) 21:45, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

David notMD It's at Adrian Sangeorzan. 331dot (talk) 22:09, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you all so much. I will remove the external links. But how do I declare my WP:COI? And about the sections which have no references, what do I need to do about that? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sângeorzan Adrian (talk • contribs)

@Sângeorzan Adrian: You can declare your conflict of interest a couple of ways, all of which are listed here. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:34, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Draftified to Draft:Adrian Sangeorzan. However, Draft:Sangeorzan Adrian also exists (twice declined) with same content. David notMD (talk) 12:59, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Dr. Kilaparti Ramakrishna

FYI

 – This has been asked at the help desk. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:36, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Can someone please finish the Wikipedia page on Dr. Kilaparti Ramakrishna? I created it but am not sure how to finish it, add an image, or publish it. I submitted it for review, but not sure if it went through. Thank you! RameshR.18.3200 (talk) 22:17, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

@RameshR.18.3200: Welcome to the Teahouse. Please ask either here or at the Help Desk. You have already received an answer at the latter. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:37, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

SATURDAY HERALD

Do you plan to reduce the size?? 122.60.182.64 (talk) 22:38, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. Could you please clarify your question? We don't seem to have an article for Saturday Herald. Is this about editing or using Wikipedia? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:48, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Create a Wikipedia page for a pianist.

Hello, I would like to create a Wikipedia page for my piano teacher to thanks her for her hard work, but I don't know how I have to start. So I would be grateful if you can help me to create a Wikipedia page for her.

Her biography and her Instagram page links are below:

https://yaldasamadi.com/biography/

https://www.instagram.com/yalda_samadii/

Many thanks for your help, Amir Amirkm82 (talk) 23:34, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

@Amirkm82: Welcome to the Teahouse. You're going to want to read Your first article, but seeing as you're her student, you should disclose your conflict of interest, and understand that Samadi has to be notable by Wikipedia's standards. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 23:40, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Amirkm82, and welcome to the Teahouse. I understand why you might want to do something like this for your teacher, but I'm afraid that Wikipedia is a very very bad place to do this. Your attempt is likely to result in frustration and disappointment, both for you and for her. Here are some of the reasons:

1. Wikipedia will accept an article on her only if she meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability. This depends mostly not on what she has done, but on what people have published about her. Most music teachers do not meet these criteria.
2. If she is notable, and an article is accepted, the article will not be "her page" but "Wikipedia's article about her". She (and you) will not own it, and not control its contents. If it should happen that something critical or disparaging gets published about her somewhere, then that information may get added to the article, and neither you nor she can prevent that.
3. Wikipedia articles are required to be neutral summaries of what has been independently published about the subject. Nothing that you know about her should go in the article unless you can find a published source that confirms it; and your opinions (including your gratitude) should not appear in the article at all.
4. Creating an acceptable article is one of the most difficult tasks there is for an inexperienced editor in Wikipedia. Doing so about a person you have a connection with is even harder (because it will be harder for you to stay neutral).

I suggest that you read WP:NOT and WP:PROUD before you go any further. If you wish to contribute to editing Wikipedia (please do!) I recommend you start with making small changes to some of our existing six million articles before trying to create a new one; and when you do try creating an article, choose a subject that you do not have a personal connection with. After all that, you will be better placed to see if an article about your teacher is possible, and how to go about it. --ColinFine (talk) 11:07, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Create a Wikipedia page for Ojayy Wright.

 Courtesy link: Draft:Ojayy Wright

Hi Teahouse, I'm not new editor in wikipedia. I need your support to publish Ojayy Wright article, He is a popular person in Nigeria and some bilingual country as Cameroon. There are many press which talk about Ojayy Wright. Please, let us take a look on this article to manage as well its publication. Thank you.

 Bile rene (talk) 00:13, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Teahouse volunteers are here to answer questions about how to edit Wikipedia, but are not here to be co-authors. David notMD (talk) 04:06, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

How to publish this article, please?Bile rene (talk) 07:46, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Bile rene As you were told in the decline message, the draft does not show that this person meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable singer, as shown with significant coverage in independent reliable sources. You've cited announcements of their work, which does not establish notability. Please see Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 07:51, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi 331dot,

I've unterstanding very well what you told. How do I done to publish this article?

We know that the matter is not to delete an article but to engage editors to best practices and help them to publish good articles.Bile rene (talk) 08:18, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Bile rene You need to gather independent reliable sources with significant coverage of this person, showing how they meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable singer. The sources you have currently are just announcements, not significant coverage. Have you read Your First Article? As you are the one writing about the subject, we cannot do these things for you. Which aspect of the notability criteria does this person meet? 331dot (talk) 08:23, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

331dot for sources, I agree with you, but the guy is celebrity in his community and other countries as Cameroon where I'm.

The 11point is respected for notable singer on Wikipedia.Bile rene (talk) 10:46, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

The thing to understand, Bile rene, is that Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources. If you cannot find sources that are independent of Wright, are reliably published, and contain significant coverage of him (all three of those conditions), then there is literally nothing which can go in an article about him, and no article will be accepted. "Being a celebrity" is not enough, unless people have written about him. --ColinFine (talk) 11:17, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for clarification.Bile rene (talk) 11:33, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

I would like to specify the page number in Google Books

 Courtesy link: Function of several complex variables § Levi problem (ref.57 ISBN 9784431568513.)

I need p.109 for reference, and I noticed that the preview is available in Google Books. but I don't know how to link. (How to link directly to page 109.) Thank you for your help. SilverMatsu (talk) 00:29, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@SilverMatsu: It seems you already have the reference info inputted correctly. You could add the {{rp}} template right after the reference to denote a page number. I unfortunately am not aware of how to link to an anchor to page 109 of the book on Google Books. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 04:57, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@Tenryuu: Thank you for teaching me. I added {{rp}}.--SilverMatsu (talk) 05:09, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@SilverMatsu: Google Books directly supports this ... first, display the page through Goole Books, click on the "3-dots" and select "share". It will display, or you can click "copy" for it to copy to your paste buffer. For instance, this link should take you directly to page 109. Fabrickator (talk) 05:47, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@Fabrickator: Thank you for teaching me. I added url. You taught me the procedure in detail, so I think I can do it myself next time. --SilverMatsu (talk) 08:31, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Treemap upload

Hi, I am new here. I was to update treemap of Brazil exports on Economy_of_Brazil#Exports (currently it is showing 2012 treemap which is way out-of-date). Please guide me regarding this, can I just copy the license used in 2012 image and upload 2019 treemap as I am using same source (https://oec.world/en/profile/country/bra). Thank you. Droogenbroeck (talk) 01:11, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Droegenbroeck. The current diagram, Commons:File:Brazil Product Export Treemap.jpg says that it is uploaded with "Creative Commons 3.0 non-commercial license". Unfortunately a NC licence is not compatible with Commons, and I shall be raising the issue there: I fear that it will probably mean removing the diagram entirly, but I may be wrong. Looking at https://oec.world/en/resources/terms, I don't see any mention of a Creative Commons licence, though I see terms which are similar to the CC-NC licence. If I am right, then I'm afraid that you cannot use images from that site on Wikipedia (unless you can argue that they meet all of the non-free content criteria, which I doubt). --ColinFine (talk) 11:34, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

