Wikipedia:Teahouse

Cullen328, 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

Correcting Subject Names

How do I fix an incorrectly spelled subject name? The wikipedia article "Era of Good Feelings" should be named "Era of Good Feeling". How do I drop the "S"?

Here's the link:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Era_of_Good_Feelings Lord Milner (talk) 12:49, 30 March 2022 (UTC) Lord Milner (talk) 12:49, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi Lord Milner. Technically, the page would need to be WP:MOVEd to the new title, but in this case it might be best to be WP:CAUTIOUS and propose the title change at Talk:Era of Good Feelings to see what other might think. There reason why I'm suggesting this is that a quick Google search shows the period being referred to in both ways by various publications and websites. Encyclopedia Britannica even states as much here; so, instead of moving the page, adding something about the different ways of referring to the period to the MOS:LEAD of the article might be all that's really needed. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:16, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

You don't drop it, Lord Milner. Instead, you go to Talk:Era of Good Feelings and there write out your proposal for a title change. Note that the talk page shows that others have already proposed the same change. However, their proposals seem to have less reasoning and evidence, more indignation. Try to be persuasive. Get agreement. If you succeed, then retitling ("moving") the article will be easy. -- Hoary (talk) 13:22, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. Obviously, I'm from the United States, and there is no discussion about this. We are all taught the same. The word "Feeling" in this sense, is plural. The connotation of "Feelings" suggests something different, something amateurish. "The Era of Good Feeling" is both academically and linguistically correct. So, two changes need to be made: one to add the word "The", and a second to delete the letter "s".— Preceding unsigned comment added by Lord Milner (talk • contribs) 19:54, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

@Lord Milner: On the omission of the in the article title, see WP:THE. Deor (talk) 21:16, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

I'm from the United States, too, and I see no problem with the title "Era of Good Feelings". --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 11:08, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

How long have you lived here, and where did you get your education? We have many contributors here, and many of them are foreign, and they do not know about this part of American History. I did a search on 'Internet Archive', and I came up with 70 different texts that support me. Link: https://archive.org/search.php?query=The%20Era%20of%20Good%20Feeling Lord Milner (talk) 20:13, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia is a collaboration. Please consider using Third Opinion, Request for Comment to build a consensus. If you like American history, just think of Wikipedia as an upstart colonial government attempting democracy through discussion and consensus. Pyrrho the Skipper (talk) 20:32, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

All my life. Which is probably longer than yours. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 12:06, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

@Lord Milner, we are not "all taught the same" in the US. I have never heard of this, and I have always lived here, and I went to US public schools. Does "there is no discussion" mean that "everyone (in the US) knows this"? Not true... 73.127.147.187 (talk) 06:32, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

Here's a few sources using the "s" form: https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Era_of_Good_Feelings/yCByAAAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=%22Era+of+Good+Feelings%22&dq=%22Era+of+Good+Feelings%22&printsec=frontcover , https://www.google.com/books/edition/James_Monroe/sVbDDgAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=%22Era+of+Good+Feelings%22&printsec=frontcover and https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Era_of_Good_Feelings_and_the_Age_of/657fAAAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=%22Era+of+Good+Feelings%22&dq=%22Era+of+Good+Feelings%22&printsec=frontcover --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 12:14, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

In this context, I believe that "Feeling" is what is known as an "uncountable noun," meaning the singular form of the word serves as a plural. 69.112.128.218 (talk) 23:18, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

But it is referring to the feelings of multiple people, so that makes it countable. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 01:43, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

Yes. I do not believe this is how it works. The term "uncountable" refers not to whether we are focused on a singular item or a multitude of items, but whether or not there are simply more than one item, and that these items, on the onset, have not been counted. It does not imply that the number of items can never be counted. An example, the word you use above "people" refers to more than one person, but this group of people have yet to be counted, and even if it would conceivably be possible to count these people, we are referring to an unknown number of persons - thus they, in this sense, are "uncountable." I know it seems weird, but I believe this is the perspective on that term "uncountable." 69.112.128.218 (talk) 15:42, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

You're still not quite getting my point. During this era there were good feelings from many different people from about many different things. Thus, (whether looking at people or issues) there were multiple good feelings. One could also describe this in the singular as a time of general good feeling, but the plural usage that Lord Milner is objecting to is most definitely not wrong. According to the article, the plural usage was the original. Even if that is in error, there are plenty of other sources that use the plural. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 16:09, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

My point wasn't to do with the context of the webpage, it was me just trying to explain a pedantic point about the grammar of one word versus another word. It has nothing to do with whether Wikipedia has the word "feeling" or "feelings" in the title of the web page. If, as you state here, that the original usage of the reference uses the word "feelings" with an 's', that should be that, in my opinion. I can agree with that. When you say that there are other sources that use that same designation, it only implies that the remaining sources do not, and I do not see that as helping the situation. But in any case, I see your point, and I do not see any way to disagree with that point. 69.112.128.218 (talk) 16:31, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

I find it ironic that we cannot agree on this. American History was taught to us in the 4th Grade. Lord Milner (talk) 06:43, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

@Lord Milner, yes, American History was taught all throughout my school years here. I just never heard of that era, using those words. 73.127.147.187 (talk) 05:00, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

Cannot resist this, but that era was especially famous for having been the only time in US history (post George Washington) in which a president was unanimously elected. Only one candidate, if I remember correctly. 69.112.128.218 (talk) 16:46, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

