Wikipedia:Teahouse

Cordless Larry, 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

Review article

Please review https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toy 37.225.76.109 (talk) 12:59, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! Can you please explain what you mean? — {{u|Bsoyka}} ^talk 13:36, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

Toy is an existing B-class article which you have not edited. What, specifically, did you have in mind? David notMD (talk) 14:14, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

@David notMD: Correction, Toy is C-class. --The Tips of Apmh 14:18, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

C-class for Core, B-class for WikiProject Toys David notMD (talk) 14:23, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

I submitted a request at Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests for someone to review the article and remove the {{tone}} tag. GoingBatty (talk) 14:25, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

Oh, nevermind, you're right. --The Tips of Apmh 14:00, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

I hoped someone would notice and remove tank as a toy example, especially given current world situation. 37.225.76.109 (talk) 19:06, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

Right,
1. Could you perhaps have said that in your opening question? Being clear is important
2. Wikipedia is not censored. Toy tanks exist. They are notable. Notability is not temporary. There is no reason to remove them from the Toy article that fits with Wikipedia's current guidelines. casualdejekyll 22:34, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

We did not have toy guns in the house. I came home one day to find my daughter and friends running around the yard with Barbie dolls bent at the waist so that they were holding the torso and 'shooting' each other with the legs. David notMD (talk) 15:13, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

Sounds like buying your daughter some toy guns is in order. (Not that I'm commenting on your parenting or anything, for all I know this story probably happened years and years ago) casualdejekyll 17:40, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

Heck, we used random sticks - or even our fingers - as guns. The original poster's request to remove the image of the toy tank is as ridiculous as a request to remove the picture of teddy bears because people have been mauled by bears. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 18:32, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

Tanks have no legitimate uses. 37.225.76.109 (talk) 11:49, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

One more time everyone: Wikipedia is not censored! casualdejekyll 23:20, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

@David notMDPlacing an anecdote in the midst of a thread may do more harm than good; refrain from possibly confusing @37.225.76.109 and instead, attempt to frankly explain the situation. If another editor has already done as — as is the case here — then, do not add anything. 2601:641:380:CDF0:2CAE:5DBF:9C78:28F9 (talk) 05:42, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

• The tank toy is perfectly legitimate as an encyclopeadic entry in a toy article. I've removed the tone article as it is radically out of date and there was some 500 edits since them. I read about half of it and don't see any tone issues. It probably does need a copyedit. I didn't see anything in the history to say it was copyedited. Certainly it can take a couple of months or more to do the work. Perhaps you never left the tag on long enough for the guild to action it. What the article does need and perhaps you do this, is more sources. There is whole bits and sections which are unsourced. Hope that helps. scope_creep^Talk 10:54, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

@37.225.76.109: Hitler, Stalin, Mao, and Ho Chi Minh were all very bad people who caused much misery and death. But Wikipedia has--and should have--articles about all of them. Uporządnicki (talk) 14:24, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Translations of the bible

I often find when reading articles something to do with Christianity that, when quoting a bible passage, they tend to use the King James Version. Is this due to a policy/guideline (and if so why), or is it just an unwritten rule? Either way, I do not consider it very helpful - the King James Version is unclear for modern readers (given how the language has changed, and translation techniques have improved). Farleigheditor (talk) 17:29, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

Farleigheditor. I am pinging Jenhawk777 to this discussion. Jenhawk777 is a very helpful editor with a lot of experience with biblical and Christian topics. Cullen328 (talk) 17:47, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

Correct. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:27, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

@Farleigheditor I don't know of any written guidance. I tend to consider it a version of WP:ENGVAR/WP:REFVAR, as in keep consistent within article, don't change without good reason (for example see the editsummaries in this diff:[1]), and if you start the article you get to pick. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:26, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello Farleigheditor, the simple answer is "because it's the easy thing to do". There is a template for King James that is simple and there isn't for other versions. That's it. Human laziness - mine included. Gråbergs Gråa Sång gives good advice above. Jenhawk777 (talk) 02:51, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Gråbergs Gråa Sång I agree that's a ridiculous edit summary in that diff you linked (that you reverted); I'm not sure how much more easily understood that other version is,though (compare KJV's And Adam knew Eve his wife with And the human knew Eve his woman. The latter sounds like alien speech from a low budget sci fi film ;) General comment regarding the status of the KJV and another probable reason it is commonly quoted in Wiki articles is that, for most of the general English speaking population it is the de facto "standard" version. To most anyone other than scholars of textual criticism, the differences between the Textus Receptus and the modern critical editions of the New Testament source texts is trivial. As for the language: scripture isn't expected to sound modern: it's NOT modern. The KJV is only about 400 years old (although its style of English was even somewhat archaic at the time that it was written), but the texts in their original languages are 2000+ years old. Yet is not the original Greek text of the NT the version that is still in current use in Greece, and the Masoretic text of the Tanakh in current use in Israel? Point being, I don't see any compelling reason for rewriting scripture in modern vernacular. There's also a non-trivial degree of ambiguity created in translations that use "you" as their only second-person pronoun: the source texts differentiated between singular and plural in the second person. Therefore, meaning is lost and ambiguity is introduced when every instance of thee/thou becomes "you". This isn't a problem in modern English writing, because we construct our speaking and writing in such ways to accomodate not being able to indicate singular or plural in the second person through pronoun choice. That doesnt apply to the Bible, and "you" doesnt work as a drop-in for thee/thou in texts that originally had thee/thou (or their equivalents in their original languages). A particular place where this would be highly problematic is the book of Job, during the dialogue between Job and his three friends, Job frequently switches back and forth between adressing his friends directly, and addressing God directly, and often the only way to figure out who he's speaking to is whether he's using 'you' (his friends) or 'thee' (God). Trying to comprehend that correctly from a version that only uses "you" would be totally hopeless. 2600:1702:4960:1DE0:8973:283F:5A03:85F (talk) 16:53, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

If not KJV, which translation would one use? Picking an official Wikipedia standard would be near impossible. An interesting possibility might be a template that for any quoted passage gave the reader the ability to query a selection of other major translations (plus the original text) that are freely available online.--agr (talk) 19:05, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Jenhawk hasn't edited today yet and it makes me wonder after this message [2]. I am hoping for the good outcome. 180.194.127.148 (talk) 12:08, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

How to change a page title

I wanted to create a page for International Institute for Software Testing. It got created but I see the title is https://testinginstitute.com. How do I change the page title? Magdyshanna (talk) 07:56, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi Magdyshanna, welcome to the Teahouse. You created https:/testinginstitute.com. It has been deleted per Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#A7. PrimeHunter (talk) 08:27, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

@Magdyshanna: In general, you can change the title of a page on the english Wikipedia if you have at least 10 edits and have been registered for 4 days by using the page move functionality.

On an unrelated note, Since your article creation history has more failures than sucesses, I would reccomend that you still use the draft namespace to prepear articles until they are ready, and submit them to AfC. Victor Schmidt (talk) 09:04, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

am reading Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#Atrying to understand why it was deleted. The international Institute for Software Testing is the ONLY educational institution in the world authorized to issue education-based certifications in software testing. It is also the world leader in software testing certifications by the statements of the references independent sources. How that not important. I can see pages for other commercial organization, some of the are our competitors, and they are listing unrelated items on the page e.g. TechWell Corporation and International Software Testing Qualifications Board, which have references to self-published sources. Please help me understand why you think this is not important Magdyshanna (talk) 03:43, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

@Magdyshanna: You have to establish that the subject is notable as Wikipedia defines the term. That means using secondary, independent, reliable sources. Do not use just any other article as a benchmark; if you must, take a look at good or featured articles. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 07:20, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

I have used 10 different sources all are independent sources from reputable industry magazines. If the pages lacks the notability criteria, why was it delet6ed rather than being fixed? Magdyshanna (talk) 03:09, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

It looks like the admin who deleted it is PrimeHunter. How do I ask him question. I replied to the post. Magdyshanna (talk) 06:04, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

It might have been deleted because the title of the page was mistakenly published as the URL, which I can see a URL is not notable by itself. I just went through all the GNC and this page satisfied this criteria. either restore it or I can create the page with the correct title. Please help me what we need to do more to satisfy notability. Magdyshanna (talk) 03:36, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

The article Https:/testinginstitute.com was deleted by a Wikipedia administrator named 331dot. Have you tried asking 331dot for clarification? Most people answering questions here at the Teahouse aren't administrators and therefore are no longer able to see the content of the article. If you think the article was incorrectly deleted, the best thing to do would be to ask 331dot for clarification. In general, articles about organizations need to satisfy WP:NCORP and this can sometimes be hard because the notability requirements for companies and organizations tend to require that multiple reliable sources showing that significant coverage is provided are needed. Ten sources sounds like a lot, but it's not so much the quantity of the sources cited that matter, but rather the quality. Any information that appears to be too closely connected to the organization itself (e.g. press or media releases/announcements, interviews) might not be considered sufficient to establish notability regardless of whether where the information is published. I can't say for certain because I can't see the article, and the Teahouse isn't really the place to do a detailed assessment of sources (i.e., there's no need to start posting them here). So, once again, you should discuss things with 331dot and explain why you think an error was made. Finally, your last post states Please help me what we need to do more to satisfy notability., but it's not clear who the we is. Are you connected to the International Institute for Software Testing in some way? Are you working on its behalf the create a Wikipedia article about it? If you are (or if you're not sure whether you are), then you should take a careful look at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and Wikipedia:Paid contribution disclosure for reference. -- Marchjuly (talk) 03:43, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

Thank you so much for the great advice. Will do accordingly. Magdyshanna (talk) 05:54, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

I am sorry, how to direct a question to 331.dot? I replied to the post about deleting the article but received no response. Magdyshanna (talk) 05:58, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

It looks like the admin who deleted it is PrimeHunter. How do I ask him question. I replied to the post Magdyshanna (talk) 06:24, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

When you click on https:/testinginstitute.com, it takes you to the page where the article used to be. On that page, it gives the date and time the page was deleted, the name of the administrator who deleted the page, and the reason why it was deleted. You can post a message on that adminstrator's user talk page and ask them to clarify why the page was deleted. As long as your post is WP:CIVIL, you should be fine. You might also want to take a look at Wikipedia:Why was the page I created deleted? for general reference. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:16, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

Magdyshanna I deleted the draft under what is called the "A7" speedy deletion criteria, which means that there was no credible claim of significance of the company described in the article, in other words, it did not show how the company meets WP:ORG, the Wikipedia definition of a notable company. The sources provided were almost exclusively related to the company, either press releases or the company website. 331dot (talk) 09:25, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

You say "The sources provided were almost exclusively related to the company, either press releases or the company website" this is not true. I provided 10 sited 10 references, only one of the them is the company web site, which I assume is important for people readers to know the company we being mentioned and two press releases. The other 7 are all independent reputable industry magazines and other articles that mentioned how unique the company is. I can delete those three references if that bothers you. Magdyshanna (talk) 19:39, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

could please respond to my note? Magdyshanna (talk) 23:14, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Magdyshanna The company website cannot be used to establish notability as it is a primary source(which are only acceptable for certain bits of information). I'm going to post the rest of my reply on your user talk page as it will be a touch lengthy. 331dot (talk) 23:24, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Article Help

I am currently creating a article about Swissôtel Clark, a newly opened hotel in Clark, Philippines. The problem is, the hotel is part of a resort complex which includes a hotel (Marriott Clark), a casino complex (Hann Casino Resort), and a planned hotel to open in 2023 (Mercure Clark). Can the article about Swissôtel Clark be a standalone article or should it be part of an article about the resort complex? Thank you. Article draft link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:ShiriEdits/sandbox ShiriEdits^Talk 01:39, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello, ShiriEdits. The answer is, No, not until several people unconnected with the hotel or the resort have chosen to write articles about it. The four links below are all saying what the hotel's proprietors want to say. 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. ColinFine (talk) 11:19, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

@ColinFine: Thanks for the clear explanation. On closer look, it looks like the writers were paid by the hotel owners. Frequent buzzwords such as tallest building in NCR, first fully integrated hotel, top-notch, and ultimate millionaires playground to name a few. Thanks for the advice! ShiriEdits^Talk 23:52, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

References

Is Wikipedia interested in reality anymore?

So far, I see that Wikipedia is perpetuating a situation in which people all over Earth literally lost touch with reality because people using Allied Command titles were re-writing stuff in High Command style. Y'all have a system of denial of the startling reconciliation of religious warfare that emanated from Humboldt while Microsoft's attempted takeover of Earth using Earth's leaders as hostages and betraying the USA. You still appear to be in denial that God and I are real people charged with the responsibility of preserving history accurately and resolving large-scale problems. Is it worth our time to help y'all return to reality, or will you just keep deleting crucial descriptions of societal patterns? Thank y'all, I still believe in Wikipedia--it was once great.--. Mydearpeople (talk) 06:29, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

You have misunderstood how Wikipedia works. Wikipedia summarises what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a topic. If you can find reliable published sources to support your content that would be the way forward. Theroadislong (talk) 07:41, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

For the curious: The Mydearpeople account was started 1 March 2022, and made two edits, both to Talk:Earth, both reverted as not being relevant to the topic, and two nonsensical requests to reduce page protection, also reverted. David notMD (talk) 07:43, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

Checking your edits, Mydearpeople, WP:NOTAFORUM seems relevant. Use your social media instead. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:57, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

Asker appears to be WP:NOTHERE. Just to remind you, Mydearpeople, we're here primarily to build an encyclopedia. If you're only here to "right great wrongs" or whatever, that's not going to fly. casualdejekyll 12:29, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

Oh dear, people. This editor has now been blocked per WP:NOTHERE. Nick Moyes (talk) 01:06, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

I am not shocked, I tell you. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:48, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Details for References in Sources?