It's more complicated than that, Droegenbroeck. It appears that when these files were uploaded to Commons in 2012, their licence was questioned, and the uploader Doubleodd2 arranged that the copyright holder authorised them, though this was not recorded on that file's information page. However, my guess is that that permission would only apply to that set of images, not to any later version. I've asked about this at Commons:Commons:Village pump/Copyright#Updates to File:Brazil Product Export Treemap.jpg (and pinged you there, so you should get a notification about it in Commons). I note that Doubleodd2 doesn't seem to have been active since 2012. --ColinFine (talk) 11:58, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

ColinFine Thanks, you're very helpful. One more question, there is whole category where such images were uploaded in 2017 by some bot (BMacZeroBot) what do you think of it? Are they allowed? (Commons:Category:Images_from_the_Observatory_of_Economic_Complexity). Droogenbroeck (talk) 21:37, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

User Talk Christopher Shay

"The proposed article does not have sufficient content to require an article of its own, but it could be merged into the existing article at Symphony No. 9 (Beethoven). Since anyone can edit Wikipedia, you are welcome to add that information yourself. Thank you." And "But only immerse the source material and not as an essay" Source material? Does this mean that Wikipedia does not want my original observations about Beethoven? Christopher Shay (talk) 01:27, 17 July 2021 (UTC) Christopher Shay (talk) 01:27, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Christopher Shay, that is exactly right. We are not looking for subject matter experts to share their original research here. "OR" is anathema, because this is only a crowd-sourced encyclopedia. We only state what is found in reliable sources, so that all donated content is verifiable. If we had to individually vet every contribution, Wikipedia would be much more limited than it is today.--Quisqualis (talk) 01:45, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Need admin to create page for "Mach-Hommy"

Need admin to create page for "Mach-Hommy" Learningtakessteps (talk) 05:48, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Non-admins can also create pages. If you want to start it yourself, please read Your first article. If you would like to request that someone else make it, you can try Requested articles, though that tends to be slow. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:17, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@Tenryuu: Non-admins can't create Mach-Hommy directly, as the title has been salted. Non-admins can, however, create a draft. --David Biddulph (talk) 06:24, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@David Biddulph: Ah, thanks for letting me know. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:43, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@Learningtakesteps: - you can create a proto-article in your sandbox. When you think it's ready to be moved to mainspace, you can ask for assistance at the administrator's noticeboard. An admin will move the article into mainspace if it is in a fit condition to be moved, or if not they may give you feedback as to where improvement is needed. Mjroots (talk) 13:45, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

How can I

How can I return back Wikipedia delete articles Wikicontributority (talk) 08:53, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Wikicontributority Depends. If the article-subject doesn't meet the demands of WP:N, you can't. But if after reading WP:N you conclude "Yeah, I have those sources, no problem!", then you can give it a go. Start with WP:YFA. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:08, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

All different types of page protection

May I know what are all different types of page protection on Wikipedia? 42.60.18.87 (talk) 09:10, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

hi ip user! the types of protections can be found over at WP:PROTECTION. in short, the important ones are pending changes-protected (white), semi-protection (silver), extended-protection (blue), create-protected (sky blue, also known as salting), template-protected (pink), and fully-protected (gold) pages.   melecie   t 09:17, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Dark mode?

Hey, its Solar again. Interested if there is a dark mode you could put on your personal CSS, which I am positive does exist. Please direct me to the code I should C&P into. Thanks! (Oo and I forgot the name of the CSS, is it 'Personal.css'? Lol) -Solarrrr... Send a message to Solar? Tappy tap tap! ⏰Time: 09:15, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@SsSsSølarRadia -75 To enable dark mode (currently it under testing), go to your preferences > Gadgets > scroll all the way down to Testing and development > tick    Dark mode: Use a light text on dark background color scheme > click Save at the bottom > refresh the page. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 09:59, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@Paper9oll Hmm, does this apply to all wiki skins? I went there and saw nothing of the selected feature. -Solarrrr... Send a message to Solar? Tappy tap tap! ⏰Time: 10:10, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@SsSsSølarRadia -75: Dark mode is currently supported for the following Skins: Vector, MonoBook,Modern and Minerva Victor Schmidt (talk) 10:32, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@SsSsSølarRadia -75: The skins supported are as mentioned by Victor above, to see the changes, you would need to go to either the homepage or any other articles, for some reasons the mode doesn't work on preferences. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 11:42, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@SsSsSølarRadia -75 You can also try User:MusikAnimal/nightpedia. @Paper9oll No JavaScript is loaded on the Preferences page (that is available through the gadgets or user scripts). ―Qwerfjkltalk 12:22, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@Qwerfjkl Ah I see, thanks letting me know. I can't figure out why it doesn't work for quite some time and I just ignored it 😅. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 12:32, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@Paper9oll well I guess that concludes this convo, since I like the skin Timeless instead. -Solarrrr... Send a message to Solar? Tappy tap tap! ⏰Time: 18:00, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Can I become extended and confirmed user

Hiii editor I wanna ask, I created Changdeva Temple article, tried to contribute in some articles. Is I'm now eligible to become a extended & confirmed user. And why no one still gave me barnstar so far, I'm kidding, if no one gave no problem. And I want to tell about my favourite sports, favourite sportsmans, about my favourite subject, favourite statesman, which is Abraham Lincoln in my talk page with colourful animation. Guide me to how to do that. Huge Earth (talk) 09:47, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@Huge Earth To get extended confirmed user rights, your account would need to be least 30 days old and has made at least 500 edits. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 09:56, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@Paper9oll: My account is 2 monts old and I did lods of edits. So can I become E&C user??? & You only gave half ans, my 2nd questions ans is not given so far.Huge Earth (talk) 10:09, 17 July 2021 (UT

@Huge Earth: According to XTools, you made 474 edits so far. Thats a lot, but not quite at the 500 requirement. Regarding Barnstars, I believe noone has considered giving you one so far. Its quite rare that you get one - my averge is about 1 per three months. Regarding the last thing, I do not believe it is possible to create animated content for talkpages (apart from .gif files) with wikitext. Victor Schmidt (talk) 10:28, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@Huge Earth: Currently, your account only met the 1st condition (at least 30 days old) but you have not fulfil the 2nd condition (at least 500 edits). And as mentioned by Victor above, you currently have made total of 474 edits hence you're still 26 edits away from fulfilling the 2nd condition. Once you fulfil the 2nd condition, the system will automatically give you the user rights in which you should receive notification from the system informing on it. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 11:49, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Difference between source and visual editing

May I know what is a difference between source and visual editing? 42.60.18.87 (talk) 09:54, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

See WP:TUTORIAL. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:02, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Creating a page in Wikipedia

How can I create a page for a public figure celebrity woman? Salekin62 (talk) 10:22, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

hi Salekin62 and welcome to the teahouse! please see WP:Your first article and WP:Notability (people). once you've done so you may now compile reliable sources to create your draft in say, User:Salekin62/Sandbox. happy editing!   melecie   t 10:25, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

See "Create a Wikipedia page for a pianist." (above) for advice to new editors who hope to create an article. David notMD (talk) 12:57, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Can be upgraded to a higher level of draft?

hello everyone!