No problem. Lord Milner (talk) 03:32, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

hey

 Courtesy link: Draft:Regular Show (2022 series)

mind if you make my page official (Regular Show '22 draft page) Mardecayrigboi12436 (talk) 17:41, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

idk you need to find a page reviewer. Dawn Lim (talk) 18:38, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Mardecayrigboi12436. Your draft has been commented on by two experienced editors. They have concluded that it has insufficient content, and in particular lack of sources, to be included in the encyclopaedia at present. The main problem, I think, is that it is WP:TOOSOON to be writing about a show which won't even begin airing until August and hence has no independent commentary to convince Wikipedia editors it is noteworthy enough for article. Mike Turnbull (talk) 19:09, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

Mardecayrigboi12436, hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Thank you for coming here with your concerns. As @Dawn Lim has pointed out, an AfC reviewer will have to move your draft to main space. However, you may want to consider some things first. Your draft has no sources for us to verify the information by. Sources help us determine whether a subject is notable (See WP:RS and WP:V). Also, as alluded by @Michael D. Turnbull (They already provided a helpful link), I noticed that the subject show has not made its debut yet and may be in early to mid stages of development. Perhaps when it gets closer to the airing of it's first episode there will be additional sources that may give it significant coverage, especially as it seems to be a reboot of a very popular show. Writing an article from scratch is the most difficult task an editor can do on the encyclopedia. I encourage you to read WP:YFA and seek help or guidance here or by asking an experienced editor. You may also want to try out the Wikipedia Adventure. I hope our advice helps and good luck! --ARoseWolf 19:19, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

note: the revival is a more adult-oriented approach and was originally pitched to Adult Swim but was later rejected and was later on picked by Paramount+ since they thought that this revival might be fitting for their service and maybe acquiring the full rights to the series to put the original and revival series on Paramount+ and some international MTV, Comedy Central, Paramount Network and Nickelodeon feeds. Mardecayrigboi12436 (talk) 21:16, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

Please, stop with the lies. Nothing you’re saying is true. CreecregofLife (talk) 01:15, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. Please read notability to start to understand the basic requirements for a Wikipedia article. When you have spent a few months making small improvements to existing articles and thereby learning how Wikipedea works, you may be ready for the very difficult task of creating a new article from scratch: please read Help:your first article. --ColinFine (talk) 21:03, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

Note: The draft has been deleted on 10 April 2022 in accordance with criterion G3 – a blatant hoax. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:00, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Wait, isn't there an LTA that does this sort of thing? casualdejekyll 12:50, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

@Tenryuu: Not so blatant, given that ARoseWolf, ColinFine and I all took the user's enquiry seriously. I'm beginning to think that I WP:AGF too much at the Teahouse! Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:00, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

hi Michael D. Turnbull! trust me, y'all are not the only one. I've probably extended way too much care and love both on and off the teahouse at some point! but that's not a bad thing, sometimes it can be helpful to other editors: from our dear Nick Moyes, a polite Teahouse response to one person - even a troll - is seen by numerous other new users, who may well learn from that response, and from the politeness we try to offer the other user. 💜  melecie  talk - 14:14, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Michael D. Turnbull, personally, I will continue to assume good faith on every enquiry until proven otherwise. That's just me. It is extremely unfortunate that this editor took that assumption for granted and misused it, but that is on them, not you, not me, not us. I do go out of my way to be kind and caring (I've been lightly chastised for it recently but even more so in the past and not even on Wikipedia) but it's who I am. I'm not going into details because this is not a forum but the care and love part is genuine. To separate myself from it would be to ask me to stop breathing. --ARoseWolf 14:38, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Indeed. I like Maria Konnikova's position: according to Rutger Bregman in Humankind, Far better, she says, is to accept and account for the fact that you'll occasionally be cheated. That's a small price to pay for the luxury of a lifetime of trusting other people. ColinFine (talk) 15:42, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Removing a category

At Category:Hardboiled crime novels there's a page listed under "N" for Nobody Move (novel). Clicking on it takes you to the article for the book's author, Den Johnson, not the page for the novel, because that page doesn't exit. I don't know how to remove the novel from the category because I only know how to remove categories from the appropriate article. -- Pete Best Beatles (talk) 00:14, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Pete Best Beatles, welcome. It's occurring because the redirect is populating the category just like an article would. You are able to edit the categories in the same way you would for a normal article. Zindor (talk) 00:24, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

hi Pete Best Beatles and wecome back to the teahouse! the category is at the redirect Nobody Move (novel), as in the page that redirects you to Denis Johnson. if you wanna get there, when you click on Nobody Move (novel), you get redirected to Johnson with a link back to Nobody Move that allows you to stay at that page, where you can edit that page. you can also click this link: Nobody Move (novel). happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 00:24, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

before I forget, please also note that nobody move can keep its categories despite being a redirect due to those categories being incompatible with its redirect article (is Den Johnson himself a hardboiled crime novel?). for a page on how to categorize redirects, please see this page. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 00:38, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

That's a good point, Melecie. I do note however the redirect page has no history of being anything other than a redirect, so is the category useful or simply confounding (considering principle of least confoundment) for those trying to locate articles on 'hardboiled crime novels'? Kind regards, Zindor (talk) 01:03, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