In the article "Edmund Gurney" the entry "Hall 1964" appears in the References many times, but that is the full extent of the detail there. The section "Sources" contains the entry "Hall, Trevor H. (1964). The Strange Case of Edmund Gurney...". Is it supposed to be self-evident that they are the same thing? It would be nice if this was made more explicit somewhere. The entry "Hall 1964" is a link, so I clicked it in the hope of getting such confirmation, but up came another opening of the "Edmund Gurney" article I was already reading! This is utterly pointless. Can something be changed so that clicking the "Hall 1964" entry does go to the detailed entry in the Sources? Thanks. 61.68.250.211 (talk) 13:22, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

hi ip user! yes, the reference does refer to the book The Strange Case of Edmund Gurney, which the source link already redirects to. if I'm correct it's a physical book instead of the usual webpage link and the individual references are referring to pages of said book (for example Hall 1964 p. 27 refers to page 27 of said book). happy reading! 💜  melecie  talk - 13:38, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

When you say "which the source link already redirects to", do you mean that if I click any of the "Hall 1964" entries (which ARE blue links) in the References section, it IS supposed to display or lead to the full-length entry in the Sources section? (The second of the three entries there, which for me is entirely white and not a link AFAICT.) That is not what happens for me - I am viewing on a Galaxy tablet, not a PC. Could that be making the difference? 61.68.250.211 (talk) 14:03, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

That isn't a limitation of the device that you are using to read Wikipedia. It behaves the same on a Windows device. It is supposed to be self-evident that "Hall 1964" is a short notation for "Hall, Trevor H. (1964). The Strange Case of Edmund Gurney...", and that that is a printed book. There probably isn't any information available on the web. Wikipedia requires that information in articles be verifiable, and it is, by finding the book in a library, or buying the book second-hand via Amazon or eBay. If Wikipedia required that all references be web links, that would exclude the ability to list information such as this that is found only in printed books. The source is a printed book that may not exist online. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:47, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

You misunderstand me. I am not asking that the reference itself should be on the web; I can see that it is a book. I am asking (perhaps only wishing) that the short-form entries in the References "Hall 1964" when clicked should lead to, or display, their long-form entries in the Sources section (totally within WP). The system already does seem to be trying to do this, but it only opens the TOP of the same article over again, when it should at least be going down to the Sources section, and preferably be displaying only the text of the relevant entry. It is this action that I feel may be deficient on a tablet. 61.68.250.211 (talk) 15:25, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

Are you not seeing Hall 1964 in §References as a link? When I click on them, they take me to §Sources and highlight the Hall source. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:34, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

For me, both in the Firefox browser, and in the Android Wikipedia app, if I pick (eg) reference 21, it takes me to the top of the "Sources" section". On Firefox it highlights the particular source, as Tenryuu says. In the app, it offers me a new page, but when I go it it, it opens at the Sources section. ColinFine (talk) 15:48, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

I am not clicking any reference by number in the body of the article. I have the References section open and I DO see (eg:) "Hall 1964" as a link. If I click that link it is the same as if I clicked the link to some other article: I see the title and the introduction to the article, only it is the SAME Gurney article that I was already viewing. It stays at the top; it does NOT "take me to Sources and highlight the Hall source". I am using the Android Wikipedia app, but obviously the "go down and highlight" function is deficient on this tablet. Perhaps I should try to update or reinstall the app - AFAIK it has been unchanged since I got the tablet. 61.68.250.211 (talk) 16:12, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

Ah okay, I booted up the Wikipedia app on my Android device to see if I can replicate your issue. I went into the article, scrolled to §References, and tapped on one of the linked Hall citations. A prompt comes up with "Open a new tab" or "Read article". Picking "Read article", the app directs me to §Sources to display the full Hall citation. What version of the Wikipedia app are you using? I'm on version 2.7.50396-r-2022-03-03, which was last updated on 3 Mar 2022. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:45, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

Both of you may be having problems due to using the Wikipedia app on an Android. Some editors advise against using the Wikipedia app on an Android. Use the Firefox or Chrome web browsers on the Android, either in mobile view or in desktop view, but the Wikipedia app is worse than either mobile view or desktop view. That may be the problem. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:21, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

I didn't encounter any problems: the link seems to be working on the app as intended, just like ColinFine. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:41, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

When I view the article in my Chrome browser and click one of the short-form links in the References, it DOES display in a pop-up the corresponding full text from the Sources, ie: sensible operation. My copy of the Wikipedia app IS (rather to my surprise) the 2.7.50396-r-2022-03-03 version as reported by Tenyruu. So it seems that "using the Wikipedia app on an Android" is indeed the problem. Thank you all for your help in discovering this. Is it worth reporting this to the appropriate area, or would they already know, or is it a lost cause? 61.68.250.211 (talk) 06:35, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

The Wikipedia App is fine for reading but for editing, I find it quite inadequate. casualdejekyll 14:10, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

The feature I'm complaining about IS used when only reading ... That last reply, and some of the earlier comments, suggest that the candid answer to my last question would be: no, yes, and yes ... But nevertheless, I will ask one final question: Where is the appropriate area to report a deficiency in the Android Wikipedia App? 61.68.250.211 (talk) 10:43, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Famous people that don't have many news coverage

Hi, I converted a French Wikipedia article "Abish Brodt" to an English one & fixed it up (Draft:Abish Brodt). I keep on getting rejected because any standard editor who knows nothing about "Orthodox Jewish Music" won't find much media online, for he lives a quiet life (as many Orthodox Jews do). Yet he is a very significant piece of Jewish music history & known by almost EVERY Orthodox Jew.

I see many other articles on less significant artists in this genre. I want to add more, as that's the purpose of Wikipedia. (There are many many more than: Category:Orthodox pop musicians). Can someone please help overcome this obstacle? BangKettle (talk) 01:01, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

So there are no reviews of his work in print or online? —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 01:03, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

All over the place. Just not many news articles on him. He's the lead singer for a series called Regesh. https://jewishmusic.fm/artist/abish-brodt/ (See the article for more info) BangKettle (talk) 01:10, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

These "reviews of his work in print or online" that are "[a]ll over the place": that sounds very promising, BangKettle. "All over the place" surely includes the web. Please, here, provide links to three among the many that you believe are good examples of discussions of him or his work. -- Hoary (talk) 01:35, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

https://djsa.s3.amazonaws.com/prod/archive/Regesh%20-%20Regesh%20Volume%20II%20-%20K7/Foldout06.jpg?X-Amz-Algorithm=AWS4-HMAC-SHA256&X-Amz-Credential=AKIAWI5T45MEE5H6RHRV%2F20220315%2Fus-east-1%2Fs3%2Faws4_request&X-Amz-Date=20220315T011621Z&X-Amz-Expires=300&X-Amz-SignedHeaders=host&X-Amz-Signature=31d8c02ba67c58bdee67e04e28f671ca39e368edbb3137abf2110ad118bf1195

https://mostlymusic.com/products/volume-2-cd-2?_pos=8&_sid=4e8f1e1a8&_ss=r

https://djsa.s3.amazonaws.com/prod/archive/Shmuel_Brazil_-_Songs_of_Regesh_Vol_1/Back.jpg?X-Amz-Algorithm=AWS4-HMAC-SHA256&X-Amz-Credential=AKIAWI5T45MEE5H6RHRV%2F20220315%2Fus-east-1%2Fs3%2Faws4_request&X-Amz-Date=20220315T011337Z&X-Amz-Expires=300&X-Amz-SignedHeaders=host&X-Amz-Signature=5d560069995c465543b568966e427a6a25fb2294427582b4319963ace4c45c50 BangKettle (talk) 02:20, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

The first and the third of these, BangKettle, tell me "Request has expired". (But even if it hadn't, why are you providing links to Amazon Web Services?) The second is a sales page that says nothing about the man or his music. If there's nothing in print that's very much better than this trio, then no article about him can be created. -- Hoary (talk) 03:22, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, the 1st & 3rd were to Dartmouth Jewish Sound Archive that have the albums & covers, apparently it only works for me with an account. Is there a way to show those pictures by uploading somewhere?

Again, if you read the proposed article I made you'll see that he is a top personality. The Siyum Hashas is the largest event in Judaism today, & he's the main singer. The song Sholom Aleichem that he sings is one of the most famous songs in Orthodox Judaism. BangKettle (talk) 04:05, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

BangKettle, images of album covers do nothing to demonstrate notability. Also, I don't see that singing an extraordinarily famous song confers any kind of notability (Wikipedia or other) on the singer. The question would be, rather: Is this person notable as a singer of it? (Many have sung Bachianas Brasileiras 5, which I think we can call famous; but this in itself doesn't make all its singers notable. I believe that it did add to the notability of Bidu Sayão and Victoria de los Ángeles; and it might well have added to the notability of several others. But not to that of all.) A skim-read of the article Siyum HaShas suggests that it's a large event indeed. If you can present reliable sources that he was/is "the main singer", then that would be something. Is there no published commentary on his singing? (Your draft currently says that "He was a featured performer at the 10th, the 11th and the 13th Siyum HaShas"; within which, "featured" is a word meaning anything or nearly nothing.) There are no particular notability criteria for religious figures; since he's a singer, the draft must show that he satisfies either Wikipedia:Notability (music) or, more generally, Wikipedia:Notability (people) (he doesn't have to satisfy both). Note that as long as cited sources are reliable, they may be in any language. -- Hoary (talk) 07:35, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks to User:Gråbergs Gråa Sång. You can see here that he is one of the main highlights of the Siyum Hashas ("Niggunim" means songs)

https://archive.org/details/sim_jewish-observer_2005-10_38_8/page/n1/mode/2up?q=%22Abish+Brodt%22 BangKettle (talk) 13:51, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

BangKettle, I learn from this that he's one of two people who performed one of 10+ "highlights" in a five CD-ROM set of the 2005 event -- according to an advertisement for the CD-ROM set. This is not reliable evidence for notability as Wikipedia understands it. Now, I happen to think that one can reasonably complain that what Wikipedia calls "notability" is close to mere "celebrity", that the most vapid of celebs get the most assiduous write-ups, and that this may help promote mere celebrity over actual worth. But the wider society (with its enthusiasm for writing and reading about attention-seekers) rather than Wikipedia is to blame. An article here about Abish Brodt will have to wait until his accomplishments are written about in reliable sources. -- Hoary (talk) 23:22, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

I'm not sure if anyone read the Title: Famous people that don't have many news coverage

He is extremely well known by hundreds of thousands of people. Yet none of the Wikipedia editors here are fluent with Orthodox Jewish culture. Is that a legitimate reason not to publish it? Perhaps if the article gets published another reader will be able to enhance it. BangKettle (talk) 03:05, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

@BangKettle: All that is required is that Brodt is significantly covered in independent, secondary published reliable sources. It doesn't necessarily have to be news, though that tends to be the medium used). Being extremely well known by hundreds of thousands of people isn't useful due to the "published" requirement if it's being cited as personal knowledge. On the other hand, if he is widely known, surely there's someone (maybe a reputable musicologist or biographer) that has written something about him? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:38, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

@BangKettle, if you haven't checked them already, some of the hits at [3] may be of some use. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:36, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

How do I delete a wikitia page?

Hello. I'd like to delete a page I was drafting for a music artist that was never approved for a wikipedia page but then ended up on wikitia. How do I go about doing so? The page is for 'Ron_Velvet' on wikitia. Thank you. Pinoypress1 (talk) 02:21, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

@Pinoypress1: Hello Pinoy! Unfortunately no one here can help you with issues on Wikitia, so there's not much you can do to my knowledge. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 02:24, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Wikitia is wholly unrelated to Wikipedia. It's like asking the Canadian Government for advice on something in Australia, because they happen to speak the same language. You need to go to the right authority. ColinFine (talk) 09:48, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

@Pinoypress1: As I understand it, it is doubtful they will remove it. Wikipedia's license permits them to use Wikipedia content as long as they provide attribution. You agree to this every time you click "publish changes", as stated under the edit window. 331dot (talk) 09:51, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

can someone fix this error

I looked up Kurt Thomas (gymnast) an it says he was married 3 times :

Rebecca Sue Jones (m 1996 - 2020), Leanne Kay Hartsgrove (m 1982 - 2020), Elizabeth Ann Osting (m 1977 - 2020)

I seriously doubt all his marriages ended in 2020

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurt_Thomas_(gymnast) 47.140.58.180 (talk) 02:27, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

hi ip user! it doesn't seem to exist in the article, could find no mention of hartsgrove or osting at all in it. happy reading! 💜  melecie  talk - 02:49, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. I cannot find any evidence that those names have ever been in the Wikipedia article Kurt Thomas (gymnast). Where did you see this information? ColinFine (talk) 09:50, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Th article Kurt Thomas (gymnast) mentions being married twice, no dates, only Rebecca is named. David notMD (talk) 10:58, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

There is an IMDb entry here for Thomas that mentions Hartsgrove and Osting as former wives. Even that source doesn't suggest these wives were current at the date of his death in 2020: the dates of their divorces are not specified. As IMDb is not a reliable source in any case, the Wikipedia article does not mention these individuals. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:06, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Blocked IP

My IP address didn't do a Harassment but then it had a partial block and I cannot create an account. Why does this happen? I am Rjsb0192 (talk) 04:24, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict) hi I am Rjsb0192 and welcome to the teahouse! ip blocks are applied per ip address, which can affect multiple innocent people. it doesn't mean you yourself was in the wrong, and those innocent affected by an ip block can still edit wikipedia, request an account, or edit with a registered account (as you have). see WP:IPBLOCK for more. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 04:29, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

ping fix: @I am Rjsb0192:. 💜  melecie  talk - 04:35, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

But when I edit when I'm not registered, there's a warning that says :

You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to a username, among other benefits.

That's the screen of IPs when they try to edit.