I've been working on this page for a long time, creating improvements until I reached a really good result in my opinion.

Can I finally request to have it upgraded to a higher level of draft according to you? Nscent (talk) 13:03, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Nscent Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. There are not "levels" of drafts; you have resubmitted your draft and it is pending review to be formally placed in the encyclopedia as an article. Those are the only two possibilities. 331dot (talk) 13:22, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

331dot Hello 331dot, thanks for the reply, alright then I will wait for someone to evaluate it, I really hope this is the time to make it an article :) Nscent (talk) 13:27, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

You have not shown how they meet the criteria at WP:NARTIST and press releases are not suitably reliable sources. Theroadislong (talk) 13:39, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Using urlencode in templates

How do you use {{urlencode:{{{1}}} }} without it encoding {{{1}}} literally? ―Qwerfjkltalk 13:54, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@Qwerfjkl: I'm not exacly clear what you're asking here. {{{1}}} is automatically replaced with whatever you set as the first unnamed parameter when transcluding a page. Is this related to User:Qwerfjkl/scripts/template (just had a peek through your edit history)? If so all you need to do is provide whatever you want the {{{1}}} to be replaced with as a parameter when transcluding it, e.g. {{User:Qwerfjkl/scripts/template|foo}} produces:

• Foo: (script • edit • history) • (doc • edit) | .

192.76.8.91 (talk) 20:46, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Oops, I forgot to purge the page and it was giving me a bad title error. Thanks! ―Qwerfjkltalk 20:59, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@Qwerfjkl: No problem, by the way your edit link isn't working because you've got the URL in the wrong format. To generate a link to the edit form you need to either use [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title={{urlencode:{{{1}}}|WIKI}}&action=edit edit] or [[Special:Edit/{{{1}}}|edit]]. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 21:01, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, that was my next problem to solve. ―Qwerfjkltalk 21:06, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Fixed two typos in the reply by 192.76.8.91 (: --CiaPan (talk) 21:25, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Bulgars Article

Hello Editors,

 I have a concern about the Bulgars article for a long time now. It's been a debate on Wikipedia for a while also,and conclusions were made,which I believe it is not meeting with the real data and all sources around the world. I will point on the first sentence on the article which I believe is missleading. 

X = The Bulgars (also Bulghars, Bulgari, Bolgars, Bolghars, Bolgari,[1] Proto-Bulgarians[2]) were Turkic semi-nomadic warrior tribes that flourished in the Pontic–Caspian steppe and the Volga region during the 7th century. I find this first sentence on this article partially correct,by this means I want to say and point out that the Turkic origins of the Bulgaris,currently and since the begining of researching the Bulgars origins,this is the most common accepted theory,hypothesis of their origins. However it is not a fact. What I am trying to say is that the article begins as the origins are proven fact with evidence behind,which is not at this moment. Many historians,scholars and linguist have been debating and accepting common theories of their origins. The turkic one is one of the theories which is accepted,but we cannot disregard the others too as the Iranic theory. I would like to have that sentence edited to more neutral view,since right now it seems that the editors of the authors see the Turkic theory as a fact. Down below the article they have added the theories of other origins,however the sentence they began the article claims as the Bulgars were turkic. It seems its missunderstood. What I want to see is :

Y= The Bulgars (also Bulghars, Bulgari, Bolgars, Bolghars, Bolgari,[1] Proto-Bulgarians[2]) were semi-nomadic warrior tribes that flourished in the Pontic–Caspian steppe and the Volga region during the 7th century.The origins of the Bulgars is not yet fully understood,but they are many theories and hypothesis in existance about it.

At present, the main theories about the origins of the Bulgars are: (1) Turkic origins, (2) Sarmatian origins or Iranian, and (3) mixed, Turkic-Sarmatian origins. Many other theories have been put forward in the past, but have subsequently been shown unsupportable.

If u follow up from 2006 there are plenty of sources which of were taken in considartion taking in the origins and the history of the Bulgaris. In the present there is minority source of Bulgarian scholars or historians implemented into the article ,because simple the Wikipedia Editors on that artice find them Nationalistic point of view or anti-turkic propaganda.

I will really appreciate your time looking upon this request and take necessary actions to make that article less missleading for the public. Thank you!

Best Regards, Nikolay. SvetiNikolay (talk) 14:29, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

It appears you have requested at Talk:Bulgars a specific wording change. That is the proper place to present changes to this semi-protected article. Also appears that at times you are not signed in, so edits appear from IP:95.103.11.6. Please remember to always log in. David notMD (talk) 14:46, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Defamatory bio

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_G._Jacoby 72.218.131.88 (talk) 14:35, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

100% agree. There was a neutral-worded version in July 2020, 'whitewashed' (all mention of sexual misconduct removed) in Nov 2020, subsequently changed to a defamatory version that went beyond NPOV. I restored the July 2020 version but kept one of the recent refs. David notMD (talk) 15:05, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Need guidance in amending my draft

Hi, I have a written a draft on Myc-induced synthetic lethality taking inspiration from other peoples Wikipedia drafts. I have supported my draft with a good number of references. However, My draft is rejected for the reason being that it sounds like an essay. Also, I have written the draft with a neutral point of view. I have no clue as to what fails my draft as none of the sentences are pointed to support the rejection. Hence, it is challenging to improve the draft. Could I get some guidance on this please? Thanks, Vidhula Vidhula A (talk) 14:42, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello Vidhula A and welcome to the Teahouse. This draft seems to contain some of your own research and conclusions; this is not allowed, per Wikipedia:No original research. See also Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_publisher_of_original_thought. It's an interesting and very detailed draft but you shouldn't include your own research or conclusions here in articles. Rubbish computer (Talk: Contribs) 15:41, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Thanks for your prompt reply. The draft does not contain any of my research or conclusions. I have just made a compilation from other studies the references of which are included. Hence there is no original research involved. That's why I am confused. I am trying to edit the draft but every time the same comment comes back. Could you please specifically tell me which lines or paragraph makes it look like it's my research and conclusion and that this is an original research? At least that will help me improve. Thanks, Vidhula

Help with footnotes

I have written the text of my narrative in sandbox. I am now trying to enter my citations. I have read the directions on about how to enter a citation, but I wasn't able to follow or understand them. I need more detailed step by step guidance about how to enter a footnote. Orangecholo (talk) 14:59, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Orangecholo Check these guides:

WP:TUTORIAL

WP:REFBEGIN

User:Nick Moyes/Easier Referencing for Beginners Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:03, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

See List of civil engineers for examples of what articles on civil engineers do and do not contain. WAY too much of what you have drafted is unreferenced laudatory content. All that must be removed. David notMD (talk) 15:17, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

am an amateur

how to start and go on properly??? Zahinian (talk) 15:28, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello Zahinian and welcome to the Teahouse. You can find a general introduction with useful links at Help:Getting started. Rubbish computer (Talk: Contribs) 15:33, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@Zahinian: Welcome to the Teahouse. You may want to try this interactive tutorial. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:06, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

How can i submit a draft page?