I notice that four of Den Johnson's novels and two of his short-story collections already have articles of their own, so it's plausible that Nobody Move could also merit one. The redirect page could be repurposed for that if anybody wanted to take it on. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.200.65.249 (talk) 17:57, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

@Zindor:@Melecie: Thanks everybody for your help. I was busy, but just got around to removing Category:Hardboiled crime novels from the Nobody Moves (novel) redirect page, my original problem, but there are still 9 more categories there. How can a novel have categories when it doesn't have a real article? You can't assign categories if you don't know anything about the novel, and I thought you could only base that on what's verifiable (from an article). I have a strong urge to remove all the categories, but I know I should get some guidance first. -- Pete Best Beatles (talk) 05:03, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

Draft deletion

Is there any rule preventing someone from putting deletion templates on other people’s drafts? There’s a draft I’ve noticed that is nothing but complete misinformation and lies, but has been taken at face value. They’re trying to pass it off as real and I feel if they continue to work on it they will try to legitimize it. I don’t think it’s even appropriate to move it to their userspace CreecregofLife (talk) 01:22, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Drafts states that drafts can be nominated for Speedy deletion if certain criteria are met. See the General subsection at Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion. David notMD (talk) 01:42, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

hi CreecregofLife and welcome to the teahouse! are you referring to Draft:Regular Show (2022 series)? since it is a draft, it cannot be nominated for deletion yet until further investigation, although if someone decides to move it to articlespace (which won't happen for as long as there are no sources present, which also requires it to be legitimate), it could be tagged by {{hoax}}. as said by User:David notMD above, blatant and obvious hoaxes can be nominated for G4 speedy deletion, although it's best to investigate first. for more please check out Dealing with hoaxes. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 01:45, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

On another page the drafter calls it an unannounced project. If it’s unannounced, how would he know about it? Why would it be premiering in 4 months if it’s unannounced? The project would have to be announced to have a release date. He also has a definitive home for the show listed when in his justification he says "maybe acquiring the full rights to the series to put the original and revival series on Paramount+ and some international MTV, Comedy Central, Paramount Network and Nickelodeon feeds." The information doesn’t match up because there’s no information to match. It’s an obvious hoax CreecregofLife (talk) 01:53, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Update: I have added the speedy delete template for hoaxes and notified the user as directed. It looked like the advised move to make CreecregofLife (talk) 02:37, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

CreecregofLife An Admin agreed with you, as within the hour, it was deleted. David notMD (talk) 10:01, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Verifying user rights

What template do people generally use to confirm their user rights? Fijipedia (talk) 02:31, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

hi Fijipedia and welcome to the teahouse! you can see your user rights over at Special:UserRights. right now, you are autoconfirmed. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 02:33, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the comment, however I'm asking what template people use to display the verify button on their user pages. I probably wasn't clear enough. Fijipedia (talk) 02:42, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

@Fijipedia: the template is {{User rights}}, an infobox shell that provides a uniform template for the user rights userboxes which includes the (verify) button. as to how the verify button works, it seems to be a link encoded through {{Fullurl}} to Special:ListUsers that defines the user and group names. it isn't a separate template and honestly it'll take me a long time to understand the underlying code, so in the meantime to make yours you could just directly link to the page: <small>([https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:ListUsers&username=Fijipedia&group=extendedconfirmed&limit=1 verify])</small> which displays as (verify). happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 03:11, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Hello Fijipedia. If you mean the service award, just copy {{Registered Editor}} to your user page. For more information see Wikipedia:Service awards. Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:33, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Blackface photo on Wikipedia entry

I am not an editor. I am hoping that someone else can fix this issue. In the entry for a wassail bowl en.Wikipedia.org/wiki/wassail Wassail a photo example has been included of a man in blackface. Surely it is not necessary to include this culturally offensive image to demonstrate a bowl? I’m hoping someone can remove this image, either entirely or to replace it with one that does not stir up ill feelings. Thank you. 2005sfuta (talk) 03:10, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

I don’t think that is blackface. Thriley (talk) 03:15, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Looks like there is some debate on this subject: [1]. Would be an interesting article. Thriley (talk) 03:18, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

and there is one! Blackface and Morris dancing. Thriley (talk) 03:23, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

The role of ‘Butler’ is done with a blackened face, a traditional way to transform the person assuming the role. A long tradition that has nothing to do with race. ... perhaps a note in the photo about this.Moxy- 03:25, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Blackface and Morris dancing allows that the origins clearly have to do with race, and are nowadays considered offensive. Surely there are photos of a Wassail "Butler" not in blackface that would be a better choice for this article. David notMD (talk) 10:26, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

If a "Wassail butler" role is traditionally done in blackface, we should not remove a representative image. If not, then it should be removed as gratuitous. In any case, that is probably something to source (Thriley’s independent piece is a start), and discuss in the article. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 11:06, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

A Google search on "Wassail Butler" found people in blackface and not. David notMD (talk) 20:40, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Look Both Ways: Revision history

I'm having trouble with an IP regarding an External link to a website that discusses this film, amongst others, which the IP has repeatedly deleted. I'm happy to own past transgressions but I don't know what [they] is talking about. Doug butler (talk) 03:40, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Look Both Ways is the film link. Karenthewriter (talk) 03:48, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

hi Doug butler and welcome to the teahouse! while I am unable to speak on whether the external link is valid (although I'll direct you to the policy on external links and specifically what can be linked), I advise you and the IP to stop reverting and discuss first (even if they revert back). multiple reversions in a row is considered edit warring and is disruptive regardless of whether one is right or wrong. I've dropped a warning on the ip's talk page to direct them to the relevant talk pages, and hopefully a discussion can be had and the best way forward done. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 03:53, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Doug butler, that website Ozmovies looks like a blog to me, and the vast majority of blogs are not reliable sources for use on Wikipedia. Please see WP:BLOGS for the relevant policy language. Cullen328 (talk) 04:52, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Yes, it's a blog, one of hundreds posted around the same time by an IP user from Melbourne on 16 December 2021‎. It was posted at External links, which is perfectly OK AFAIK. I checked it out and did not delete it, as it was good info and well presented. No, I did not use it or link to it. Anything I contributed I gained from my own copy on DVD, and consisted of edits to the plot outline and added a few cats.