Thank you. I am Rjsb0192 (talk) 04:36, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

@I am Rjsb0192: that's normal. you can edit without logging in, however your ip address would be visible instead of your username. do you also see this? This network has been used improperly by someone on your network. It has therefore been blocked as a precaution to prevent abuse and damage to Wikipedia. 💜  melecie  talk - 04:41, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Ahh, I get it. You can edit without logging in but you won't have more tools and your IP address can be seen. I am Rjsb0192 (talk) 04:46, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

@I am Rjsb0192: that is right. if you don't see any notices other than that when you try to edit, you're probably not ip-blocked. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 04:49, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

But I haven't seen that this network has been used improperly by someone on my network and that it has therefore been blocked as a precaution to prevent abuse and damage to Wikipedia. I am Rjsb0192 (talk) 04:51, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

by notices I meant the You are not logged in notice. if you see just that your ip address is probably not blocked. 💜  melecie  talk - 04:59, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

It has been blocked, but only partially Melecie. I am Rjsb0192 (talk) 05:04, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

This is the screenshot of the IP block.

Here's the screenshot of the block: I am Rjsb0192 (talk) 05:11, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Generally, IP range blocks are used if blocks of single IP adresses are ineffective as the problematic user immedately returns with a new adress. Users in good standing can request IP-block excemption, see there for how. (Note for the future: Instead of posting a screenshot, simply copy the IP adress or range displayed. Makes things a lot easier). See also WP:Partial blocks and Help:I have been blocked. Victor Schmidt (talk) 09:11, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Here's the IP address that was blocked in case you need it: ‪2001:8F8:1C00:0:0:0:0:0/38‬''. I am Rjsb0192 (talk) 04:32, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Very odd that this pblock is affecting a registered user. I am Rjsb0192 are you able to edit user talk pages while logged in to your account? Pinging ToBeFree as the person who pblocked the range. wizzito | say hello! 03:21, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Yes but I prefer not to edit when I'm not logged in. I am Rjsb0192 (talk) 04:09, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

The block is evidently "anon. only" (block log). If this affects you while logged in, please file a ticket at Phabricator; more likely, you just need to log in. Logged-out editing from your IP address range has been disabled due to harassment by someone else from the same internet provider, but this shouldn't be a problem for you as you have an account. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 07:23, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

That is great! I am Rjsb0192 (talk) 08:32, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

ARTICLE GOT REJECTED

Hello team,

My article got rejected even though its a first draft, Can you please guide me in correct direction on what needs to be done.

Let me know what sources you all needed in order to help me out. Eswar Ramisetti 2705 (talk) 07:59, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

What's the title of the article/draft, Eswar Ramisetti 2705? -- Hoary (talk) 09:36, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

From a look at the contribs, this seems to be about Draft:MINIORANGE, which they created and edited when logged-out.

Eswar Ramisetti 2705, the full guideline about sources is WP:GNG, but in 99% of the cases it means multiple full-length articles by newspaper or the specialized press. Paid-for content (such as prnewswire or businesswire) does not count, because it is not independent of the company.

If that sounds hard, it’s because it is. Even fairly major pieces of software do not have Wikipedia articles. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 09:44, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

A distinction: Declined is less severe than Rejected. miniOrange was Declined, with reasons given by the reviewer. David notMD (talk) 11:19, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Request you to Help me for my first article

Can Someone help me for Edit in my article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Kalamandir_Jewellers_ltd RajeshGoud007 (talk) 10:20, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi RajeshGoud007. Are you connected to Kalamandir Jewellers in some way? Are you, for example, someone who works for the company or has been hired by the company to create a Wikipedia article about it? If you are either of those things, please take a close look at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure because those pages contain some important information that you should be aware of. As for the article, you're going to need to establish that the company meets Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) in order for your draft to be accepted as an article. Most of the sources currently cited as references for the draft's content aren't really the type of significant coverage in secondary reliable sources that is needed to establish Wikipedia notability for a company. You can find some more information here about the type of sources that are typically needed to establish notability for a company. No matter how well written or formatted a draft is, it will never be able to overcome a lack of notability; so, you're going to need to find significant coverage about the company in multiple reliable secondary for the draft to be accepted. Finally, there are also some issues with some images you uploaded to Commons for use in the draft. Please go to your Commons user talk page at c:User talk:RajeshGoud007 to see what they are. You might also want to take a look at c:Commons:Own work because it seems as if your misunderstanding what the term means when it comes to image copyright and Commons. -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:57, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

"Talk" Page

What exactly is the talk page for? Magik 3099 (talk) 11:40, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

I could also use some help in "upgrading" my User page. Magik 3099 (talk) 11:41, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Magik 3099, and welcome to the Teahouse and to Wikipedia. A talk page is a page for Wikipedia editors to communicate with each other about matters to do with editing Wikipedia. If you are talking about your User talk page (which does not yet exist) it is primarily a place for other editors to put messages for you about Wikipedia and about your editing. See WP:Talk pages for more information.

As for your User page: WP:User page design centre is no longer active, but has some ideas. ColinFine (talk) 12:12, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

ColinFine, how do I change the colour of my text? Magik 3099 (talk) 12:23, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

@Magik 3099: (Not ColinFine, but I'll reply anyways): You can use the CSS color property, similar to this: <span style="color:#018201">Dark Green Text</span> produces Dark Green Text. See also Help:Using colours. Victor Schmidt (talk) 12:34, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

@Victor Schmidt: thanks. Magik 3099 (talk) 12:41, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

@Victor Schmidt: How do I change my "signature"? Magik 3099 (talk) 12:41, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

@Magik 3099: See WP:CUSTOMSIG. Here's a tip for finding relevant policies, procedures and guidelines, and most anything else you hear mentioned by regular editors, or come across in Wikipedia's interface. Type "WP: (an easier-to-type alias of "Wikipedia:") into the search box, followed by the word or phrase you heard. Most of the time, this will quickly locate a targeted, behind-the-scenes information/help page, or how-to guide. See more at Help:WP search protocol. Victor Schmidt (talk) 12:44, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

@Victor Schmidt: It isn't working... Magik 3099 (talk) 14:09, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Someone's mucking about with the EN-GB page template

Someone has changed the Read heading on the en-gb page template to read Kencan. How can it be corrected? Murgatroyd49 (talk) 12:10, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello Murgatroyd49, and welcome to the Teahouse. This is a known problem, which has been asked about here several times. It seems to have been a mistake in saving translations on translatewiki.net. See WP:VPT#Edit tab says siesie for a discussion. ColinFine (talk) 12:15, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Ah, right. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 12:49, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

@Murgatroyd49: In the meantime, you may want to think about switching your language from en-gb to en. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:54, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, did that. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 17:49, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

My Submission is Declined

I am trying to create a page for a female presidential aspirant in Nigeria and upon submission, my entry has been rejected citing lack of references. Can someone help me out? Khadijah Okunnu Lamidi (talk) 12:41, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Khadijah Mobolanle Okunnu-Lamidi 💜  melecie  talk - 12:57, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

hi Khadijah Okunnu Lamidi! firstly, you may want to read WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY and WP:Conflict of interest. autobiographies are generally discouraged since it's hard to write about yourself while still remaining verifiability and neutrality.

anyway, the lack of references they are talking about is a lack of reliable sources that support your claim to notability. basically, you'll need to check the guidelines for notability (especially for people) and have that backed up by reliable sources. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 13:07, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, Melecie, for the courtesy link. Khadijah Okunnu Lamidi, first, welcome to the Teahouse!. I think it is admirable to be a fan of an extraordinary woman as Khadijah appears to be from what you have written. There are extraordinary people in this world that have had such an impact upon our lives. Unfortunately, most of them will never have a Wikipedia article written about them. In addition to what Melecie has told you I would like to add that Wikipedia wants to know what reliable sources say about a subject (See WP:RS). As this is your first article according to the history of your user account I would suggest reading WP:YFA, as well. Writing an article that gets included is one of the most difficult tasks an editor can do here. As pointed out by Melecie, one issue with what you have written is that most of it can not be verified because there are few inline citations to a reliable source. That makes it appear to be original research. If information can not be properly verified about a living person then one may think the author must have a connection with the subject. I would suggest finding additional reliable sources, including inline citations to sources for what you have included and potentially will include and changing your username so it doesn't match the subject of the article about which you are trying to write, in in fact you are not Khadijah. I hope what we have written helps point you in the right direction. --ARoseWolf 13:23, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Faculty of Political Science and International Studies, University of Warsaw

Hi, I would like to discuss this case. My article about one of severe Faculties of Warsaw University is said as innotable. However the rejection for article doesn't mean that it cannot be used to improve the general article about Warsaw University. Is it acceptable to integrate these informations into the main article? These Draft is really advanced, has enormous data, just due to the consensus that parts of educational places (schools, universities) aren't notable qualitied this Draft to rejection. Thanks in advance for Your opinion. Superjurek (talk) 13:18, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

• @Superjurek: There is nothing wrong in general with reusing parts of a rejected draft in another article. However, as it stands, the article is little more than a directory of current staff, which would not be acceptable per WP:TRIVIA, and a few grandiose-sounding claims which fall under WP:PEACOCK (for instance: leading to reinforcement of research activities and division into 15 robust scientific centres and 2 independent research centres - as opposed to other universities, who weakened research activities through the use of feeble and censored research centres?). If there is useful stuff, you can make a selective copy-paste. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 15:26, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Using a Library of Congress image

Hi! Just wanted to confirm if I could use this image from the Library of Congress in this Wikipedia article. No explicit copyright labels are provided here, and the site's legal page mentions that "You should determine for yourself whether or not an item is protected by copyright". Toofllab (talk) 13:59, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

@Toofllab one of the photo notes states: "U.S. News & World Report Magazine Photograph Collection" so there's a good chance that U. S. News & World Report holds a copyright on the photo. I am not sure how you would go about contacting the magazine to find out about the copyright status. Karenthewriter (talk) 14:41, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

I found some other relevant images in the JFK Library archives which seem to be in the public domain. Can you confirm this, please? Toofllab (talk) 14:50, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Ownership of the physical expression of a work does not constitute ownership of Copyright. Uporządnicki (talk) 14:53, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

The LoC was gifted the collection (and rights) of these historic images by the magazine. The exact rights situation for this collection can be found at https://www.loc.gov/rr/print/res/078_usnw.html In short, they were made public domain when gifted and this goes for all material in that collection that was made by Staff photographers, whom are also identified in that page. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 15:11, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

By the link you included, it's rather more complicated than that. They turned over the rights to those photos done by their own staff photographers as works for hire. But it also says there's no easy way to know which photos in the collection fall into that category. Others in the collection could still be under copyright for the photographer or heirs. Uporządnicki (talk) 17:20, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Yes, but most images have credits, so for THOSE specific ones, you can determine if they are staff photographer, and then they are PD. "dedicated to the public all rights" (this is USGov speak for public domain). —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 19:36, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

So the bottomline is that I should avoid the Library of Congress images, but can use the JFK Library ones? Toofllab (talk) 19:22, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

I don't think it's about a Library of Congress image or not a Library of Congress image. One thing I'm sure of is that the Library of Congress does NOT hold Copyright in these works. Just about any library will have materials that are under copyright; that copyright would be owned by SOMEBODY, and that somebody would not be that Library. Many libraries will have materials that are not under copyright--either because they weren't under copyright protection to begin with (US Govt. publications, for example), or because copyright has expired. With the image you asked about, the most recent question to come up was, does U.S News & World Report own copyright in the image. If they do, it doesn't matter which library you found it in. Uporządnicki (talk) 19:33, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

The LoC has many images with many different copyright status'es. But YOU need to figure out which one applies for each specific photograph you want to use. Some (probably most actually) might be PD, some not and this can even differ within one and the same collection of photos which they own. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 19:42, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

draft article about Csákány M. György

I would like to kindly ask you to review the English translation of the Hungarian page Csákány M. György in order to let us (translation office) complete a project. In loving memory of the great obstetrician, I gathered translators to translate the article into 22 languages and publish them to his birthday, 25 April. As the translation from Hungarian (in the case of some language pairs, for example, HU-JP, HU-CHN etc.) would be very costly, I would like to use the English text as the source. Any help in the early publication of the article would be very much appreciated. Thank you in advance for your reply. https://hu.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cs%C3%A1k%C3%A1ny_M._Gy%C3%B6rgy Eczopyk (talk) 16:31, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

@Eczopyk: You don't need permission to use the English text as a source for translation, just follow the guidance at WP:TRANSLATEUS. Each Wikipedia has its own rules for what is required for an article, so having your draft approved here on EN Wiki may not help you with trying to create the article on other Wikipedias. RudolfRed (talk) 16:41, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

@Eczopyk: Hello! It seems that you (and the translators) will have a WP:COI, if not paid COI. Please read the essays I've linked, to see how to stay within the terms of service, but still contribute! Isro! (talk) 16:46, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Eczopyk. I see that the translated draft is at Draft:Csákány M. György. It may take some time for it to be reviewed, as drafts are reviewed in no particular order, and this will require a reviewer who is willing to look at the sources in Hungarian. (There is no objection to sources in another language, though English ones are preferred if they are available; but the review process requires a reviewer who can check the given sources. Wikipedia is not, in general, concerned with external deadlines.

A couple of points I note: I believe that you have followed the Hungarian convention, so "Csákány" is his family name. On English Wikipedia we normally title articles according to English sources. I suggest you include {{Western name order|Csákány M. György}}, which will display as

The native form of this personal name is Csákány M. György. This article uses Western name order when mentioning individuals.

Then the article should be named "György M. Csákány", and the first paragraph in "Career", for exampole, should say "Csákány graduated from ..." (also "Semmelweis University" should be wikilinked). You could Move the draft to Draft:György M. Csákány to avoid confusion, though this is not essential, as the accepting reviewer will give it the correct English title when they move it to article space.

Your citations are not adequate, in that they mostly only give a title and a URL. It is important to include bibliographic information such as date, author, and publisher, so that reviewers and readers can evaluate the likely reliability and relevance of a source. I recommend using citation templates such as {{cite book}}, {{cite paper}}, etc. See Citing sources. Also some of your refrences are to hu-wiki: most wikis, (including all Wikipedias) are not regarded as reliable sources, and may not be used as references. The information should be cited to reliable sources, or not included.