 Courtesy link: Draft:Badhangarhi temple
i have made a draft page on badhangarhi temple and i want to submit it ,how can i submit it? Yakku3 (talk) 16:07, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@Yakku3: Welcome to the Teahouse. You can submit the draft for review with {{subst:submit}}, but in its current state it's almost certainly going to be declined with the references you're using. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:10, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@Tenryuu:then which type of references i can use because there is very lass data about this temple. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yakku3 (talk • contribs)

@Yakku3: If there are no reliable sources about this temple, then it isn't notable enough to be on Wikipedia, and no amount of writing will help. (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.) —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:03, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi Yakku3, you can find out more about references at Wikipedia:Reliable sources. If there isn't significant coverage of the temple in reliable sources, then there shouldn't be an article written about it, because this means it is not notable. Cheers, Rubbish computer (Talk: Contribs) 17:03, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Don't start every sentence with a date

Hi folks. There's a guideline, policy or essay on writing style that I can't find which essentially states: "don't start every sentence with a date" ("on 1 January 2021…", "on 4 January…" etc.). I've been doing web searches with different search terms but to no avail. Does anyone have an idea where I could find it? Kind regards, Robby.is.on (talk) 16:25, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Duh, I searched for ages and now that I posted here, I found it near instantly: WP:PROSELINE. Nevermind. :-) Robby.is.on (talk) 16:29, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

How to submit changes to a protected page

A page that I would like to update is currently semi-protected, the page is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_series_database Dirk Beetstra has told me that should prepare a draft called TimescaleDB but I am not clear if I should copy the page and modify the content as the draft, or create a draft containing the changes.

There are two sections I would like to change. The first is the table of Timeseries databases, to add TimescaleDB. The citations for this will include existing references [7] and [10] as per InfluxDB and will add a new citation 14

The second is to add additional citation, 14 (and possibly another one or two). The citation I would like to add is this one, proceedings from the Cray User Group 2018 where they state that they added TimescaleDB as the preferred time series database for PMDB (Power Management Database). https://cug.org/proceedings/cug2018_proceedings/includes/files/pap174s2-file2.pdf as I believe that this should provide sufficient evidence that TimescaleDB warrants inclusion on that page.

One other question: would either of these articles be considered appropriate secondary citations? https://www.dnsfilter.com/blog/why-dnsfilter-replaced-influxdb-with-timescaledb or https://labs.consol.de/development/2018/10/31/introduction-to-timescale-db.html

How should I proceed please? Lorilanc (talk) 16:43, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Variability of inclusion criteria according to language

I have been referred to this page by Theroadislong.

I had posted on that reviewer's Talk page the following comment and question:

On 15 July 2021, you wrote (above, in Draft: Joseph Ribas (French author)): "other countries Wikipedia have quite different inclusion criteria". It seems surprising that the criteria for publication of Wikipedia articles can vary according to the language in which they are written. This appears to mean that users of Wikipedia in one language may be viewing articles which are of a quality inferior to that of corresponding articles in other languages. Yet Wikipedia is obviously a global "brand". All articles, regardless of language, seem to have a common format and appearance, a common (globe-like) logo, and a common domain name (wikipedia.org). Users might therefore be forgiven for thinking that all articles, regardless of language, are included on the basis of common, global criteria. I don't underestimate the scale of difficulty in securing agreement on, and then enforcing, a common, global set of inclusion criteria. But shouldn't the adoption of global criteria at least be an aim? Perhaps it is. But I've searched, and I haven't yet found a statement to that effect. (None of the above is meant to imply criticism of the criteria that are used for inclusion of Wikipedia articles in English.)

Theroadislong said that I "might get a more informed response" here, at the WP:Teahouse. So any response would be appreciated. Alan Mattingly (talk) 17:15, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@Alan Mattingly: Welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia policies and guidelines are decided by consensus by its editors and not by the Wikimedia Foundation, who provides the software and appearance of the project. As editors tend to stick to one (or two) different languages, the overall consensus in each Wikipedia will differ. The English Wikipedia has more stringent criteria because it is the most viewed (and edited) language out of the ones available, and there's a sizeable portion of the userbase that can enforce said criteria. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:25, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@Tenryuu 🐲: Thanks for your swift response. I am probably out of my depth here because I know relatively little about Wikipedia, but it somehow doesn't seem right that users of Wikipedia pages which are viewed less frequently (because they are written in less-used languages) tend to be offered articles which are judged by less stringent criteria. Don't editors from different language zones confer in some way from time to time to try to make their respective consensuses consistent across the globe? - Alan Mattingly (talk)

@Alan Mattingly: This is unfortunately one of the downsides of a volunteer project. Editors may sometimes interact with other users in a more global venue on Meta, but that's a dramatically smaller proportion of users on here, who solely peruse the English Wikipedia, and none of its sister projects like Wikibooks, Wikivoyage, or even Wikisource. (Please remember to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~) so that your username and timestamp show up in the signature.) —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:45, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@Tenryuu 🐲: Fair enough. But it's to be hoped that there is at least a set of minimum global standards that editors in all languages are expected to comply with, and a process for trying to enforce those standards. (Incidentally, when I started this thread, I was told not to sign with tildes...).Alan Mattingly (talk) 06:59, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@Alan Mattingly: The most likely way to do so would be to go make a proposal at Meta, but even there I don't find it likely to be accepted, editor discretion and all,
Opening questions are designed to sign on the asker's behalf; all subsequent comments are not. This is because a fair amount of newcomers don't know how to sign, and some don't leave follow-up comments. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 13:07, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Edits to the Palma Sola Article Reverted

The information on the Palma Sola massacre which took place in Dominican Republic, which I came across in my research, is biased and uninformed and omits key points behind the religious community which was massacred. The current entry also misrepresents the spiritual leader who founded the movement. Why were the edits reverted? Brooklynctitizen (talk) 17:31, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@Brooklynctitizen: The edits were reverted here for being unsourced. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:33, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

I'm happy to add sources. The only reason I made this edit is that I was alarmed that the two sources referenced are travel guides written by white Americans. How is this a credible source? Travel guides are not historically accurate yet this information stands though it is biased and omits key information about this movement and its leader. This is misleading for any reader. Brooklynctitizen (talk) 17:47, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@Brooklynctitizen: This sort of discussion is best had on the article talk page. You will still need sources for what you wish to add, and any other sources are not vaporized just because additional ones exist. If you have further comment, please edit this existing section, instead of creating additional sections. 331dot (talk) 17:59, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

There is a book called Peasants and Religion: A Socioeconomic Study of Dios Olivorio and the Palma Sola Religion in the Dominican Republic that may well be an excellent source. Brooklynctitizen, Wikipedia articles are works in progress, many of them have weaknesses, and many thousands of editors work every day to improve them. You are right that travel books are mediocre sources for history, but that is their nature and has nothing to do with the race or nationality of their authors. The solution is to add better sources, summarize those sources, and improve the article until the travel books are no longer needed. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:11, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