Their original gripe involved Dark City, presumably Dark City (1998 film) of which I know nothing.

But my question was this: someone has a bee in their bonnet and I don't understand what they're getting at; they won't discuss it on my talk page, and I'm hoping someone more internet-savvy can clear the air. Doug butler (talk) 05:53, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

they seem to have stopped so I don't think there should be any more problem unless they start reverting again tomorrow. they may not have seen the message I sent yet (their last edit was at 2:55 and I sent the message at 3:48), and since they're using desktop view (mobile view and phone apps don't alert new messages to ips and is painful), they'll probably see the message again when they read/edit wikipedia the next time, so hopefully they'll be able to communicate with you. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 09:34, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Trying to avoid an edit war

Hello, I recently tried to edit theory of mind as quite a bit of the information in it regarding "autistic people do not have theory of mind" is out of date is generally agreed to be wrong by modern scientific consensus (similar to how "autism is caused by vaccines" could be cited with out-of-date studies). My edit was reverted as unjustified (that's fair, I should've been more clear) so I tried to edit again this time making it more clear why in the edit description and adding more sources, but it's been removed again and I was asked to justify at the talk page (again, fair - I should have done that initially). I've now explained in the talk page, but I'm now worried about editing it again in case I get in trouble for an edit war but also am feeling a bit stressed because not only is the information out of date, but it's also actively harmful to autistic people. Can I ask for any advice regarding this? Thank you and I apologise -- ☽☆ NotCharizard (talk) 05:37, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

@Notcharizard, you will have to discuss on the article talk page and establish consensus, before carrying out major changes in an article. Kpddg ^(talk) 05:44, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

My main advice, Notcharizard, would be to continue with the approach you have now taken (to use the Talk Page of the article to discuss content with other editors) and assume good faith in those editors. One reason your initial edit may have been reverted is that you changed the WP:LEAD part of the article. That section is supposed to summarise the more detailed account in the full article and is the part that is most important, since it's what most readers read first before deciding whether to read on. Hence it needs to be crafted very carefully. It may be better to think about how the main article should be updated before making changes to the lead. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:44, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

That makes sense about the lead - I will be sure to use the talk page before making changes to the lead in big articles in future! I'm definitely assuming good faith (I love that it is a wiki guideline). Can I ask, for future edits, what counts as "major changes" to an article? Is it about word count/percentage or more just about the content? Thank you. -- ☽☆ NotCharizard (talk) 16:19, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

@Notcharizard: It's easy to say what is a "minor" change, because that's defined at WP:Minor as one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. So most edits are by implication "major". However, Wikipedia encourages editors to be WP:BOLD and sometimes, indeed, to write whole articles from scratch. If you do make large edits to existing articles, then don't be upset if you get reverted, that's just the WP:BRD cycle kicking in and you just need to move on to WP:DISCUSS with other editors. Many articles I edit have few, or no, other people recently interested in them, as judged their Edit History. So large changes I make probably won't be a problem. However, sometimes it's obvious that lots of people will have the article on their watch pages and the "Page information" link will tell you how many these are (if >30). That's useful in knowing how bold to be. Likewise, the Talk Page of an article can be used to make a judgement: how recently have editors been discussing content? One other tip is to add new content to well-established articles in relatively small increments. Then other editors can revert the bits they don't like while keeping the parts they are happy with, making it easier for you to build up a WP:consensus. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:19, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

That's actually incredibly helpful, thank you! I appreciate the detailed response and also the BRD resource, I will save that for future use. -- ☽☆ NotCharizard (talk) 18:13, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Main page OTD linkage

on April 11 (today) an article and image appeared re the arson of Neville Ground https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nevill_Ground and it mentions a 'country wide campaign' - this phrase should also be wikilinked to https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suffragette_bombing_and_arson_campaign

The guidance on Main Page talk does not explain how to fix this. Kaybeesquared (talk) 06:54, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

I have mentioned this at Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors. 108.52.196.8 (talk) 09:48, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

 Done link added. Mjroots (talk) 12:26, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Lincoln–Douglas debates

Would someone please fix footnote 11 in Lincoln–Douglas debates? I added the requested citation. The citation should include "p. 119." Thanks. Maurice Magnus (talk) 10:53, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Hi Maurice Magnus. If you click on the "help page" link in Lincoln-Douglas debates#cite_note-Follett-11, you should be able to find out what the problem is and how to fix it. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:01, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

@Maurice Magnus, I have fixed it in this edit. Happy editing! Kpddg ^(talk) 11:02, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. Maurice Magnus (talk) 11:05, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