Finally, I cannot see anywhere where you have attributed the draft as a translation from hu:Csákány M. György. It is a licensing requirement to do so (see WP:Translation): I suggest you add attribution on Draft talk:Csákány M. György. ColinFine (talk) 18:02, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Some copyediting (run-on sentences in the Lead). David notMD (talk) 03:45, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Where can I report users?

What is the page where I can report users? Viewer⁷¹⁹/_Contribs! 17:04, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

@Viewer719: Hello Viewer! That would depend on what you are wanting to report the user for. Would you mind being a bit more specific as to what you are wanting to report a user for? ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 17:18, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Using Wikipedia as a web host, as his only edits have been on his sandbox and user page (both deleted per WP:SOAPBOX) Viewer⁷¹⁹/_Contribs! 17:20, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

@Viewer719: Then you would report them to WP:AIV per WP:NOTHERE. Who are you wanting to report? I'm only asking as if you make a bad faith report then you can get into some trouble. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 17:22, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Kisscho Games. Viewer⁷¹⁹/_Contribs! 17:23, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

@Viewer719: Ah well then in this case either WP:AIV or WP:UAA will work as their username is also a violation of the username policy as being promotional. When reporting, make sure to tell admins to check their deleted contribs. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 17:25, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

@Viewer719: I see that you reported them and they've now been blocked as a spam/advertising only account. Good job! ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 17:58, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Thank you! Viewer⁷¹⁹/_Contribs! 18:00, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

@Viewer719: Welcome to the Teahouse. That depends on the nature of the report, as there are different venues established to address different types. What exactly seems to be the problem? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:19, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

• Viewer719, hello and welcome to the Teahouse please I’m echoing Tenryuu as they are is very much correct, please disregard any reply (that may come) here that tells you to go to WP:AN/I. A couple of questions though, first, which editor do you want to report? Can you show the entirety of their contribs here? Or can you shows diffs that are problematic, this are in order for us to guide you correctly. Please note that WP:AN/I is only used when all other options have been exhausted else you risk opening a premature report. Celestina007 (talk) 20:28, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

  @Celestina007: Uh.. they already answered the questions you're asking. They reported the user to AIV and the user they reported got blocked. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 21:14, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Blaze Wolf, when talking to me or, anyone for that matter do not start conversations with “uh”. You can state expressly that they already provided the information or just ignore altogether. Keep this in my going forward, this may come off as rude to the next editor. Celestina007 (talk) 21:28, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Ok sorry.. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 21:54, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Rude to whom, exactly?.. eh, the question's already been answered, that's all the Teahouse is for anyway, no need for bickering casualdejekyll 23:29, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Human-animal communication

Can someone take a look at this page? It doesn't appear to follow the common style. It seems rather draft-like. Bray (talk) 17:05, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

It looks just fine to me. What exactly are you concerned about?--Shantavira|^{feed me} 17:10, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

The extra 'References' section and the lack of an introduction except there's an 'Introduction' section but not at the top. Bray (talk) 17:13, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

See Pyrrho's comment below. I honestly feel the "Introduction" section should just be scrapped since that's what the lead is for, it's an introduction for the article, summarizing the key points of the article. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 17:17, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

For one thing, someone today had removed the lead and put a second References section at the top, for some reason. I reverted it. It still needs work, though. Pyrrho the Skipper (talk) 17:10, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

The amount of references is not an issue at all with this article. It has 67 references which is way above average for an article. The issue is there are large swaths of information with no citations. Another issue is with the lede paragraph. A lede paragraph is not just an introduction, it is a summary of the contents of the article, very often including some key points from the article itself. The current lede doesn't provide any of that. User Jblight added the second reference section at the top and included what appears to be personal observations or drafted notes at the bottom. I'm not even sure they knew they were editing the article as they also have a sandbox draft with the same name. It would be great to get their understanding of why they added the information they did. I'm thinking it was a misunderstanding. The article needs to be rewritten as proposed. --ARoseWolf 17:25, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Is this fork okay?

I'm working on a Web site for a ham radio club, and I've copied and modified some content from Wikipedia. The pages with WP content are here. Are these pages compliant with the license? KJ7RRV (talk) 18:40, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

@KJ7RRV: Hello KJ7RRV! As long as it follows all the things documented in WP:REUSE then it should be fine. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 18:45, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

@Blaze Wolf: Thank you! The only one I'm not sure about is indicating changes. One of the pages is https://pbarcwiki.kj7rrv.com/wiki/R-S_Signal_Report, and they all have the same format of copyright notice; does that indicate changes properly? --KJ7RRV (talk) 18:49, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

@KJ7RRV: I don't know. I'm unable to view the pages you linked for technical reasons. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 18:55, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Oh okay. Here's the copyright section:

This page is based on the Wikipedia article "R-S-T system" as it appeared on 5 July 2021.

CC BY-SA 88x31.png

Copyright © 2003-2021 Wikipedia contributors. See the edit history of "R-S-T system" on Wikipedia up to and including 5 July 2021

Copyright © 2022 PBARC Wiki contributors. See the edit history of this page.

This page is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike (CC BY-SA) 4.0 International. Original content from Wikipedia is under CC BY-SA 3.0 Unported.

There are links in several places ("the Wikipedia...2021", "edit history...2021", "edit history...this page" and "Creative Commons...International", but they didn't copy over. --KJ7RRV (talk) 19:00, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

@KJ7RRV: I think that should be fine. However I'm not an expert on copyright and content copied from Wikipedia so I'm not sure. I would wait for someone who understands Wikipedia's copyright policy better to respond. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 19:03, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

@Blaze Wolf: Okay, thank you. I'll wait. --172.58.35.46 (talk) 19:05, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

@Blaze Wolf: Oops, I just realized I was logged out when I wrote that; it was me. BTW, should I put two hyphens before the four tildes? I've seen it done both ways on other wikis, and I'm not sure what's preferred on Wikipedia. --KJ7RRV (talk) 02:11, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

@KJ7RRV: I had a feeling that was still you. For that it's down to personal preference if you don't want to that's fine. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 02:15, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

@Blaze Wolf: Okay, thanks. I think I'll keep doing it, because most of the other wikis I work on use it. --KJ7RRV (talk) 02:18, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

@KJ7RRV: Alright sounds good. Again, it's down to personal preference. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 02:21, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Preferences

Hi, im new to wikipedia, is how do i get to preferences? Andrew Reissig (talk) 23:00, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

nevermind Andrew Reissig (talk) 23:03, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

How do I get info tables?

!!!nvm I have figured it out 👍!!!

On most important articles there is a table of info like when someone was born/something created. What template code(?) can I use for it? I just need to test it for an article i'm making

thank you | V ImAFurryWith2BrainCells (talk) 23:24, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

@ImAFurryWith2BrainCells, start with Help:Infobox, then look at Wikipedia:List of infoboxes. StarryGrandma (talk) 23:30, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

ImAFurryWith2BrainCells, two points. First, the place for testing is not your user page but instead User:ImAFurryWith2BrainCells/sandbox. Secondly, your list of contributions shows no work on existing articles. People with little or no experience of improving existing articles tend to waste a lot of time on drafts for new articles, drafts that fail and that waste their (and others') time. -- Hoary (talk) 23:46, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

That's a little mean, @Hoary. I'm of the personal opinion that any good faith attempt to improve the encyclopedia is not a waste of time (bar WP:CIR, but that's an extreme case) casualdejekyll 01:28, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Want to know the process how it works

I got this article after scrolling till last I found 3 Related articles how it happens what is the algorithm? Bijoy2020 (talk) 00:59, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi Bijoy2020, welcome to the Teahouse. "Related articles" are only shown in the mobile version of Wikipedia. They are nearly always selected automatically by a search feature called morelike. See mw:Help:Extension:RelatedArticles and mw:Help:CirrusSearch#Morelike. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:16, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

help

on 1 tab my account DMPenguin has a talk page and on one my name is red and does not say i have a talk page but this just happend and i know i have a talk page cas i just edited it DMPenguin (talk) 01:11, 16 March 2022 (UTC) thanks

@DMPenguin: Hello DM! Relax, it's perfectly fine. The pages don't actively update. Simply just reload the tab where the link is red and it will be blue. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 01:13, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

so it just got fixed was this just a bug if so its annoying pls fix it DMPenguin (talk) 01:13, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

thanks DMPenguin (talk) 01:15, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

The page User:DMPenguin was created 2 August 2021‎. User talk:DMPenguin was created 13 July 2021‎. There shouldn't have been red links to any of them for many months. I wonder whether you were at another wiki when you saw a red name. Each wiki has separate user pages. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:31, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

DNA question

FYI

 – Added section header. GoingBatty (talk) 04:49, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

The Substances an host of DNA macro/gene and Genetic Formula that Gods gene strand holds macromolecules properties? 2600:8801:9E2E:CA00:A163:169:AD18:EA5C (talk) 03:26, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! This is a page for asking questions about using Wikipedia. If you have a question about the content of a Wikipedia article (e.g. God gene), then the best place to ask it is on the article's talk page (e.g. Talk:God gene). If your question is unrelated to Wikipedia, then you could try asking at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Science. GoingBatty (talk) 04:53, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Creating page

How do you create a page? The User access levels page says the person needs to be autoconfirmed, which happens at 4 days and 10 edits. However, it says it may vary. What are these variations? And what are the ways of creating a page? Oixyplanet (talk) 04:51, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

@Oixyplanet: Welcome to the Teahouse! Creating a new article is one of the hardest things to do on Wikipedia, especially for someone who is just starting to edit existing articles. To learn more about how to edit, you could view Help:Introduction and take The Wikipedia Adventure. I suggest spending a significant amount of time editing existing articles to hone your skills. Once you're ready to create an article, you would gather independent reliable sources that have provided significant coverage of the subject, and determine whether it meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, called "notability". If so, you could follow the instructions at Help:Your first article, and be prepared for a process that may include months of waiting, rejections, and rewrites, before an article is created. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 04:56, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

hi Oixyplanet and welcome to the teahouse! those with IP block exemption and connecting from stuff like Tor have stricter restrictions, according to that page. to create a new article for wikipedia, please read WP:Your first article. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 04:57, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Autoconfirmed status allows registered editors to create articles directly in mainspace, but the consistent advice is to use the WP:YFA procedure, which directs users to create a draft and then submit that to Articles for Creation for review. Experienced reviewers will either accept, decline or reject drafts. If declining, reasons are stated, identifying weaknessess and errors. The creating editor can fix and resubmit. Bypassing AfC is not recommended, as new articles are reviewed by a New Pages Patrol, which may implement an Articles for Deletion process. David notMD (talk) 10:28, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

See all contributions of a user to a page

I'm looking for a specific edit I made to a page that I have edited maybe 100 times over the years. How do I see all contributions I've made to a specific page? Do I just scroll through my edit history and ctrl-f? Akeosnhaoe (talk) 06:20, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

@Akeosnhaoe: Welcome to the Teahouse. If you go to a page's history page, there's a line near the top that lists external tools: one of them is "Find edits by user". Clicking on that takes you to a new page where you can insert your username to see what edits you've made to that page. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:41, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

@Akeosnhaoe Hi. You can follow this link to find out all edits you made to a specific page or your most edited page. Itcouldbepossible^Talk 06:42, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, how did you know that was the article I wanted? :) Akeosnhaoe (talk) 06:49, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

@Akeosnhaoe Just a coincidence. You had edited that page the most number of times. That is why I linked you to that specific link. Itcouldbepossible^Talk 07:13, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requested moves clarify

Hello. Before i request a move, just to be sure. In Wikipedia:Requested moves it says, Do not create a move request to rename one or more redirects. Redirects cannot be used as current titles in requested moves. Can i request a current article name to be be moved to it's old article name? It's old name is a redirect to it's current article.

I want to move Fano (nationalist movement) article back to it's first article name Fano (militia), see reasoning on talk. [[4]]. Dawit S Gondaria (talk) 06:44, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

@Dawit S Gondaria, yep, you can make that request! If the discussion successfully finds consensus, though, you'll just need to get an admin or page mover to perform the move. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 08:30, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

See Template:Db-move. -- œ^™ 08:31, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for this explanation!Dawit S Gondaria (talk) 15:18, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

how do i edit?

i am new to wikipedia and i want to edit but i dont know how to edit wikipedia so can you teach me how to edit wikipedia and the guidlines to edit wikipedia? Holiday chicken (talk) 08:32, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Check out WP:The Wikipedia Adventure! -- œ^™ 08:40, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

A common beginner's mistake is to add factual content without supporting reference(s). New content without a ref is often reverted (reversed) even if true. Practice creating content and references in your Sandbox, then when ready. copy into an article. David notMD (talk) 10:33, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

@Holiday chicken and WP:TUTORIAL. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:34, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello Holiday chicken and welcome to the Wikipedia experience. If you look at Help:contents, you will find other portals to articles that can help you know a bit before you begin. And as you begin your first editing actions, you might begin at WP:GettingStarted. Sometimes, knowing how to write the proper source code can be a bit daunting. I first began by looking at the Edit source tab of the article and mimicked what previous editors had done. I still do this for--what are to me--complicated matters. Know that you will make mistakes, and even though there are a few exceptions, the vast majority of editors are gentle, pleasant, and helpful to new editors. Kind regards,Hu Nhu (talk) 16:01, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

MS Dhoni edit war

Dhoni article is in constant in edit war by @Ripomobo11: other users. They are adding misinformation on there, for ex. In lead they wrote he is former profesional Cricketer. But it's wrong he still plays for Super Kings in IPL, this team retained him in 2022 auction, source- [5]. I suggest to ce the article thoroughly and stop these user from causing destruction on Cricket related articles.Success think (talk) 11:16, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

@Success think: Hi again! My recommendation when you asked for help about this same topic two days ago still stands. GoingBatty (talk) 13:55, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

How can I contribute to revisions of Wiki pages?