This is a new process for me so I will add final comments here. In terms of process why didn't Wikipedia simply alert me that the edits would be reverted if the sources were not added? Regarding the nationality and race of the travel authors it is absolutely relevant considering that this was an Afro-Latino resistance movement in response to the American occupation of Dominican Republic. It is neglectful to not include that Liborio was hunted and murdered by US marines. White washing history is not truthful and honest and I would think Wiki would strive for truthfulness. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brooklynctitizen (talk • contribs) This is a new process for me so I will add final comments here. In terms of process why didn't Wikipedia simply alert me that the edits would be reverted if the sources were not added? Regarding the nationality and race of the travel authors it is absolutely relevant considering that this was an Afro-Latino resistance movement in response to the American occupation of Dominican Republic. It is neglectful to not include that Liborio was hunted and murdered by US marines. White washing history is not truthful and honest and I would think Wiki would strive for truthfulness. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brooklynctitizen (talk • contribs)

White American authors are perfectly capable of accurately reporting on and criticizing the actions of the U.S. Marine Corps, but a diversity of reliable sources is a good thing. You are now just as much a Wikipedia editor as any of us, and are welcome to get to work on improving that article, in accordance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:32, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Every new editor finds the guidelines less than ideal. You have access to a personalized watch list in the top menu. That way, when you log in, click on your watch list and you will see a mention of the most recent edit, including reverts. General rule is reference as you go, rather than edit and add refs later. Some people compose in their Sandbox, then paste the completed (and ref'd) work when happy with it. David notMD (talk) 21:22, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Ajoku Gift Best

 Ajoku gift best (talk) 17:52, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@Ajoku gift best: Welcome to the Teahouse. Did you have a question about using or editing Wikipedia? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:56, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

obituary for a source

Can an obituary be used as a source? 73.167.238.120 (talk) 19:23, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Absolutely! As long as it is a reliable, published, source.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 19:43, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Actually, in many cases, the answer might be "no", but that would depend on who wrote the obituary. If it was one submitted by someone connected to the person the obituary is about, then it would likely be considered a self-published source and have very little value as a source, particularly if it were used to support a claim about some other third-party. If, on the other hand, it was something written by an independent third party published in a publication with an established record of editorial control, then perhaps it would be OK to cite. For example, if the entertainment writer at a major newspaper writes an "obituary-like" article about a movie actor who has just died, then that might have some value to Wikipedia; however, if the "obituary" is just a sort of "press release" type of thing submitted by the actor's family or the actor's representatives, then that probably has little if any value, and could only be used very restrictively if even at all. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:00, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Marchjuly, the news source I read more often than any other is the Guardian (theguardian.com). As this is pretty ambitious in its coverage and doesn't require payment or even nag intolerably for it (I happily pay anyway), it seems to be a favorite of many editors. It very commonly has long and informative (and, in ways that are seldom useful for Wikipedia, fascinating) obituaries written by friends and acquaintances of the deceased. (This is made quite clear: "As a BM colleague, I came to appreciate his achievements...", etc.) Warts and all; but, unsurprisingly, the warts aren't dwelt on. The Independent is similar. But both the Guardian and the Independent also publish obituaries by people whose publications for the respective newspapers suggest that they were chosen not because they were personally acquainted (they may not have been) but because they were/are skilled writers of obituaries in the relevant area. (See as examples the obituaries of John Glashan here and here.) I presume that these newspapers have high expectations of their obituarists, independent or otherwise, so I'm happy to cite any obituary that appears in them. -- Hoary (talk) 00:17, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

I look for obituaries to find out when a person died and, if the person wasn't controversial, I believe the basic information, such as how many children the person had. But some people have been known to disown adult children, or exaggerate what they have accomplished, so you can't always trust what's in an obituary, because some people write their own, to make sure it says what they want it to say. That being said, I usually trust straight-forward obits, that tell a death date, and where a person lived and worked. Karenthewriter (talk) 23:11, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

First time new article contributor

When writing about music artists what are the best practices for sourcing their music? I have a few more I would like to write about and need help making sure I source reliable sources

I should have checked the guidelines further for more informations on which sources could be used and which ones could not. When I was doing the research on Rawle Harding I did a google search and there are articles written about his music however, i assumed when it came to listing his music a link to the source would be appropriate. I realize now it is not a reliable source. I have since removed those sources and added others. Kaimake (talk) 23:52, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Question

A few minutes ago I wrote a page about a client who is the founder of a fashion brand, some guy removed it. The reason was that there was promotional content in it, and if there was none at all. Letterwriter2021 (talk) 23:56, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@Letterwriter2021: Welcome to the Teahouse. If you're writing on behalf of a client, you must disclose your paid relationship on your user page; you may use {{paid}} to do so. I also noticed that you seem to refer yourself as "we"; take this as a reminder that Wikipedia accounts are for one person and one person alone; sharing accounts is not allowed.

If you haven't, please read Your first article, as it gives details on how to write one, and go through the Articles for Creation process and make a draft. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:03, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Letterwriter2021 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You had edited your user page, which is not article space or space to draft an article, but a place to tell about yourself as a Wikipedia editor. New users cannot (and are advised not to) create new articles directly, and should use Articles for Creation. That's not why your draft was deleted- it was considered promotional because it just told about the person. Wikipedia is not for merely telling about someone. Wikipedia articles must do more, they must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a person, showing how they meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person. Please see Your First Article. Successfully creating a new article is one of the hardest tasks to perform on Wikipedia; it's good to first get some experience editing existing articles, to get a feel for how Wikipedia operates and what is expected of article content. Using the new user tutorial will help as well. 331dot (talk) 00:05, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

We as a team make a client page, that’s what I meant. Can I restore a deleted article? and another question, if I put a paid article, do I have to pay some money to wikipedia and will that article get a place on google as a paid article?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Letterwriter2021 (talk • contribs)

Letterwriter2021 Wikipedia does not charge for creating articles. Wikipedia also has no interest in helping you enhance search results for your clients; Google results are a side benefit, which might benefit you and your client, but that's not our mission. We are here to build an encyclopedia of human knowledge, not to aid in marketing efforts. There are ways to recover deleted content, but I doubt anyone will do so. 331dot (talk) 00:10, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

We are writing about a person who is already recognizable, I wonder where that tag for paid content is placed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Letterwriter2021 (talk • contribs)

Letterwriter2021 If they are already recognizable and meet the special definition of a notable person that Wikipedia has, it would be better for you to allow independent editors to take note of this person in reliable sources and choose on their own to write about them. You should also be aware that a Wikipedia article is not necessarily desirable. You may place the paid declaration on your user page. 331dot (talk) 00:19, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

What exactly is the mark for paid? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Letterwriter2021 (talk • contribs)

You may simply write a statement which says "I am being paid by (whomever is paying you) to make Wikipedia edits about (your client or clients). 331dot (talk) 00:28, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