@Kpddg: You should check your edit again because your "fix" created a different citation syntax problem in Lincoln-Douglas debates#The debates. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:07, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

That too fixed here. Kpddg ^(talk) 11:16, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

There's still a problem. The footnote (now #12) has "a," "b," and "c." Page 119 should be attached only to "c."Maurice Magnus (talk) 12:32, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

I wanted to make sure that you saw this. That's your reward for being so helpful before. :) Maurice Magnus (talk) 13:12, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

There's still a problem. The footnote (now #12) has "a," "b," and "c." Page 119 should be attached only to "c."Maurice Magnus (talk) 12:32, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

You probably want template {{rp}}. —Wasell^(T) 🌻 13:27, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, but that is beyond my capabilities (or to be more honest, my willingness to learn). Maurice Magnus (talk) 14:16, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

I've tried to add it. Please check to see if I placed it on the correct ref. —Wasell^(T) 🌻 15:43, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Yes, you did. Thanks very much. Maurice Magnus (talk) 16:42, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Profile comparison

Hi,

Could you please advise and suggest ideas to transform Draft:Om Kumar Harsh's wikipedia page to match the profile of Arun Sharma (computer scientist).

Any suggestions in language or format would be appreciated. Akicracky82 (talk) 12:37, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Hello Akicracky82. I took a brief look a the draft, which has already been declined four times, so you need to proceed carefully as you will be wasting the time of experienced editors if you continue to submit more draft attempts without addressing the concerns already highlighted. One extra issue is that your draft doesn't follow the important principles at WP:BLP. Specifically, it includes in the final section personal details about Harsh which are unsourced to a citation. This is completely unacceptable for biographies of living people. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:30, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Akicracky82. First, please understand that what you are working on is neither "X's Wikipedia page" or "X's profile": it is "Wikipedia's article about X". This is an important difference because it sets the tone for what will go in there. Both of your two expressions suggest that the article in some way belongs to the person, or says what they want to say: neither of these is the case. An article about Harsh will not belong to Harsh, will not be controlled by Harsh, will not necessarily say what Harsh would like it to say, and should be based almost entirely on what people unconnected with Harsh have published about him, not on what he or his associates have said or 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. Every single statement in the article should be backed up by a reliable published source, and most of them by sources wholly unaffiliated with the subject. (It is not technically required that every statement actually cite its source, but reviewers tend not to accept drafts where this is not the case, especially for articles about living people).

Asking "Please transform this draft to match that other article" is like saying "please show me how to improve this house that I built without surveying the land under it or building foundations, to match that other house" - it might be possible, but it is more likely that you have to demolish the house, build some proper foundations, and build the house again. (Disclosure: I have not read your draft or looked at the references, so it's possible its foundations are good; but judging from the multiple declines, I doubt it). ColinFine (talk) 15:36, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

I want at my biography at my wikipedia account, i am new here please help out

How can i add articles to my wikipedia acount please — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hussaini Muhammad Jangeru (talk • contribs) 13:12, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

@Hussaini Muhammad Jangeru: Welcome to the Teahouse! Please see why an article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing, and reconsider whether you want to create an autobiography like that. In addition, note that article creation is incredibly difficult to start off with. Happy editing! Bsoyka (talk) 13:20, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello Hussaini Muhammad Jangeru and welcome to Wikipedia! I suggest you read a few of our policies and guidelines first, then move on to help about writing articles. Please don't attempt to draft an autobiography: you'll find it very difficult to do so for the reasons explained at that link. Try to improve the encyclopaedia in other ways, building up your experience. The WP:ADVENTURE is a great place to start. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:22, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

As an aside, despite the section title being "I want at my biography at my wikipedia account..." - the actual question asked is "How can i add articles to my wikipedia acount please" - if you possibly mean creating your watchlist, then you will see along the tabs for the viewed article there is a list of terms. This may differ depending on whether you have tools installed, such as Twinkle, but you may see "Article", "talk", "edit", "history", "move" and "watch". Click on "watch" and this will add the article (and talk page) to your ever-increasing watchlist. "Watch" is a toggle, and once you've clicked it, you'll see it change to "Unwatch". From there on, in the top right of the screen you'll see a hyperlink called "watchlist". Click that, and there you are. Chaheel Riens (talk) 15:55, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

I think you'll find that it's prohibited from participating in a Wikipedia page that contains yourself or that is focused on yourself. That is a strange but true rule. 69.112.128.218 (talk) 16:41, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Not quite. Keep in mind that WIkipedia doesn't have hard-and-fast rules; we have policies and guidelines that represent the consensus of the community. Wikipedia:Autobiography and Wikipedia:Conflict of interest are actually guidelines, and neither of them prohibits editing like this, they only strongly discourage it. Bsoyka (talk) 17:41, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

A few questions

I'm a new editor, and am hoping to improve The Dayton Regional STEM School. This is an a conflict of interest, so A. should I even edit at all, and B. how should I help if not?