Changes are made to Wiki pages in the name of revisions but there is no proper consultations. Only page links are shared of external sites and no inputs are taken from the other side of the source. I request you to bring some light to the matter. Gauravbhandari1788 (talk) 11:37, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

hi Gauravbhandari1788 and welcome to the teahouse! what do you mean by this? articles are referenced using sources such as existing websites, news articles, scientific journals, etc. 💜  melecie  talk - 11:59, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

@Gauravbhandari1788 See WP:BOLD and WP:TUTORIAL. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:02, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Issue with article on Wikipedia

I faced an issue while posting an article about a businessman from Azerbaijan. My article contains all needed information and links regards the topic - I would like to know, what may cause a problem of a disapprove of the article and what is a list of particular information that should be mentioned and applied to get an article posted? Here is a link Draft:Zaur Sanan Akhundov to the draft issue. Denzo9909 (talk) 12:10, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

hi Denzo9909 and welcome to the teahouse! the issues Robertsky pointed out are that the draft currently doesn't show that the person is notable enough for an article. you can check WP:NBIO to see whether your article does in fact meet the requirements, and if it does, you must provide reliable sources to support that. additionally, parts of the article aren't referenced such as § Career, you also need to add a reliable source for that. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 12:24, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Is my article good enough to be sub-content to a main page?

Greetings! Newbie here who has just begun dipping their toes in Wikipedia editing. I created an article yesterday in my sandbox that will be inserted into the MTU main page. The article was declined for not being noteworthy enough for a stand alone article and that the cited resources were only MTU-based. Does that fact that this article will be part of the MTU page, not a stand alone article, make it a viable? Thanks in advance for your guidance. Husky1986 (talk) 13:16, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: User:Husky1986/sandbox, about Svitlana Winnikow 💜  melecie  talk - 13:42, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

@Husky1986: The sources you used in your sandbox were both created by MTU. Do you have any independent sources? GoingBatty (talk) 13:57, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

All sources are MTU. No other sources found on the web. Husky1986 (talk) 23:56, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

@Husky1986: You may use published independent reliable sources that are not on the web, such as books, magazines, newspapers, and journals. GoingBatty (talk) 02:09, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

@Husky1986: The draft seems to be copy-pasted from Lyon Bradley King. There is no need to put [edit] in the headers or a manual "contents" section. --The Tips of Apmh 16:05, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

My Wikiperidan in Residence instructed me to copy-paste King's article to create the Winnikow article. Husky1986 (talk) 23:57, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Follow-up to Draft: John R. Falck

Hi. I would like to submit a new, revised, version my original Draft:John R Falck, archived and or deleted for lack of activity and/or potential copy right infringement. I tried to retrieve the original draft but was unsuccessful. Thanks, Jmcapdevj Jmcapdevj (talk) 14:31, 16 March 2022 (UTC) Jmcapdevj (talk) 14:31, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

@Jmcapdevj, I see nothing that prevents you from clicking Draft:John R Falck and start writing. WP:COPYPASTE is important, so is WP:BLP if it applies. If you can't source it, don't add it. WP:TUTORIAL has good guidance on how to do referencing, if you want a WP-article to "stick", this is essential. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:09, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Should I include all parent categories when adding categories to a page?

For example, I assigned categories for a page about a village in India yesterday. I assigned "Geography of India by city" but also all of its parent categories, "Geography by City", "Geography by Location", and "Geography". Is this the correct thing to do? Link: Mathankovil patti Sushi725 (talk) 16:09, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

No you should not. We categorise as specific as possible. See also advice in Wikipedia:Categorization#Categorizing_pages —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 16:15, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I will fix that page, review your link and note this going forward. Sushi725 (talk) 16:21, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Add Software screenshoots

Hello,

I would like to add a screenshoot to the page Draft:Phoenix Bird Database I created, but the system can't verify the rights of the image and I can't upload it.

Can anyone help me?

Thank you Tech curator 89 (talk) 16:17, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Tech curator 89 Much more important than adding images is the need to ensure that this database/software is notable by Wikipedia standards. Your draft lacks any citations about the software to show that people have commented on its utility. There is no hope of getting the article accepted without this. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:27, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello Mike, is a pretty new software and I don't think there are many citations around at this time. Tech curator 89 (talk) 17:01, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

@Tech curator 89: How new is new exactly? If it's only a few days, weeks, or months old, then it's unlikely to be notable yet. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 17:17, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

The software was release on 8 October 2020 Tech curator 89 (talk) 19:19, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

If it's too new to be mentioned in reliable sources, then don't make the article yet. If an article subject isn't mentioned in reliable sources, it isn't notable enough to be included on Wikipedia. Bsoyka (talk) 17:25, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Tech curator 89, and welcome to the Teahouse. I would echo what the other replies have said. 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. So until several independent people have published material about the database, there is nothing that you can put in an article about it.

But I notice that nobody has answered your main question, apart from noting that it's not worth worrying about images yet. The answer is that the user interface ofa piece of software is almost always copyright, and you may not use it anywhere in Wikipedia unless either the copyright owner explicitly licenses it under a licence such as CC-BY-SA; or all the terms in the non-free content criteria apply. Neither is very likely, I'm afraid. ColinFine (talk) 18:00, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Thank you all for your reply. I have added an extensive bibliography in the draft for now. Some reviews by independent and established magazines are ongoing, when ready I'll add more citations. Tech curator 89 (talk) 22:20, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Tech curator 89 The ref to a bibliography about birds is completely useless. What is needed is references to published articles about the software, as that is what the article purports to be about. David notMD (talk) 22:50, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Hyperlinks not allowed in body of article. Can those become refs? David notMD (talk) 22:54, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

User script

I tries to import User:Anomie/useridentifier.js to User:Sandsandsandsa/monobook.js but it isn't working. Why is this? Sandsandsandsa (talk) 16:17, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi Sandsandsandsa, welcome to the Teahouse. Do you use the MonoBook skin at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-rendering? Code in monobook.js only runs if you use MonoBook. I'm not sure why Anomie wrote monobook.js in the instructions at User:Anomie/useridentifier.js. The script appears to work in other skins. Add the code to your common JavaScript to run the script in all skins, but I don't make promises about how it works. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:44, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Back in 2007 when I wrote it, Vector wasn't a thing yet, not was user common.js, nor the skin.js redirect script. All those came a few years later. Anomie⚔ 20:40, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

@Anomie: Thanks. Then maybe update the instructions? The script is listed at Wikipedia:User scripts/List#User information. PrimeHunter (talk) 08:45, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Remove redirect to create a new page draft

Hello, I’m an employee of Chewy_(company) and I’ve added my COI to my user page as well as the Chewy Talk page when requesting edits. I need help with removing the redirect for Sumit Singh (businessman) to the Chewy Wikipedia article; I would like to begin a new draft for the article about Sumit Singh, which was quickly deleted in June 2020 for a lack of notability, after being created by another user. I am unaware of the user who created it, but I’d like to begin the process of recreating it by disclosing and with more notability about Sumit. Am I able to begin this myself with my COI? I’ll add necessary tags to the draft but need some help with removing the redirect and creating the draft page. Thank you. Ab31488 (talk) 16:24, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Ab31488 I suggest you use the WP:AfC process to create your draft. later, if the new draft is approved, the reviewer who does so will sort out the redirects. Note that in addition to notifying about your COI, you must under Wikipedia's terms and conditions also fully comply with WP:PAID. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:32, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Question re references that can't be accessed

Where, in an article, the writer has provided links to the sources of references, but the Wikipedia user can't access the actual information, do we mark it as a dead link or remove the link altogether? For example, the author of an article "quotes" from several books, but only provides the links to the books. The Wikipedia user can't actually read, or see, the quote from the book, the original page, or the preview. So it's a link that goes nowhere and does nothing to verify the article's statements and conclusions. In another instance (same article), a reference link eventually goes to an Excel file with five date lines in it and nothing else. So it does not verify the statement in the article and is of no use to the Wikipedia user. Should that reference be removed altogether or marked in some other way?--LJA123 (talk) 16:54, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

@LJA123: See WP:OFFLINE. Even though Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia, there is no distinction between using online versus offline sources. The book can still verify information, but it might not be available to everyone online, and that's perfectly fine. As for the second case, if the source definitely doesn't support the material it's supposed to, take it out. Bsoyka (talk) 17:30, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

OK thanks.--LJA123 (talk) 17:43, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

No problem. Bsoyka (talk) 17:56, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Template reason

Hi, I have to give my rationale in a proposed deletion template but can't make it concise enough, so would someone help me word it properly please? -- CalSmith2 (talk) 17:55, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi CalSmith2, I think Mayor of Wigan definitely is a notable topic; the article may need improving but definitely not deleting. I'll give it a quick read. Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 18:32, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi again, it could do with updating and more inline citations, I think it otherwise looks ok though. Have you brought up the issues on Talk:Mayor of Wigan? Cheers, Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 18:36, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Adding info to an article

I would like to ask how I may upload a picture of my house to go along with my house's listing under the works of George Barber. My house is listed but it doesn't include a photograph. Thank you 8.15.177.111 (talk) 19:12, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! Try using Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard. GoingBatty (talk) 21:34, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

create a article

Hi, so I am new to wikipedia and was wondering how to create a page of my own. There probably is a very obvious solution that I overlooked however I was just wondering where I can create a page. Thanks

-leham6309 jk (talk) 19:50, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Please, see Wikipedia:First article. Ruslik_Zero 20:04, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Leham6309 and welcome to the Teahouse. If you mean a page where you may share with other Wikipedia editors what your interests are as a Wikipedia editor, then you can create your user page User:Leham6309, and put anything you like on it that is permitted according to WP:UPYES.

If you mean you want to create an encyclopaedia article, then please follow Ruslik's suggestion; but I would urge you to put that project aside for a few months while you learn how Wikipedia works by editing existing articles. If you mean that you want to create a Wikipedia article about yourself, then please don't. See autobiography for why not. ColinFine (talk) 21:12, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

By the way, confusing that your signature has "jk" whereas your registered User name is Leham6309. David notMD (talk) 22:32, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

picture licensing

Hi, could someone please explain to me why is the usage right of the attached picture not open to the public even if it was taken in 1928, after almost 100 years of existence.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Nadine_Hwang_en_tenue_d%E2%80%99escrime_1928.jpg YodaYawn (talk) 20:08, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

@YodaYawn: It is public domain in China. It may or may not be public domain in the U.S, since it was created after 1926. See File:PD-US_table.svg for some of the rules. RudolfRed (talk) 20:14, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Draft

Would someone mind reviewing the draft I created (here) and letting me know whether it would make it onto the mainspace wiki? It's my first draft and I want to know whether it's good enough. I'd guess that even if it doesn't get added currently, it will after a few days, because the season for the Biathlon World Cup is ending soon and he's ranked 10th overall. Thank you! Réunion (stylised) - (talk to me) 20:43, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

@Reunion You just created the draft today. There are 2,979 other drafts waiting for review. Just be patient. You can continue to work on expanding the draft while you are waiting for review. RudolfRed (talk) 21:03, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Additionally, it may take months for review. Don't expect it to be done in a few days. RudolfRed (talk) 21:05, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Actually (RudolfRed), the backlog is not a queue. Reviewers select what they want to review next. So could be days, weeks or (sadly) months. David notMD (talk) 22:35, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Surprise! Reviewed (and Declined) one hour after submitted. David notMD (talk) 22:37, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Notification of the contribution

Hi, I am a newcomer in the community. I've made a few changes on some topics, but some of my updates were deleted by others without notification. Are there ways to watch the update? Polinlc2 (talk) 21:26, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, @Polinlc2! Your watchlist is a great way to keep track of new edits to articles that you've contributed to. ––FormalDude talk 21:29, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

@Polinlc2: you can also see when your edits have been reverted by toggling it in Preferences > Notifications > Edit Revert. regarding the relevant revert, an ip user reverted your edit as it added in a user review from Rotten Tomatoes, which is not allowed per WP:UGC. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 00:25, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Relevance of an article

Hi, I wanted to ask if there is a place where suggesting the creation of an article, or asking if an article is relevant enough. Thank you. Malerag (talk) 21:49, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

@Malerag: Welcome to the Teahouse! There is Wikipedia:Requested articles, but there is no guarantee that editors would create articles for any recommendations made there. If you choose to make a recommendation, I suggest you review Wikipedia:Notability and provide multiple published independent reliable sources that provide significant coverage of the topic. Hope this helps! GoingBatty (talk) 22:12, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Regulatory agencies as a reliable source

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:ThorCon_nuclear_reactor
I would like to see an article on each of several new reactor designs, with enough detail to answer many of the questions raised by anti-nuclear advocates. Are all molten salt reactors a proliferation risk? That depends on the specific design. We need these details.
I have started one of these articles, but I am running into a wall of opposition. The clearest source of design details is the companies themselves, usually on their website. That was the first reject, not independent enough. Then I found the same data in documents submitted to the IAEA, not as clear, but much more thorough. That got another reject. Even though the data was reviewed and published by independent experts at the IAEA, it still ultimately came from the company. I don't think there is any better source of this information.
I have written a response to the second reviewer (See the notice at the top of the article.) Can I get some advice, before submitting it again? I have read the policy on reliable sources, and it is not clear to me why this reject, or how this question can be resolved. David MacQuigg 21:49, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Macquigg, what you need is reliable independent published sources that discuss the reactor. Your own comment "I contacted ThorCon and got the following comment from Robert Hargraves: 'There were dozens of interactions between IAEA editors and me. The tables of tech specs were required by IAEA and filled in by me and checked by others. There can be no more accurate source.'" makes it clear that the IAEA sources are not independent of the designer of the reactor. Maproom (talk) 22:19, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

The point of the comment was to show that there WAS an actual review by the IAEA. They don't just accept without question the information submitted by companies wanting to build nuclear reactors. Regulatory agencies answer to the government. Their mission is public safety. Their reviews are done by experts independent of the companies submitting applications.