The paid declaration goes on your User page. Also, please 'sign' your comments by typing four of ~ at the end. And stop referring to yourself as "we". You as an individual have an account. You as an individual are responsible for what is written from that account. You may be working with other people ("a team"), but the account is for one person to use. Lastly, Wikipedia has articles, not pages. Once an article is accepted, any editor can amend it as long as references support the changes. No one 'owns' articles. David notMD (talk) 01:35, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Letterwriter2021, and welcome to the Teahouse. I suspect that some of the responses above have appeared a bit hostile. The fact is that (aside from an unlikely degree of altruism), if somebody is paying you to put them on Wikipedia then they are paying you for promotion. Promotion is fine many places on the web, but it is fundamentally inconsistent with the purposes of Wikipedia. You are permitted to edit as a pair editor, provided you make the necessary declarations; but you can and should expect your work to be carefully checked to make sure it complies with Wikipedia's policies. As 331dot indicated, a Wikipedia article is not in any way for the benefit of its subject - any benefit they may derive is incidental, as far as Wikipedia is concerned. Note also that Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources. Any article should be based almost 100% on what such independent sources say, not on what the subject says or wants to say. And once an article is accepted, your and your client's involvement in it will be limited to suggesting changes: neither of you will have control of the content. --ColinFine (talk)

David notMD My problem is what I will call and whom. So your discussion is worth nothing. Thanks to the others for the answers. Greetings

Notability from video and audio

Can a youtube video or a radio program/podcast ever be used to demonstrate the notability of an article? I think there's a guideline or essay about how Wikipedia has a bias toward digital news rather than books and newspapers, but I don't remember what it was called. TipsyElephant (talk) 02:44, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

For YouTube, only if the source (1) was produced by an outlet we would otherwise consider reliable and (2) uploaded to that outlet's verified channel. Otherwise, no.

For radio programmes/podcasts, again yes if it was produced by an outlet we would otherwise consider reliable, otherwise no. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 02:54, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

How to get Rollbacker

 King Rudra 03:14, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, King Rudra. In order to gain the rollback user right, an editor must have a good record of differentiating vandalism from other types of problematic edits. Pease read Wikipedia:Rollback for how to apply. But why would an administrator give an advanced permission to an editor who has "officially retired" posted on their user page? Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:39, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Also, what's with the 'invisible' content on your User page? Suggest your Sandbox would be a better place for creating a draft. David notMD (talk) 08:51, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

DYK help

I have been working on a DYK piece for the page The Anarchist Cookbook and it appears I made a mess of things. Can someone please lend me a hand of fixing the subpage? Etriusus (talk) 05:46, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@Etriusus: Happy to help, but what exactly do you need help with? I don't understand what you mean by "subpage"; mainspace articles aren't supposed to have them. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 06:55, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@Ganbaruby: I assume Etriusus is talking about the first section of Talk:The Anarchist Cookbook, where there are DYK errors introduced. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 12:56, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@Ganbaruby: and @Tenryuu: I need issue with the section of DYK where it is saying that there are errors within the nomination. I.e. ""The Anarchist Cookbook" is not a valid article name; check for bad characters,"User:Etriusus" is not a valid user name; check for bad characters. Error: no articles specified". It was my error in calling it a subpage. Etriusus (talk) 18:52, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@Etriusus: Hello Etriusus, welcome to the teahouse. Did you know nominations are supposed to be created on separate pages in template space, rather than on the talk page of the article. Follow the instructions at Template talk:Did you know#Instructions for nominators, which will take you through the process of creating the subpage in template space. You should just be able to copy across all the stuff you filled in on the talk page. If you need extra help you'll probably get better responses at Wikipedia talk:Did you know where there will be a lot more people familiar with the process. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 19:00, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Etriusus, I've fixed all the stuff for you. Please see Template:Did you know nominations/The Anarchist Cookbook. ─ The Aafī ^(talk) 19:17, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Uploading of Video Game Cover Art Screenshots

Can I upload a higher-quality and more up-to-date video game cover art screenshot to a Wikipedia article about the game? This is the Wikipedia article I would like to add updated video game cover art for. As you can see on the page, the current cover art still has a "Rating Pending" ESRB label in the corner. I found a replacement image online with the correct ESRB rating (E for Everyone), and would like to upload the image to replace the existing one. With this use case in mind, I would also like to know if it still qualifies as Fair Use in a manner consistent with Wikipedia's non-free content criteria, as I saw the fact that the existing image is of a low resolution (256 × 359) mentioned on the file's page (linked in image below), and the image I found online is of a much higher resolution (1539 x 2154). From what I understand, the image I found online is a user-uploaded scan of the cover art, and can be found here. I am using the VisualEditor.

TheDoctor50 (talk) 06:16, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@TheDoctor50: Yes, you may replace the image, but I would find a version without the back cover on it. Fair use allows copyrighted images in articles only for identification purposes, which is what the image is being used for here (the full list of criteria is at WP:NFCCP; all 10 must be met). Note that the low resolution is intentional because readers only need to be able to identify the game, and should not be able to take that image for other purposes (see WP:IMAGERES). There's a bot that goes around resizing images, but that takes a while, so I always resize it myself when uploading a free use file. As for how exactly to replace the image, go to the file's description page at File:Nicktoons - Battle for Volcano Island Coverart.png, scroll to the "File history" section, and click "Upload a new version of this file". Then, go into VisualEditor on that page, edit the big template under the "Summary" header, and update the "Source" parameter to the URL where the image is hosted. A bot will delete the now-unused older version. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 06:48, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Auto confirmation

hi just wanted to find out why my account has not been auto confirmed yet? I've made over ten edits now. My account has been active over 2 weeks. So when will it get auto confirmed? will we receive any email regarding confirmation? Also, once its auto confirmed, will I be able to create a new article and publish it live overnight? thank you @vash171 Vash171 (talk) 06:17, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@Vash171: You have 8 edits so far, all of which are visible on your contributions list. While you can theoretically directly create articles in mainspace once you are autoconfirmed, I strongely adivse against it, because new articles are expected to meet most of the content guidelines, in particular, they must be well-sourced, have a claim of notability, neutral and not a copyright violation. New articles who don't meet the content criteria for articles often end up in draftspace anyway, so there is nothing preventing you from creating a draft, perhaps with the Article Wizard, until you demonstrateable have the experience in how to create new articles. Victor Schmidt (talk) 06:38, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Be aware that articles which bypassed Articles for Creation review are reviewed by the New Pages Patrol, which may execute a Speedy delete, kick back to draft or start an Articles for Deletion. Also, such articles are 'invisible' to Google and other search engines until either the NPP review or 90 days. David notMD (talk) 08:56, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Best practice for embedded irrelevant listing inside article

Hey! Still somewhat new and nonconfident with removing content from articles (I'm want to make sure I'm not making mistakes), but I'm pretty sure that the listing on phone models at Always on Display in the history section is unnecessary. I feel like, if the models shouldn't be removed, they should at least be rewritten (e.g. Google Pixel 2 through 5; or Galaxy S7 series and later.)

The article also has other issues, but I'm not sure how to clean it the best. aaPle (talk) 06:47, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@AaPle: You may bring up your concerns at the talk page of that article and wait for other editors interested in the subject to give feedback. Or, you may be bold and make the change! If you do get reverted, follow the WP:BRD process to reach a consensus. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 07:00, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

I made a template in my sandbox. How do I move it to the mainspace?