IHaveAVest (talk) 15:44, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Hello IHaveAVest and welcome to the Teahouse. As a general rule, if you have a conflict of interest then you shouldn't edit an article directly. If you are a paid employee or are unpaid, something like an internship, then you should read WP:UPE. To know if you have, what Wikipedia considers, a COI, please look at WP:COI. If you have a COI or are a paid/unpaid editor in regards to this subject then you must disclose that on either the article talk page, on your user/talk page or both. You may always use the article talk page to present edits you feel need to be made to the article. Sourcing requirements are the same regardless. I hope this helps and good luck!--ARoseWolf 15:59, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

I have read the conflict of interest page, I was just hoping for some help and suggestions. IHaveAVest (talk) 15:59, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

haha always hit f5 before replying oops I didn't see your response, thank youIHaveAVest (talk) 16:05, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

IHaveAVest, you are most welcome. Thank you for bringing your concerns to the Teahouse. If you need anything further please don't hesitate to ask. --ARoseWolf 16:08, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Asking about Lye like what is use in concrete

I have a house that is built in clay or Gumbo and it is wet under the house and the piers are sinking into the mud. Can I use lye to dry it out with out doing damage? 38.108.56.34 (talk) 15:57, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Hello IP, I do apologize but this is a place where editors can ask questions about the encyclopedia. Wikipedia is an online free encyclopedia about notable subjects found in reliable independent sources. I am sure there are self-help websites out there that can field your question. I do apologize for not being able to assist you but this isn't the right place. Good luck! --ARoseWolf 16:06, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Check out the Wikipedia:Reference desk! casualdejekyll 17:04, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

1914 United States House of Representatives elections

I have a question. I was editing the article above, but almost all the other infoboxes got absorbed into the Arkansas infobox and I'm not sure how it happened and how to fix it, since when I was using the visual editor, everything seemed fine and normal, and what I was doing had worked many times before.

1914 United States House of Representatives elections in Arkansas

Please click on the link so you can see the problem. Do you know how to fix it, and if so, can you?

Thanks,

A frazzled editor PoliticallyPassionateGamer (talk) 17:46, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

@PoliticallyPassionateGamer: I checked the page history and I think your problem was the absence of a final curly bracket at the end of the table. I added one, so it should look better now. I'm not very experienced with tables, especially in the visual editor, but someone else may be able to explain what happened better than I can. Perfect4th (talk) 18:47, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Thank you so much! It works perfectly now. I must not have noticed, and I made a prior error beforehand lol. :) PoliticallyPassionateGamer (talk) 18:53, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Update to New edition of the Terminologia Anatomica (TA2-2019)

Good evening gentlemen/miladies,

The terminologia anatomica has been re-edited in 2019 and is much more logical than the first edition. https://ta2viewer.openanatomy.org/

Since one year, I work full time to create an open source 3D atlas of anatomy (https://www.z-anatomy.com/) which includes this list of anatomical structures in several languages.

English and Latin are default, I translated it in french and the Portuguese version has also been corrected.

For this atlas, I adapt, copy-paste and create a definition for each of these anatomical structures (I have about 2700 on 7200) Most of them are the actual Wikipedia page, but the name has been adapted to the new nomenclature.

In order to be up-to-date, Wikipedia could take advantage of this work and adapt all these pages.

We are talking about >2500 pages and more will come (>7000).

The creation of the definitions inside the atlas and the other tasks are already taking all my time.

Do you have any idea about how to update the content of Wikipedia to the new TA2?

Sincerely

For more information, you can follow the LinkedIn page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/z-anatomy Melodicpinpon (talk) 20:10, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

@Melodicpinpon, unfortunately, if the atlas is open source, that means it's user-generated content, which is not seen as reliable sourcing for Wikipedia. If your entries cite their root sources, though, perhaps those could be used to create Wikipedia articles for topics still missing them. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 20:17, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Most of the sources are Wikipedia itself.

There are very few new anatomical structures; existing anatomical terms only changed their name.

https://ta2viewer.openanatomy.org/

This is the previous version

https://taviewer.openanatomy.org/

Many anatomical terms did not have their own page on Wikipedia.

The definitions created are only parts of existing pages copy-pasted to describe a part of another anatomical structure that has a full page of description, inluding a part describing the term for which I propose to create a new page.

The other description created are translation made from the 'Feneis' -which is the first reference for french anatomists- and contain the reference used in this book (page+number).

If you wait two articles from Elsevier to create each of these pages, you can as well say that it won't ever be done. Melodicpinpon (talk) 20:39, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Melodicpinpon. Any references used in Wikipedia's medical articles must comply with Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine). I suggest that you discuss this matter with active editors at WP: Wikiproject Medicine. Cullen328 (talk) 20:46, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Help with page approval please

Hello!

I don't think I can link our page here since it's in draft status, however, I wanted to see if I could get some assistance with how to get our page approved. It's for our upcoming film 'Nomad' that is not released yet, however, we have noted several on-line sources (not of our own) that talk about the movie production.

The decline notice says, "most of the sources say this movie hasn't released."

Does this mean we cannot get it approved until the film is released?

Thank you for your help! Jane Editor (talk) 20:20, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Yes, you can link it. I'll do it: Draft:Nomad (2021 film).

Wikipedia publishes articles on notable subjects. Your film cannot be notable until it has reports of public reception. Most of the sources you cite aren't about the film. Half of them are about a solar eclipse. Some of them are announcements. And we cannot cite IMDB.

Your draft says the release date is in 2021. That was last year. If the film has been released, aren't there any better sources you can find? It looks like the draft could be completely rewritten post-release.

And to answer your question about approval for unreleased films: generally that won't happen unless there are extraordinary circumstances. Wikipedia absolutely cannot be used as a publicity medium. Generally, trying to publish an article about a film before its release would be considered promotional use of Wikipedia, which is prohibited. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:26, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Thank you for your response. I see now that the draft says 2021 and that should be updated to 2022 as it was not released last year. Am I able to update this in the edit section?