If not a regulatory agency, what would be a better source of information on a reactor design? Would an article in Popular Mechanics be acceptable? David MacQuigg 22:53, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

@Macquigg, you need two different types of sources. To show that the article is about a topic already well-enough known to have a Wikipedia article you need two or three sources which are reliable, independent of the company, and have some in-depth discussion of the reactor. ThorCon is discussed in the technical literature of molten salt reactors and turns up in multiple places, such as here and here. However it is perfectly acceptable to also use published company sources for what the reactors do and the design details, from their website or in articles they have written in the industrial literature. These primary sources are fine for such factual statements and are likely to be the most accurate. We use NASA for details about rockets and spacecraft for example. But all sources have to be published. StarryGrandma (talk) 00:16, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

@StarryGrandma Thank you. This is very helpful. I was aware of the first link. The second is also good to establish that this reactor is well-known in the technical community. Thank you also for the clarification that I can use the company website for the design details. I will keep the link to the IAEA document for those who want more detail and have the time to wade through it.

Now I need to convey this information to the next person who responds when I click SUBMIT. Should I just copy your comments into the template at the top of the article? David MacQuigg 01:20, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

{{u|David MacQuigg]],That comment alone will not help you. You need to show notability, which requires independent secondary sources taking an interest in the subject. IAEA and primary docs may be WP:DUE once the article establishes notability, but they are useless for establishing notability itself.Slywriter (talk) 16:32, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

@Slywriter Are you saying the two links cited by @StarryGrandma are NOT sufficient to show notability? David MacQuigg 16:42, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

David MacQuiggThe 2nd is sourced to ThorCon for the very limited mentions it makes of the company. The second also seems to be using the company as its source. So I don't see how either contribute to notability of Thorcon. Another reviewer may find differently.Slywriter (talk) 16:54, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

@Slywriter, @Macquigg it turns out that TMSR-500 is the existing article about the reactor. The two sources I mentioned were to show that the reactor turns up frequently in the technical literature; there are more as well as the news media coverage. The point is that sources for facts don't have to be the same sources that show notability. StarryGrandma (talk) 17:34, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

StarryGrandma, agreed though getting the draft accepted is not as simple as referring to your comment and expecting a reviewer to accept that as proof of notability nor would those two sources necessarily convinced every reviewer. Though all moot, as the article already exists and the technical information should be incorporated there. Name change might be justified but I haven't done any review of which is common name.Slywriter (talk) 17:59, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

@Slywriter@StarryGrandma

On the question of notability, can I appeal to common sense? Understanding some important details of these new reactor designs is super important to the debate going on now over renewables vs nuclear. ThorCon is one of the leading contenders (not my favorite), but certainly worthy of coverage.

On the question of reliable sources, can we accept company websites as authoritative on the details of their own designs? If there is a challenge, we can dig deeper. If that still doesn't resolve any question of fact, let's have a brief point-counterpoint on the talk page. See the examples in the draft I submitted.

On the existing article, TMSR-500 appears to be an old name. I don't see it anywhere on ThorCon's current website, or in their filing with the IAEA. The old article seems too promotional to me. We need a short, factual article, focused on the issues of safety, waste management, weapons proliferation, and cost. Everything else is readily available on the company's website. If there is something you think is important in that old article, let's merge it into the current draft.

I will be writing articles on a few other reactors, the ones I find most interesting. I suggest we try to establish a common format, so readers can easily compare one to another. Surely the four issues I listed should be prominent.
David MacQuigg 22:44, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Macquigg, you are free to edit the existing article and are encouraged to clean up(even remove) the promotional materials added by a connected editor. You are also free to move the page to what you think is a better name either by using the Move feature or requesting at WP:RM. So with that established, notability is not currently being questioned since the article already exists in main space. What's not going to happen is your article being approved when an existing article already exists. Also please see WP:Advocacy as we are here to inform readers, not lead them by the nose to a desired outcome. Additionally Talk pages are for discussing the editing of an article and not for further discussions or information on the subject or related topics.Slywriter (talk) 23:33, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

@Macquigg, it was originally titled Thorcon and was about the reactor. Occasionally it tried to be an article about the company. It was moved to the current title in 2020 and certainly can be renamed. A standard organized form is a good approach. You could start by writing an article about one of the other reactors, then step by step modify the existing article about ThorCon into that form. Since we are an encyclopedia the article needs the history of the project, who it is being built for, etc. as well as the technical material. It is the former that will show the project is notable in the Wikipedia sense and provide the references that demonstrate notability. There is an in depth, though rather negative, analysis of the reactor done by the Union of Concerned Scientists, and their assessment should be included. I've added the reference as Further reading here. StarryGrandma (talk) 23:53, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

@Slywriter@StarryGrandma

I worry about getting into an edit war with whoever wrote the TMSR-500 article, but I will give it a try. There is nothing provably wrong with the existing article, so it will probably end up like the mush I see in other articles on nuclear power.

I have no desire to "lead them by the nose". If that remark is in response to the draft, I would sure like to know what you are seeing.

If the talk pages should include only editorial, not substantive issues, I will need to remove the point-counterpoint summaries on the current talk page. How about we make a sub-page: "Thorcon nuclear reactor/Q&A" where both sides can have their say, and keep the controversies off the main page.

I agree, the UCS analysis should be included, but not without fact-checking. Also UCS is far from neutral on anything related to nuclear power. I guess you didn't see that I included their statement about this reactor on the Talk page, followed by a statement from the company that seems to settle the matter. I think the only legitimate challenge to this would have to be a statement from a nuclear engineer, not affiliated with UCS or any other advocacy group, saying that while the ThorCon design does not have the alleged problem, it won't work as designed. If true, the company will have a big problem with getting approval by the regulatory agencies. If the question can't be resolved between neutral experts, our readers should see that. David MacQuigg 01:22, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Macquigg, my lead them by the nose is based on your comments here. Even now, you are looking to provide analysis to the article through Talk or Sub-page. Wikipedia is fundamentally not the place for such analysis or discussion. Wikipedia provides the facts, the rest of the internet provides the conversation. Most importantly, we never engage in orginal research.

On the edit-war, we have policies to prevent that. You can be WP:BOLD and wholesale remove what's there. Just be ready to discuss on talk page if someone reverts. Just because the connected editor found favorable facts in 'reliable sources' does not mean they are WP:DUE for inclusion and the talk page shows other editors had concerns with the article even after cleaning up. Though some of the sources may be useful as general references or basic facts so they can support notability since your draft is currently based entirely on primary sources.Slywriter (talk) 01:38, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

@Slywriter

"you are looking to provide analysis to the article" I still don't understand how I am leading the reader "by the nose". The "analysis" you refer to (I'm guessing} is the point-counterpoint on the Talk page. I see my role in this as being that of a reporter, gathering the most relevant facts, and getting exact quotes from each side where there is disagreement on the facts. I am not a nuclear engineer, so I would not even try to inject my analysis into this debate.

"we never engage in orginal research" I am guessing this refers to my digging up quotes from both sides?

How should we handle the point-counterpoint I have shown on the Talk page? David MacQuigg 04:24, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Best way to escalate politically-charged edit - Russia/Ukraine

Hello there! I am a bit of a newbie when it comes to editing politically-charged content. I have sought to edit an entry about Reuters, stating it had concluded in 2020 a partnership with TASS, the Russian state-owned agency. I originally started an explanation as to why that was important and it could certainly have been improved (long story short: Reuters uses TASS as newswire and puts out content entirely unedited, so we get unfiltered propaganda on the invasion of Ukraine, see TASS#Russo-Ukrainian_War). My edit has been deleted 3 times by 2 people, including 1 person whose edit history shows a clear long bias supporting Russia's disinformation on Wikipedia.

I read I should start a Talk page so I did Talk:Reuters#Removal_of_TASS_partnership. But that did not resolve the issue, as my edit is still deleted, and I don't want to go into edit warring, but want to escalate, given the factual and relevant nature of my edit, not to mention what I see as a critical piece of information to understand how news is being generated on this war.

So finally my question: while I understand I cannot guarantee the outcome of my request based on the channel I choose, such as 3rd party opinion or noticeboard, I want to know what Wikipedia has in place to ensure balance and prevent swarming of disinformation agents ganging up to drive content one way or the other (thinking COVID vaccines, Ukraine invasion, etc...)? And if such mechanisms are in place, what is the escalation method that is likely to give me the most politically balanced outcome? I fear for example 3rd party, as it basically requires a single person to close the matter, and that feels worse than tossing a coin (at least most coins are not loaded).

Thank you! Sheislaurence (talk) 00:18, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

hi Sheislaurence and welcome to the teahouse! there are many policies that prevent disinformation and politically charged edits, such as bold-revert-discuss, libel, verifiability, and neutral point of view. escalation is done through methods at Dispute resolution, although with how the conversation at Talk:Reuters is going on, I don't feel like you don't need to escalate yet, you'll need to prove there that this information is indeed verifiable, from an independent (non-reuters) source, and important. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 00:39, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi there! Thanks for the fast reply @Melecie! But you may have read the Talk a bit fast, no one is contesting that the TASS/Reuters partnership exists at all, i.e. the verifiability of the partnership itself is NOT in question. They are merely contesting the fact it is relevant, i.e. they are saying that it is not an interesting piece of information and therefore shouldn't be up. I don't see how constructive it would be to continue that particular debate, as clearly each party from now on would only repeat themselves, having laid it out twice.

I wanted to hear from veteran users about the merits of different methods of Dispute resolution on Wikipedia. Having read it already, I cannot decide which to choose. Sheislaurence (talk) 01:23, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

A page that I submitted isn't showing up after 2 months

I have created a page for a notable person, why isn't it showing? What can I do about it? 2603:8001:A403:A085:A52B:EB75:6096:40B2 (talk) 00:55, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

There is large backlogs for drafts. You did not say what draft you are working on, so more specific comments are not possible. Also, don't ask the same question in more than one place, please. RudolfRed (talk) 01:14, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

How to request a block of a vandal IP?

Special:Contributions/2601:143:C501:7FA0:8CDE:A3D5:FBC7:30E3

This IP has deliberately vandalized the [[Detective Pokemon]] article several times. Just Another Cringy Username (talk) 01:27, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

@Just Another Cringy Username: Welcome to the Teahouse. You are probably looking for the administrator intervention against vandalism noticeboard. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:31, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

@Just Another Cringy Username: Hello Cringy Username! I would wait for them to edit again before reporting them. THey've only been reverted 4 times so far. IF they vandalize the article again you can report them to WP:AIV. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 01:31, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Articles based on experience

I've been recommended to go to the Wikipedia Adventure, and it says articles must be based on another sites and not experiences. Is this the case with things like movies that you have seen and videogames you have played? Oixyplanet (talk) 03:03, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

@Oixyplanet: Good question! Some parts of articles, like plot summaries of films or video games, do not require a secondary sources, and the primary source (the film or game) can be used as the citation/reference. Let us know if you have any other questions! ––FormalDude talk 03:15, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Oixyplanet, to be clear, the notabillity of any such film or video game must be established by providing references to reliable, independent sources that devote significant coverage to the topic. Then and only then is it acceptable to write a plot summary based on the work itself. Cullen328 (talk) 04:54, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Submission

Hi I’m a Music Artist. I created a page on Wikipedia. How do I go about getting it submitted and approved where I officially appear on Wikipedia? Phillye (talk) 05:58, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: User:Phillye (Music Artist)

hi Phillye and welcome to the teahouse! firstly, please read WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY and WP:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. unfortunately, writing autobiographies are discouraged due to it being hard for one to stay neutral when talking about oneself. additionally, having an article requires meeting the notability guidelines, which in your case would be notability for musicians, which you have to prove through reliable sources that are independent of you which means you cannot just write about yourself freely here. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 06:06, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

i'm not sure if that courtesy link pinged her, so uhh @Phillye (Music Artist) 💜  melecie  talk - 06:08, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi I uploaded a bio that was actually written by someone else about me. I was asking for directions to the link to upload links for media coverage and other stuff to prove my notability. Where on the page do I click submit or reach out to the team that gives the approval. Thanks Phillye (talk) 06:13, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

hi Phillye (Music Artist)! you can get started by reading My first article (starting to write an article), Reliable Sources (how to cite stuff), and Notability (musicians) (how to prove your notability). you may also want to move your draft over to Draft:Phillye (music artist) from your userspace, where you can submit it. and finally, you probably want to ask your writer to create their own account (and declare conflict of interests, if any). happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 06:20, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

@Phillye (Music Artist) By definition, a bio that was actually written by someone else about me is not yours to upload. The copyright is owned by the author, not by you, unless they have explicitly and by act of law transferred the copyright to you, or unless they licence it for use. Please refer to Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for routes to perform this act.

Please see also WP:NMUSICIAN to determine whether you meet our tough criteria. If you do not then please just get a web site and publicise your achievements that way

Referencing is tough. Simple media mentions tend to be puffery. For a living person we have a high standard of referencing. Every substantive fact you assert, especially one that is susceptible to potential challenge, requires a citation with a reference that is about them, and is independent of them, in multiple secondary sources which are WP:RS, and is significant coverage. Please also see WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources and WP:SELFPUB which has clear limitations on self published sources. Providing sufficient references, ideally one per fact cited, that meet these tough criteria is likely to make this draft a clear acceptance (0.9 probability). Lack of them or an inability to find them is likely to mean that the person is not suitable for inclusion, certainly today.

What you face is the personal slap in the face of finding out that you may not merit an article on Wikipedia. Most people do not.

Far better to wait for someone else to write about you. If you are truly notable then I imagine someone will. If you believe that Wikipedia will enhance your reputation please think again. Wikipedia adds no value to you. You must add value to Wikipedia. Passing WP:NMUSICIAN does that. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 07:11, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Thank you so much 😊 Phillye (talk) 06:23, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Here's a pretty representative sample of User:Phillye (Music Artist), as I found it: With tremendously popular releases such as ‘All I Ever Wanted’ and her latest single, Weekend Love, featuring Jamaica’s very own Reggae legend, Sizzla, Phillye has taken the main stage in the industry with thousands of fans. I have deleted the whole thing as blatantly promotional. (See WP:UP.) If your purpose is to promote yourself (or anyone else), you're at the wrong website. -- Hoary (talk) 07:10, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

The "someone else" who wrote the promotionally slanted bio could register for an account and try, but then paid (WP:PAID) might apply. David notMD (talk) 10:14, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Definition of "PENALTY".