I created a template on the Regional Councils of France in my sandbox. Can I/someone move it to the mainspace? Or is there any formality for making templates? Excellenc1📞 07:26, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@Excellenc1 I think you can move it to the template namespace without any formality. ―Qwerfjkltalk 08:16, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

What is a template namespace? Will it be User:Excellenc1/Template:Regional Councils (France) or Template:Regional Councils (France)? Excellenc1📞 08:21, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

The latter. (It's the, not a, template namespace.) -- Hoary (talk) 08:36, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

I have created this template. Can someone please review it (if something is to be fixed in it)? Excellenc1📞 09:24, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@Excellenc1 I just checked it, it looked fine except for the documentation, which was at User:Excellenc1/doc, so I moved it to Template:Regional Councils (France)/doc, and fixed the transclusion from {{User:Excellenc1/doc}} to {{Documentation}}. ―Qwerfjkltalk 11:16, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Teahouse editors, please have a look at some unanswered peer reviews

Hi all. Teahouse is known for its kind and gentle introduction to editing. We have a larger than usual amount of peer reviews that are lingering without any response at all, sometimes for several months. In my experience most peer reviews are from new editors or editors hoping to improve the quality of their editing. I think most reviews would benefit from the kind and helpful feedback of teahouse regulars and implore anyone who reads this to at least have a look at the list of unanswered reviews (WP:PRWAITING) and ideally respond to two or three of them. Many thanks, Tom (LT) (talk) 07:53, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Tom (LT), I've only had one experience with peer review, and it wasn't one that I enjoyed. I didn't want to clobber the editor (who no doubt had meant well) for what they had written, particularly as it had (in my opinion) damaged what I had written, but I believed that faithfulness to the facts and fairness to the biographee had to trump reticence about "ownership", or encouragement or welcome, so clobber I did. If I hadn't already been familiar with the cited material, I'd have had to spend more time looking for it and digesting it than I'd have been willing to spend. Did I go about this the wrong way? -- Hoary (talk) 08:52, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Issues with verification for my article

Greetings, I recently joined the Wikipedia to contribute whenever is necessary. Because I recently got my patent accepted, I thought it was worthy of mention, especially in Nigeria where Intellectual Property is hardly understood or mentioned.

I wrote about myself, in what I think was a very modest way but two reviewers said it lacked reference. As I said, Nigeria patent and design registry, though affiliated to WIPO, don't give links for accepted patents but document from the government showing patent acceptance with patent number. I have my patent document.

I would like to get a clearer reason why the article failed to pass the review and what I can do to be accepted. Thanks Mirep1404 (talk) 09:27, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Check out WP:COI and WP:CITE. - AssumeGoodWraith (talk | contribs) 10:20, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict)@Mirep1404: Please review WP:AUTOBIO and undertsnad that a Wikipedia article might not nessearely be desireable. To add to your question, anything on Wikipedia must be verifyable, in particular when writing about living people, because we are not interested in a rerun of the Seigenthaler incident. Victor Schmidt (talk) 10:21, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi Mirep1404. It sounds like you might be (slightly) misunderstanding what Wikipedia is about. Perhaps if you take a look at Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything, you might gain a better understanding about what types of subjects are generally considered OK to try and create an article about. You probably should also take a look at Wikipedia:Autobiography and Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing for additional information. Please try and understand not being written about on Wikipedia doesn't necessarily mean you haven't already or won't someday accomplish some pretty great things; it's just means that perhaps at this time it might be too soon for an article to be written about you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:26, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy: Draft:Jeswills Eleke. What is mandatory is not confirmation of your accomplishments (patent), but rather that you have reached a level of notability in your field of expertise that other people have published articles about you. Also, what you submitted as refs 4-7 are not valid, as all refs must be to publication (print, web, etc.), not just statements of fact. David notMD (talk) 14:35, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Mirep1404 Wikipedia is not the only way to present information online. You might want to consider starting a personal website, or register a blog account. That way you would be able to tell those in Nigeria about patents and intellectual property, without worrying about following the strict rules of an online encyclopedia.

I hope that you will continue to contribute to Wikipedia by means of editing articles on subjects that you are familiar with, after you find good references that verify what you are adding to the articles. Congratulations on receiving a patent. Karenthewriter (talk) 18:05, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

If topic gets stolen, then...?

If I am making a draft on a topic, but at the same time another user made an article on the same topic, my draft will get declined. But then all my work will get wasted. Is there any method to prevent it? (This happened to me few days ago, I was creating a draft on Cap Écologie but at the same time, another user created an article on the topic Cap Écologie. It didn't affect me much because my draft was short.) Excellenc1📞 10:22, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi Excellenc1. You might want to take a look at Wikipedia:Ownership of content for more details, but basically we as editors don't really have any claim of ownership of the articles we create and edit in the sense that we can stop people from taking what we create and reusing it in some way (for reference, we really don't even own our user pages). Every time we hit the "Publish changes" button we are basically agreeing to allow others to do whatever they want with it as long as they comply with the terms of Wikipedia:Text of Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License; in other words, we "own" the copyright over the content we create, but are agreeing to let others reuse it for any purpose as long as they say where they got the content from. So, while I can understand how what happened might be a bit frustrating, I wouldn't consider it a case of stealing (at least not as you seem to be using the term). The only possible problem I can see with what has happened is if the other editor basically copied-and-pasted the content you created into their "article" and didn't not give proper attribution to the original source of the content. You're always free to improve the existing article if you want, and incorporate content from you draft into it if you can do so in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines. You can either be WP:BOLD in making changes or you can be WP:CAUTIOUS; if another editor disagrees with your changes, then try and resolve things in accordance with WP:DISPUTERESOLUTION. -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:38, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Creating Proposals

How do I?

Hi,

I am wondering how to create a new Proposal for a Wikipedia Page. There is an image that is incorrect, and the text goes incorrectly with it. May I know how to create a Proposal, please? It'sBirdy (talk) 10:31, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

It'sBirdy Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. By "proposal" I think you mean you want to make an edit or request an edit? It's not necessary to seek permission to make an edit; you are welcome to make it yourself if you feel comfortable doing so. If you don't feel comfortable, that's okay too, in which case you may post on the associated article talk page, describing what you wish to do. You can make it as a formal edit request(click for instructions) but that's not required. 331dot (talk) 10:42, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi It'sBirdy. If you find an error in an article and you think you can fix it in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines, then you can be WP:BOLD and fix it without proposing anything. If you think something might be wrong but aren't sure or aren't sure how to fix it, you can be WP:CAUTIOUS and start a discussion about the matter on the relevant article's talk page to seek feedback from others. -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:44, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Review of new page

Hello, hoping you can help me understand how "unreliable sources" are defined when they are not, and how a decision can be challenged. This page is linked to original sources at the BBC, The Shaw Trust Power 100, The Royal National Institute for the Blind, and London Transport campaigns -- all original source material references to this individual.