Some of the references are on-line sources that do talk about an exceptionally rare shot that was captured during the filming. Such as this one. https://gizmodo.com/a-new-sci-fi-movie-had-2-minutes-to-capture-a-solar-ecl-1836080905. Is this notable enough to be get accepted? Jane Editor (talk) 18:56, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

• The only times a film merits an article before it is released is if something is notable about the production itself, see Rust (suspended film). 331dot (talk) 20:42, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

You say, "I don't think I can link our page here since ..." and "...some assistance with how to get our page approved. It's for our upcoming film..." In that case, you have a conflict of interest and, to a reasonably good first approximation, you should not be editing the article. Instead, if someone else creates the article, you may suggest changes at its talk page, supported by reliable sources. But be very cautious about touching the article directly. And see the previous comment that "Wikipedia absolutely cannot be used as a publicity medium". Feline Hymnic (talk) 21:02, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

@Feline Hymnic: The OP has all of the necessary paid editing notices on her user page. And she's referring to draft space, which is the only venue available in which a COI editor can work. ~Anachronist (talk) 18:55, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

FWIW, I can't find anything indicating that anyone saw the film or that it was even released. Rotten Tomatoes doesn't even mention it. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 22:38, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Moldavian language

Hello everyone I'm new on Wikipedia, I wanted to ask why all pages related to Republic of Moldova in Russian language are saying we're speaking "Moldavian- a soviet Invention" language, and when I try to modify thesse articles in a day or two they go back unmodified? Moldavian language don't exist and it's disrespectful to us to see Russians dictating here! I was even blocked for 1 day by "Q-bit array- a Russian nazist" for trying to change the mistakes. I'm sorry if this is not the right place to post this problem but I really appreciate your understanding and help. Stefan chi (talk) 21:10, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Stefan, and welcome to the Teahouse on the English Wikipedia. I'm sorry you are having a frustrating time on the Russian Wikipedia, but they are totally separate projects, and English Wikipedia has no knowledge, influence, or control over Russian Wikipedia. I can only suggest that you ask at ru:Википедия:Форум/Помощь начинающим. ColinFine (talk) 21:49, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

@Stefan chi: Welcome to the Teahouse. If this is about the Russian Wikipedia we can't help you here. The Teahouse here only covers the English Wikipedia. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:49, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

This is the second post I've seen here about such behavior on the Russian wiki. While English Wikipedia has no control over Russian Wikipedia, is there perhaps someone at the foundation that might be alerted to this sort of thing if the Russian Wikipedia community cannot or will not act on the problem? --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 19:09, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

This might need to be brought to the Meta-Wiki or ArbCom. I remember seeing an RfC for issues on the Croatian Wikipedia a few years back on Meta-Wiki. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:46, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

According to Moldovan language, the concept of "Moldavian" was created by Soviets. So being blocked for being a "Russian Nazi" for going against a viewpoint of the Ur-Example of Russian Nazis seems bizarre. ArbCom doesn't have authority here since they're Enwiki only, I thought? I might be wrong on that. Regardless, this needs to go straight to Meta; don't pass go, do not collect $200 casualdejekyll 21:46, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Fix StarKist

So Wikipedia I tried to fix the article called StarKist. Please help me I am a editor I had my account EmpireOfJapan1868, so yeah fix StarKist Thank you. 173.61.148.96 (talk) 21:55, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

It's fixed now. It looks like you may have been involved in an edit war, too. Remember to follow bold, revert, discuss and take your suggested edit to the Talk Page of the article. Also remember to include reliable sources when you make edits. Pyrrho the Skipper (talk) 21:58, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Hello, IP editor. I reverted the article back to where it was before you edited it (and accidentally messed it up). You claim that the company is Norwegian owned, but I am not able to find any reliable sources that confirm that. The article says that StarKist is owned by the South Korean seafood company Dongwan, and this website seems to verify that. Cullen328 (talk) 22:22, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

listing of a school on wiki

I wanted to list our school on the platform of wiki, but it was deleted. I guess I didn't know how to do it. any help on how to add it? Bismarktandoh (talk) 22:50, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Bismarktandoh Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid that you have a common misunderstanding as to what Wikipedia is. It is not a directory where something is "listed" due to its mere existence. This is an encyclopedia with criteria for inclusion. An article about an organization must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the organization, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable organization.

If by "our school" you mean you are an employee, please read conflict of interest and paid editing. 331dot (talk) 22:58, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

yes i am an employee of the school and i am not paid to to do. i saw that when you search on wiki, it was not found so i tried to fix it there. As i not an IT expert i couldnt understand the processes and that was my issue. Bismarktandoh (talk) 23:03, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

if there is any expert that can help i will inform the authorities about it and contact him or her. Bismarktandoh (talk) 23:05, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Hi Bismarktandoh. There are no "experts" (at least not in the sense that I think you're using the term) you can contact, but you can try asking for assistance at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Higher education since that's where you're going to find users who have experience editing and creating articles about post-secondary schools. Perhaps one of them can help. However, you're still going to need to comply with Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure if you're planning to continue anything on Wikipedia related to your school. You should also be aware that it might be possible for an article about your school to be created, but there's no chance of an article for your school being created. If the difference is hard to understand, then think of it this way: neither the school nor anyone associated with will have any final editorial control over what's written in the article. In other words, the article will not be a way for the school to promote itself in any way or set the record straight about itself in any way. Article content will be expected to reflect independent and secondary reliable sources have been saying about the school and be otherwise in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines. You and anyone else associated with the school will be expected to not directly edited, but instead to seek assistance from others when you've got concerns or would like changes to be made. This means that the article may move in a direction or contain content that the school doesn't like and such content could be allowed as long as it complies with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:24, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