Please help to find out What does it mean "PENALTY"? from start, continuation, Condition, Equality, Penalizing, Being Penalized, Benefits, Verity, quantity, Quality, Duration......and...............to End. sorry for not good English.  Dabohg (talk) 07:33, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Dabohg, an entire book could be written on that subject area. Meanwhile, this "Teahouse" page is intended to help people with the problems they are encountering when trying to augment, improve or use English-language Wikipedia. Are you encountering any such problems? -- Hoary (talk) 09:29, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Dabohg There is an alternative version of Wikipedia in simple English for readers who are learning the language. You'll find its page about possible meanings for "penalty" at this link. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:07, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Change of image

Hi, i'd like to change the image on my wikipedia page. It shows a Russian flag for a company I now no longer work with. I don't know how to change the photo? Collijles (talk) 13:48, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Collijles Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I would correct you in that it is not "your Wikipedia page", but a Wikipedia article about you. If you have a photo of yourself you wish to use that you either took yourself or that otherwise copyright permits you to upload, you may go to Files For Upload to work towards uploading the image. If your account has 10 edits or more and is at least four days old, you can upload it yourself at File Upload Wizard. 331dot (talk) 13:56, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your help. Collijles (talk) 09:00, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

@Collijles: I'm presuming that you are Gareth Penny, because that is the only article you have edited. Uploading a new photo of yourself is fine. However, you should not be editing the article about you because you have a conflict of interest (COI). Instead, you should declare your COI on your user page. You can then make suggestions for improving the article at Talk:Gareth Penny with the {{edit request}} template. Or, you may use the Wikipedia:Edit Request Wizard. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 18:01, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Thank you - appreciated Collijles (talk) 09:01, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

The appropriate way to tag "social media" drafts

What's the appropriate way to tag this draft? I see these sometimes where it's not strictly {{db-u5}} because it's not a user page per se, and it doesn't quite fit with {{db-g11}} as promotional. It's basically a social media-type page for somebody that is nowhere close to being notable enough for an article. _signed, Willondon (talk) 14:17, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

@Willondon: I don't see why G11 wouldn't apply here. --The Tips of Apmh 14:43, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Purpose of a particular article

I'd take this to AfD, but I figured I might as well try to learn something. What encyclopaedic purpose does "List of sock manufacturers" have? Or is it just a pointless spam magnet? Mako001 (C)  (T)  🇺🇦 14:27, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Note: There was an Afd discussion regarding this article in 2016, and the result was 'keep' - here. Kpddg ^{(talk • contribs)} 14:33, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Can someone help me with a template?

User @Blaze Wolf asked user @Levi OP for help with this on his talk page, but he's been inactive for the past week.

Can anyone help him with this, as I am no good with wikitext conditionals or templates in general. QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 15:32, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

@QuickQuokka: Did you check my talk page at all...? SkyeWolf369 is helping me out with it. I wouldn't mind someone else to see if what they're proposing is the correct way to do it however. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 15:36, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

@Blaze Wolf: Whoops. I'm sometimes an idiot Facepalm QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 15:37, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Its okay don't beat yourself up over a mistake you are not an idiot you just did not know all of the information about something before you tried to help. Thanks for trying to help. SkyeWolf369 (talk) 15:44, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Referencing

I have created a Bio entitled Draft:Vivian Granger. I have two questions. QUESTION ONE I have completed my references. They are from historical newspaper and magazine articles. However, these are not online in terms of public domain or web sites - how do I get them to be accessible as proof that my sources are valid? QUESTION TWO Is someone able to place this updated Bio article on Wikitia for me? I am not sure what Wikitia is, but my previous draft version was placed on Wikitia by someone and I would like it to be updated with my latest version. Thank you.

Mysky2blue1 (talk) 15:48, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

We cannot help you with any Wikitia issues as that website has no connection to Wikipedia. I suspect it will eventually be updated somehow. 331dot (talk) 15:52, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Better, but needs a bit more work before submitting to Wikipedia again. You describe a photo from 1977 as your own work. Really? If not, remove, as in all likelihood, copyright protected. Bit too much about other family members. Your refs (old newspapers, etc.) do not have to be available on line as long as valid. Basically, Wikipedia trusts editors. The thinking is that published newspapers and magazine can be looked up by people with access to a library that has that stuff archived. David notMD (talk) 16:33, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Championship Colors

In the articles for American professional sports divisions like the American League East or the AFC East(and all the other MLB and NFL divisions) in the Champions by Year, Wild Card winners produced, and Division Champions sections, why are the World Series/Super Bowl wins in red and losses in green? This seems counter to common color associations and even earlier in the articles, in the Timeline and Division Lineup sections, winners are in green and appearances are in yellow. Is there a color guide that someone could point me to? Or is there a different place to discuss this, as it is something across many pages and at least 2 sports. PetahBread15 (talk) 15:53, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

PetahBread15, WP:WikiProject Sports is probably the best venue. Fwiw, I do find the color choice odd and the team colors are likely an accessibility issue.Slywriter (talk) 18:06, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

I'll go ask people closer to the topic. Thanks! PetahBread15 (talk) 01:33, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

What to do when I notice another website is copying Wikipedia without attribution?

FYI

 – Can't provide link, as Wikitia is blacklisted

I noticed that the article I wrote was completely ripped off on Wikitia. What can I do about this, as I cannot create an account. (It says "permission error" when I try)

I am not mad that they copied it, I am mad that they pretend they did it, when, in fact, me, my mom, and 74 other editors did. QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 16:17, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi QuickQuokka. Your post appears to be about https://wikitia.com/wiki/Shahar_Tavoch. I see this at the bottom of the page:

This article "Shahar Tavoch" is from Wikipedia. The list of its authors can be seen in its historical. Articles taken from Draft Namespace on Wikipedia could be accessed on Wikipedia's Draft Namespace.

Reusers are not required to list the contributors if they link the Wikipedia page they copied from. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:48, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

That website also has a general statement "Content is available under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike. Some of Wikitia's pages are sourced from Wikipedia.org's Mainspace and Draftspace. Wikitia is not affiliated to Wikimedia Foundation, unless otherwise noted." Cullen328 (talk) 16:51, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter: Oh, oops didn't notice it lol QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 16:59, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

I need help! A person has created a Wikipedia account and its username cusses me!

I need help! A person has created a Wikipedia account and its username cusses me in Hindi! His username link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Tamjeed_Ahmed_ne_apni_ammi_ke_chut_mein_peshab_kiya Tamjeed Ahmed (talk) 17:13, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Tamjeed Ahmed I have reported them to WP:UAA, so they should be blocked for an offensive username once an admin comes along. Alternatively, an admin may see this post (it's clearly offensive in Hindi, according to Google Translate). Joseph2302 (talk) 17:19, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

thanks a lot sir! Tamjeed Ahmed (talk) 17:23, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

@Tamjeed Ahmed: Please do not people attack other people, as you did with this edit. Treat others with civility no matter what. The Tips of Apmh 18:22, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Draft page deleted

Dear Volunteer;

My self Sujit Kumar Mishra, I'm Indian Actor and Author and I have to save my Wiki Draft page for final submission but due more then 6 month is over my wiki draft page deleted. And I want to update my data in Wiki pages for final submission. so please re-store as same. As per last conversation you told me there are no expiration of draft page of updating. but unfortunately it's deleted so pls check and revert back. thanks

Sujit0601 (talk) 17:25, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

@Sujit0601, welcome. WP:REFUND has directions. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:38, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Sujit0601, and welcome to the Teahouse. Click on the link in the message about the deletion on your talk page. Repeated here: request its undeletion. That will take you to the request for getting it back. StarryGrandma (talk) 17:38, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

THE ENGLISH-GEORGIAN ROYAL FAMILY OF LLOYD-BAGRATIONI

I wish to have my family history on wikipedia Please help me how to do it Many thanks The Rt Hon Steven Lord Lloyd-Bagrationi 37.131.226.211 (talk) 17:35, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Here's some reading, in no particular order: WP:N, WP:COI, WP:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing, WP:TUTORIAL and WP:YFA. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:00, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Editing

Hello i need some help with editing wikipedia articles/making articles. Every time i have a draft edit or every time i have a normal edit to an article i didnt make, it has an admin reply in less than 2 minutes telling me stuff that i cant do and this and that and blah blah blah. I just want to make and edit articles so why cant i? Xephrax (talk) 17:39, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Xephrax, maybe don't commit vandalism. It's really the simplest way to help the encyclopedia. If you actually want to learn about Wikipedia, consider the interactive tutorial.Slywriter (talk) 18:02, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

@Xephrax: Welcome to the Teahouse! While you might have been acting in good faith when you posted the lyrics of "Chocolate Rain", it is a copyright violation and had to be reverted.

Creating a new article is one of the hardest things to do on Wikipedia, especially if you have limited experience editing existing Wikipedia articles. To learn how to edit, you could view Help:Introduction and The Wikipedia Adventure. I suggest spending a significant amount of time editing existing articles to hone your skills. Once you're ready to create an article, you would gather independent reliable sources that have provided significant coverage of the subject, and determine whether it meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, called "notability". If so, you could follow the instructions at Help:Your first article, and be prepared for a process that may include months of waiting, rejections, and rewrites, before an article is created. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 18:11, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: It is not technically a copyvio, because it followed all the license terms.

• Attribution: Clearly stated in article that the song is by Tay Zonday;
• NonCommercial: Yes;
• Derivative work?: No.

QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 18:20, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

@QuickQuokka: Hi there! Due to the unusual situation described in Chocolate Rain#License, you may be right that in this case it might not be a copyvio. However, I would think that the other parts of WP:NOTLYRICS still apply. Xephrax may follow the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle and discuss this at Talk:Chocolate Rain. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 18:27, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: I didn't say he was right, I simply said it wasn't a copyvio. QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 18:30, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict) CC-BY-NC-ND is not compatible with Wikipedia's content licensing, meaning it breaks Section 7 c of the Terms of Use and therefore shouldn't be here. Providing Non-Commerically-Licensed Content can be problematic, because Wikipedia's content license allows Commercial Reuse, which means it could not only get problematic if a paid editor would start to edit the article (who would have monetary gain from his contributions, ergo a license violation) but also problematic if others reuse the text on Wikipedia (as Wikipedia cannot grant them the permission to use the text commercially, as we don't have the right ourselves). Victor Schmidt (talk) 18:41, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

@Victor Schmidt: I was perfectly aware of that, but it is still technically not a copyvio, so... QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 18:50, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Making a new draft article when one already exists, but is minimal

 Courtesy link: Draft:Reborn (Kavinsky album)

Hello, I'd like to make a new draft article for Kavinsky's upcoming Reborn album. The page Draft:Reborn(Kavinsky album) already exists, however it only is filled with a single line - I'd like to make sure I can attribute the article to myself if I am going to fill it almost entirely. I plan on having it ready for submission once sufficient critical reviews within the week arrive. Can I do this? Thank you very much! (Note: I have some experience in generating new articles as I did for Escapades (Gaspard Augé album). Radlrb (talk) 17:55, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Radlrb, nothing stops you from creating the draft under a different name and noting in the comments where a reviewer should move the page if accepted.Slywriter (talk) 18:10, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

@Slywriter: He can just edit the existing draft. Nothing is stopping him from editing it. QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 18:12, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

I'd like the article (if accepted) to be rightly attributed to me, though. Would it not matter as the acceptance disambiguates who made the most contributions? Thank you @Slywriter@QuickQuokka Radlrb (talk) 18:20, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

@Radlrb: You do not own the articles you write. Once you write them, you explicitly agree to release your work for anyone to use. See this page for more info. QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 18:24, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

@QuickQuokka Absolutely. What I meant to say is, that I'd like it attributed to me as the main writer. There's a difference is saying I "own" the article as opposed to describing me as the creator and main contributor. Therefore, it does matter. After all, Wikipedia notes when an article was created by you, or not? At least I got a notification telling me from the editor that the article I created was accepted for publication. Would wikipedia not attribute the article to the original creator once moved to the main space even though he would have only contributed a single like originally?Radlrb (talk) 18:28, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Your contributions would still be visible in the edit log after moving from draft space, yes. QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 18:32, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Alright. It's still strange, from the standpoint that there should be proper attribution to creation and development of articles, aside from the edit logs. If I provide a white page for someone to write on, then really that page's final product that is written on was for the most part "created" by the editor. It's just a statistic, but from an editor standpoint of view, it is not fair - if I have white pages myself I would rather use my own since it will be my creation's first draft. After all, Wikipedia articles themselves are creations. Radlrb (talk) 18:37, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

@Radlrb: Yeah, you can edit any article you like, as long as your edits are productive, neutral and properly sourced. QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 18:10, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Well, never mind on this particular article, it was redirected to Kavinsky. Thank you for letting me know specifically. @QuickQuokka@Slywriter Radlrb (talk) 18:23, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

FYI - There is no such thing as attribution of article creation, nor, as QQ pointed out, ownership. — Preceding unsigned comment added by David notMD (talk • contribs) 18:28, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

What about WP:G7? G7 takes authors' contributions into account. --The Tips of Apmh 18:45, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

We do track this stat, such as this page we are writing on was created by Kaldari. It just should never be the focus and editors have gotten in trouble for being over-focused on this particular stat.And yes G7 does care.Slywriter (talk) 19:11, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

G7 is a shortcut for deleting drafts. Not so much attribution as 'Nevermind, I give up.' David notMD (talk) 21:39, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

references

whenever I submit an article, it always gets declined! the main reason is usually referencing. can you help? JustAnotherUndertaleFrantic (talk) 20:08, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

@JustAnotherUndertaleFrantic: Welcome to the Teahouse! I suggest reviewing Help:Your first article and gathering your sources before you create a draft.