These are leading UK media and national insitutions. It is hard to see how much credible the sources can be, and how we can demonstrate that the reviewer was incorrect, and have a second opinion please? Thank you.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Dr._Amy_Kavanagh Kookkee Monster (talk) 11:56, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@Kookkee Monster: That decline reason (This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.) is actually overloaded, as it can mean two things (or sometimes a mixture of both):1) Some of the sources are unreliable 2) This draft has reliable sources, but we need more in order to verify everything stated. You can check at WP:RSP if there is already consensus on the reliability of a particular source. Also, please see WP:CITEHOW - So far, the draft has a bunch of external links, but no actual inline citations, which are required for articles about living or recently departed people. Victor Schmidt (talk) 12:11, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Kookkee Monster, and welcome to the Teahouse. Your references may very well be reliable, but that is only one of the criteria: most sources also need to be independent of the subject (for example, the subject's own website may be cited only for very limited information, as explained at SPS). The bulk of the content of an article must be derived from sources wholly unconnected with the subject - not them, nor their associates, employers, or institutions; and nothing based on a press release or interview. Because you have not cited your sources in one of the recommended manners, it is hard for a reviewer to evaluate them; and with hundreds of reviews waiting, in a pile that can take months to sort through, reviewers have little incentive to dig into a draft which is presented in a way that makes this difficult. --ColinFine (talk) 14:39, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Actually, Draft:Dr. Amy Kavanagh has no refs, because what you did was place hyperlinks in the body of the article rather than in reference format. Also, after it was declined, you resubmitted without making improvements, hence declined a second time. David notMD (talk) 14:42, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for the welcome and all the constructive comments. After a refresher reading on how to cite rather than link, (I'd forgotten and wrongly assumed that the links created the references) I went ahead and did 14 citations, fully referenced with dates, links, titles and accessed on details. I hope they can be recovered as unfortunately someone else seems to have not merged but overwritten them. Again, thank you for the supportive comments. Kookkee Monster (talk) 17:48, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Move category

A club called Sreenidi Deccan FC was given entry to I-League (a top tier football league in India). Some of the categories and subcategories of page is spelled 'Sreenidhi Deccan FC', where the letter 'h' is there in between. According the the club website and social media handles, it is wrong. So someone, please move the categories from 'Sreenidhi Deccan FC' to 'Sreenidi Deccan FC'. I cannot do it by myself because the option is not visible in here. Someone, please help me sort that out. Thank you. Ken Tony ^{Shall we discuss?} 12:17, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@Ken Tony: Hello Ken Tony, welcome to the teahouse. If the categories are misspelled then you'll want to list them for speedy renaming, following the instructions at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion#Speedy renaming and merging. In this case the relevant criteria would be WP:C2A, Typographic and spelling fixes. If 48 hours pass with no one objecting the category will be moved to the new title, and a bot will automatically fix all the category transclusions on pages. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 12:36, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

192.76.8.91 This issue comes under WP:C2D right? Ken Tony ^{Shall we discuss?} 13:44, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@Ken Tony: Since the article uses the same spelling that would also be a valid criteria, I would give both of them in your rationale for moving them when setting up the request. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 13:54, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@Ken Tony: https://www.sreenidhifc.com/ uses both "Sreenidhi Football Club" (with 'h') and "Sreenidi Deccan Football Club" (without 'h'). Although I created the categories by request, I'll let someone more knowledgeable determine what the correct name is. GoingBatty (talk) 14:12, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: I think it might be good if we select "Sreenidi Deccan Football Club" (without 'h'), because in their website, under this heading only they mentioned about their I-League entry. The same is used in all of their social media handles. AIFF (governing body of Indian football) also uses the same in their website. Ken Tony ^{Shall we discuss?} 14:46, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Archiving my own talk page rather than deleting to clean up and declutter

Hello, I am sure it is covered somewhere, but my own talk page is getting cluttered so I have been deleting stuff to declutter. What I would ideally like to do is not delete but somehow archive the material and not delete so it still results in an uncluttered - or at least less cluttered - page please. Can anyone point me in the right direction if possible please? GRALISTAIR (talk) 14:44, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@GRALISTAIR: Welcome to the Teahouse. There are different ways you can to do, which are listed at Archiving a talk page. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:53, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks - I have made a start GRALISTAIR (talk) 15:20, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@GRALISTAIR You appear to be doing it manually. Also you can use {{Archives}} or {{talk header}} on your talk page. ―Qwerfjkltalk 15:30, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@GRALISTAIR @Tenryuu You can also try User:Anne drew Andrew and Drew/SetupAutoArchive (a user script). ―Qwerfjkltalk 15:24, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@GRALISTAIR, I "installed" it at my talkpage in this edit: [1] If that looks ok to you, you can copy the code. You may have to wait several hours for the bot to actually archive stuff. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:33, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Come to think of it, you probably should tweak the "archive=User talk:Gråbergs Gråa Sång/Archive %(counter)d" bit. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:42, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Comment It's absurd that we expect new editors figure out how to archive their talk page. Perfect job for a bot.--S Philbrick(Talk) 18:23, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Sphilbrick There are some editors who prefer to just delete old stuff or archive it manually, so I'm not sure about a bot opting people into automatic archiving. How about creating an automatically substituted wrapper template that produces a copy of one of the bot setup templates with all the parameters filled in with some reasonable default values? Then when someone asks how to setup auto archiving for their talk page you can just tell them "just add {{Auto archive setup}} to the top of your talk page, and bots will deal with the rest". 192.76.8.91 (talk) 18:49, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

I like the idea. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:21, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Saber mensur

File information

Description	Saber mensur, in German Säbelmensur
Source	Landsmannschaft Zaringia Heidelberg
Date	1913
Author	Felix Geiger
Permission (Reusing this file)	Landsmannschaft Zaringia Heidelberg

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

Hi Wname1 and welcome to the Teahouse. From Commons:Licensing; "Wikimedia Commons only accepts media that are explicitly freely licensed, or

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

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

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

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

 Bpashalidis (talk) 18:14, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Draft question

My page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Siddhant_Sarang had been denied several times. This time the denied message has asked about paid or COI disclosure. But I was not paid by anyone to create or edit the page. 2405:201:A403:C8E0:9C4B:7991:96B8:F2B6 (talk) 18:43, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@2405:201:A403:C8E0:9C4B:7991:96B8:F2B6: Welcome to the Teahouse. The reason that the reviewer thinks you have a COI, even if you don't, is the use of language such as "one of a kind" and "first ever"; this sort of language has, in the past, been frequently used by paid editors. Once you remove those, I think you're in great shape. I'd recommend reading WP:WORDS to get a sense of what to watch out for. Helen(💬📖) 19:14, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Deleting subpages in my Sandbox

Do I have to do anything specific to delete old subpages that I had in my sandbox? TipsyElephant (talk) 19:27, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@TipsyElephant: Welcome to the Teahouse! Just add {{Db-userreq}} to the top of each subpage, and an admin will delete them for you. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 19:31, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Article Creation

How can I add a podcast? Cotryk (talk) 19:33, 18 July 2021 (UTC)