• Your Draft:Daniel L. Heitz has only one reference written by Heitz, so it needs multiple independent reliable sources. Reference #11 from List of accidents and incidents involving military aircraft (1970–1974) could be helpful.
• Your other is Draft:List of Planet and Exoplanet types, which consists of four wikilinks and no references. I hope the notability guidelines for lists was helpful. GoingBatty (talk) 21:17, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Is this appropriate rationale or do I have to do something else.

Mine looks different from other non-free album art uploads. I want to learn how to do this right.

Mine: File:Anna Burch - Quit the Curse.jpg - Wikipedia

Example: File:Tyler, the Creator - Flower Boy.png - Wikipedia TokyoBackstreet (talk) 21:01, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

@TokyoBackstreet: Welcome to the Teahouse! The Quit the Curse file used {{Non-free use rationale 2}}, so I changed it to use {{Non-free use rationale album cover}} to match the Flower Boy image. I find it easiest to use the Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard when uploading album covers. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 21:27, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

I did use Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard, but I guess I used a different option some how. If I use a {{Non-free use rationale album cover}}, can I remove that "To the uploader:" tag on my own? (thanks for the help by the way!) TokyoBackstreet (talk) 21:32, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

@TokyoBackstreet: I changed {{non-free album cover}} to {{non-free album cover|image has rationale=yes}} to remove the "To the uploader" tag. GoingBatty (talk) 21:44, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

@TokyoBackstreet: I just looked at File:Princesses Nubiennes.jpg which I uploaded recently using the File Upload Wizard, and it looked the same as your Quit the Curse file did. Guess I never looked at the source code closely before to compare with other files. GoingBatty (talk) 21:52, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

So would it be proper to add my own {{Non-free use rationale album cover}} after uploading and then subsequently add {{non-free album cover|image has rationale=yes}}? TokyoBackstreet (talk) 21:56, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Userpage

Hi, I'd like to set up my userpage but I'm not sure how. Any help would be appreciated! EarthCore9999 (talk) 21:20, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

EarthCore9999 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You have already edited your user page, what more are you looking to do? 331dot (talk) 21:28, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

I've been looking through other user pages, and have noticed little embed boxed to the sides among other things. Are these custom features? EarthCore9999 (talk) 21:51, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @EarthCore9999: Welcome to the Teahouse! Your user page is a place to share what you like doing on Wikipedia, and a little about yourself if you like. I suggest reviewing Wikipedia:User pages, especially the sections on what you may and may not have on your user page. When I see other user pages that I like, I've examined the source code and done something similar on my page.

I also suggest reviewing Help:Introduction and The Wikipedia Adventure. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 21:31, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

I will do that. Thank you very much! EarthCore9999 (talk) 21:51, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Notable Sources

The article I have was declined due to references not qualifying to be notable enough. I took the feedback, replaced the references, and got declined again. Are you able to provide feedback on what references should be added or taken out to approve this article? Can you find any notable sources to add? Please advise.

Draft:Avid Health L.knight9604 (talk) 22:45, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

@L.knight9604: Welcome to the Teahouse! I see you asked the same question at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk#22:11:32,_17_March_2022_review_of_draft_by_L.knight9604, which is the correct forum. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 00:25, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

New user needs help on submitting an article.

I have registered on Wikipedia as a user. I contributed to articles in 2015 and 2016. I have read heavily on the tutorials. Not having a lot of luck. I have attempted to download and use Open Office but Safari will not allow it on my Mac. I was trying to convert my doc document to wiki document. I have written an article that has taken me months to compose and research. It is about a notable photographer, Merry Winnett 1951-1994. The article now exists as a Microsoft word document with 33 reliable references. How can I submit this article to an editor who is experience in the field of Women Photographers of Women Artists or Art History? Thanks . I do not have a link but my user name is Photocher Photocher (talk) 23:58, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Photocher Good day. First of all pls see Help:Your first article on how to create an article for new editors. Secondly the subject needs to have significant coverage, with independent, reliable sources where by the sources talk about the subject in length and in depth and not passing mentioned to be considered notable to have a stand alone article in Wikipedia. Lastly, you can write your article in "Notepad" application and then copy and paste in draft article using "Wikipedia Article Wizard" where you can find the link on Help:Your first article. Be well and best. Cassiopeia talk 00:17, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. The references are mostly authored by art reviewers (art critics) who have concentrated an essay on this particular artist. Also there are two books dedicated to this artist. I used the technique of verifying every statement with a publication. So I hope it is enough. I will try the Wizard and the Notepad. It looks like I may need to use a PC? Thanks for your reply. Photocher (talk) 00:46, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Photocher I also use PC when I write an article. Btw you can use the horizontal formats of Template:Cite web and Template:Cite book for web source and book source respectively when providing the source info for verification in the article. Be well and best. Cassiopeia talk 00:59, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Help making a disambiguate page

I want to make a disambiguate page called "Thomas Glass" to link these 4 articles. Are 4 items enough for a disambiguate page? If so, can someone please help me make it?

Thomas Glass

Thomas Glass (physician)

Thomas R. Glass

Tagwadihi Ficaia (talk) 00:23, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Per Wikipedia:Disambiguation, this is an acceptable and indeed very good use of a disambiguation page. casualdejekyll 00:30, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

@Ficaia: Welcome to the Teahouse! I believe four articles are enough for you to make Thomas Glass (disambiguation). You can follow the guidelines at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Disambiguation pages to make a new page, which should look like John Williams (disambiguation) without all the section headers. Let us know when you've made the page so we can all check it out. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 00:33, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for your help, folks. Ficaia (talk) 00:44, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Make a English Written In Cyrillic

Please make an English Written in Cyrillic wikipedia 2601:CE:4002:C4A0:F52A:617F:B843:93B (talk) 00:27, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

I don't think that's possible considering Cyrillic characters don't have exact english letter equivalents. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 00:29, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

This is unlikely to happen, but regardless, the place you'd want to go is not here, or even anywhere on Wikipedia itself, but m:Requests for new languages. However, the request will almost certainly be denied due to meeting none of the criteria in m:Language proposal policy. casualdejekyll 00:33, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

I can't, but can the first page of the Cyrillized English Wikipedia be Spider-Man (2002 film) and Unikitty!? 2601:CE:4002:C4A0:F52A:617F:B843:93B (talk) 00:37, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Here will be the first page's Cyrillized English counterpart:

Спидер-Ман ис а 2002 Америцан суперхеро филм басед он тхе Марвел Цомицс цхарацтер оф тхе саме наме. Дирецтед бы Сам Раими фром а сцреенплаы бы Давид Коепп, ит ис тхе фирст инсталлмент ин Раими'с Спидер-Ман трилогы, анд старс Тобеы Магуире ас тхе титулар цхарацтер, алонгсиде Уиллем Дафое, Кирстен Дунст, Йамес Францо, Цлифф Робертсон, анд Росемары Харрис. Тхе филм цхроницлес Спидер-Ман'с оригинс анд еарлы суперхеро цареер. Афтер беинг биттен бы а генетицаллы-алтеред спидер, оутцаст теенаге гениус Петер Паркер девелопс спидер-лике суперхуман абилитиес, анд адоптс а маскед идентиты то фигхт цриме анд инйустице ин Неу Ыорк Циты; фацинг тхе виллаиноус Греен Гоблин ин тхе процесс.

2601:CE:4002:C4A0:F52A:617F:B843:93B (talk) 00:40, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Huh, well you've managed to prove me wrong in that it won't work. However, if you can't propose it then there's nothing that can be done. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 00:50, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

by the way I used my transliterator app for Android to do it. And i am banned on discord 2601:CE:4002:C4A0:F52A:617F:B843:93B (talk) 00:53, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

This just seems like a majorly bad idea on the whole, even disregarding the fact that it doesn't fit policy. I'd recommend that discussion here stops before we get too out of hand casualdejekyll 00:56, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! There are already Wikipedias that use the Cyrillic alphabet, such as Belarusian Wikipedia, Bulgarian Wikipedia, Macedonian Wikipedia, Russian Wikipedia, and Ukrainian Wikipedia. GoingBatty (talk) 00:59, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

What are those green unlocked icons in the links of some reference sites?

I see the quite often but I can't tell what they are supposed to be since it is a part of the link. ExoplanetaryNova (talk) 00:34, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

@ExoplanetaryNova: I think it indicates whether or not you have to pay a subscription to view the ref. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 00:36, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

@ExoplanetaryNova and Blaze Wolf: The green open lock icon means the reference is free to view, while the red closed lock icon means a subscription is needed to view the text. See Template:Cite web#Access indicators for url-holding parameters for more details. GoingBatty (talk) 00:53, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Oh ok, that makes a lot of sense. Thanks for the information! ExoplanetaryNova (talk) 01:19, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Screenshots

How are screenshots of works licenced? Oixyplanet (talk) 04:36, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Fair use. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 06:52, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Midway International Airport

Go to infobox, Reference#3 at bottom, cant make my source go to December 2021 data for Midway International Airport. Looks like I typed in URL correctly. Please fix. Thank you. Theairportman33531 (talk) 04:44, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Article to be improved

where can i get anyone or a community portal to improve an article i made that has been drafted Newzlighter (talk) 06:18, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

@Newzlighter Assuming this is about Draft:Wrestling Revolution, you can try asking for input at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games. Your first hurdle is WP:GNG, no good sources, no article. If you want the article to "stick", it's essential that you add references correctly. WP:TUTORIAL has guidance on that. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:11, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Can I propose something

Remove the "comparable ships"/"comparable aircraft by era, capabilities" section in every single military arms page. It is very controversial so just abandon it since we are not analysts nor are we professional experts. You can, however classed them as "similar ships"/"similar aircrafts", by role. I.e. destroyer by destroyer. Still, a Type 045 and Type 055 are some examples why we won't be able to initiate this. Hypersonic man 11 (talk) 09:34, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi Hypersonic man 11. You might want to propose something like this at WP:SHIPS or WP:MILHIST instead of here at the Teahouse because it’s probably something that will require some substantial discussion before it can be implemented. — Marchjuly (talk) 09:48, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Seeking out an editor from a specific field

Hi there - I am hoping to find a wikipedian willing to review an article for which I have a COI. I have tried and failed to make any edits to the article following Wikipedia's guidelines and am hoping that a willing wikipedian might review the article instead. The article has somehow managed to become a lot worse than it used to be as a result of my involvement! Can I have some advice on how to seek out a potential volunteer - the article is primarily about agriculture so someone with an interest in environment/science/agricultural would be beneficial. This is the article in question Soil Association. Thank you in advance for any advice given. DanMor0806 (talk) 10:18, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

DanMor0806 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. There isn't really a way to guarantee that someone familiar with agriculture can look at the article- it also shouldn't be necessary, as one does not need to be an expert in agriculture to review an article or examine its sources. You have already received extensive advice on the article talk page; I can't add too much to that, but I can say that you should continue to propose edits on the article talk page, preferably sourced to independent reliable sources. You had one edit request denied There is no such thing as a page without bias, as everyone has biases. Any bias in reliable sources will be reflected in Wikipedia. The sources are presented to readers so they can evaluate and judge them for themselves as to bias and other factors. 331dot (talk) 10:28, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

331dot (talk) Thank you for your response and helpful advice. You're right - it doesn't need to be someone from that sector. Is there a list somewhere of active contributors who are open to being contacted? I don't mind doing the leg work in contacting them one at a time and of course, respectfully. As for continuing in the same vein with how I am already trying to edit the page I am unsure as to how this can work. My small edit (as suggested by the community) has now been waiting for review for 6 weeks. Despite acknowledging that there is no time limit on a review process, that pace would mean the page being out of date for over a year (and that's if my proposed edit is accepted!). DanMor0806 (talk) 10:33, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

System sizing guidelines

If a Wiki is deployed on to a on-site server, what system capacity rules should be considered? Specifically, HDD capacity, RAM, CPU (qty, cores and speed). Usage model is mostly as a knowledge and document management system. Expected to be relatively small user count (sub 500) but large quantity of documents to be managed. Some files very large (CAD drawings for example). 81.157.37.227 (talk) 10:34, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

The Two William Olivers

They are Engish Victorian painters who are often confused, sometimes as father and son (particularly on art sales index type web sites eg Junior/Senior, Younger/Older, I/II). The younger artist whose professional name is William Oliver (William Oliver (artist)) is actually William Oliver Williams (1823-1901). I am writing an article on the older artist with the draft title 'William Oliver, Artist (1804-1853)'. Hopefully this could help to reduce further confusion, particularly if the birth and death years were added to the Wikipedia title of the younger artist. Would this be possible? BFP1 (talk) 10:36, 18 March 2022 (UTC) BFP1 (talk) 10:40, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Apologies for typos BFP1 (talk) 11:02, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi BFP1. What you're asking about is called disambiguation on Wikipedia and there are various ways it can be done. If you look at William Oliver, you see there are quite a number of articles about individuals with that name and they are all diambuguated in various ways. What you might do in this case is start a discussion at Talk:William Oliver (artist) and explain what you're hoping to do and why. You can then add Template:Please see to the talk pages of the four WikiProjects listed at the top of the article's talk page to let others know about the discussion. You, then, basically you wait to see what kinds of responses you get. Since only the article about the younger currently exists, perhaps the consensus will be not to WP:MOVE the page (at least not just yet) but rather wait until the article about the elder William Oliver has been created. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:24, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

@BFP1 Yes, we have various ways to distinguish between similarly-named pages. We have Disambiguation pages and we also have WP:HATNOTES which can go at the very of both pages to point to one another and to distinguish them. See examples of both at Dark side of the moon. Right now, don't worry about the title. Create your draft and submit it for review as normal, and maybe add a note at the top with a suggested title for the reviewer to resolve. But even if it's not done well at first, it can always be resolved later by moving the page to a different title (with or without a WP:REDIRECT. The key thing is to get the page content written. I hope this helps? Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 11:34, 18 March 2022 (UTC)