@Bismarktandoh: The draft was deleted due to inactivity, no edits in 6 months or more. If you are going to continue to work on the draft, you may request it be undeleted. See the note on your talk page. Check out WP:YFA for useful info on creating an article. RudolfRed (talk) 23:05, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

As an employee you must declare PAID on your User page even if you are not being paid to create a Wikipedia article about the school. David notMD (talk) 23:14, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

TRYING TO GET MY WIKI PAGE BACK

Can someone help me get my wikipedia page back?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susku_Ekim_Kaya Suskuekim (talk) 00:29, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

@Suskuekim: Welcome to the Teahouse! The article in question was moved to Draft:Susku Ekim Kaya; see the reviews there for what needs to be fixed before it's moved back. Please also note that it isn't your Wikipedia article. Happy editing! Bsoyka (talk) 00:36, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

@Suskuekim - Please read WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY. Thank you. casualdejekyll 21:49, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Making a test Wikipedia account for a blog and then deleting the account

I am making a Blog post on Google Blogger about the benefits of creating a wikipedia account, and what wikipedia is not, and then how to create an account.

I already have a Wikipedia account and want to create a test Wikipedia account and then request deletion of the account.

Is this possible? ScientistBuilder (talk) 01:53, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

@ScientistBuilder: Welcome to the Teahouse! Wikipedia accounts (generally) can't be deleted, so I wouldn't recommend it if you want to delete the account afterward. You could just point readers to en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:CreateAccount; I think it's pretty self-explanatory at that page. Happy editing! Bsoyka (talk) 02:11, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

@ScientistBuilder: To clarify a bit more what Bsoyka says above, accounts can't be deleted for technical and legal reasons - specifically, no option exists in the MediaWiki install Wikipedia's using to do it, and deleting accounts would in any event cause problems with the attribution requirements for the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike licence Wikipedia uses. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 02:30, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Hello, ScientistBuilder. Such an account is perfectly legitimate under WP:VALIDALT which says Testing and training: Users who use a lot of scripts and other tools may wish to keep a second, vanilla account, for testing how things appear to others; or for demonstrating Wikipedia's default appearance when training new users. The second account should be clearly linked to the main account, except where doing so would interfere with testing or training. So, disclose the account as a legitimate alternative, use it for your training purposes, and abandon it if it is no longer needed. There is no need to delete the account, and as pointed out above, deleting an account is not really possible for a variety of legal and technical reasons. Cullen328 (talk) 02:56, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Orient & Flume Art Glass

I am one of the founders of Orient & Flume Art Glass and I would like to post the history to Wikipedia and I don't know where to begin. David G. Hopper (talk) 04:59, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

hi David G. Hopper and welcome to the teahouse! I advise you read the guidelines on conflict of interest first before you start writing an article. it's extremely hard to write neutrally (which is required) about a subject you have a connection to, so it may be best to avoid touching the subject entirely. if someone does make a page on Orient & Flume Art Glass, you could probably hop over to its talk page and help in improving the article through edit requests. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 05:49, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

For an article to be created either about the business or the artists, there would need to be publications independent of either to serve as references. A fast search on either did not fine such. If these exist, then you could use to WP:YFA process to create a draft, and then submit to a Reviewer. But in the absence of references, the effort would be futile. David notMD (talk) 09:14, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

There are articles of varying quality about glass artists. See List of glass artists for many examples. David notMD (talk) 09:23, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

@David G. Hopper Replied at your talkpage. An article about this company may be doable. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:29, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Andhra Pradesh District reorganization and related edits

There has been a re-organisation of districts in the state of Andhra Pradesh, India effective from April 4 2022. The corresponding page on List of districts of Andhra Pradesh is edited. However this change is not reflected in other pages of wikipedia. For example, the page on assembly constituencies of Andhra Pradesh still lists the constituencies under the old districts. This error is present in each of the individual pages of the constituencies.

I am from Andhra Pradesh and new to wiki editing community. I would like explore and if possible contribute to an automated solution which fixes the above mentioned errors. tulasi 09:12, 12 April 2022 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tulasimohan (talk • contribs)

hi Tulasimohan and welcome to the teahouse! I don't know how the old and new districts work (I don't live in india, let alone andhra pradesh), but if district borders were shifted or changed here or there is a new and completely distinct set of districts, I think it would be hard to code a theoretical bot to properly and correctly replace old districts with new districts (but then again, I also don't code wikibots). of course, you can always be bold and do it yourself, and ask for assistance if you need help with the wikicode. happy editing! (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.) 💜  melecie  talk - 10:45, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Tulasimohan, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm pretty sure this kind of thing can't be automated, because unless the boundaries exactly match (so it is just a renaming) places in one district won't all have moved to the same district. Another thing to remember is that this is an ecnyclopaedia, not just for now but for all time. Just because something has ceased to exist doesn't mean that it should be removed from the encyclopaedia: if something is notable then it remains notable.

This means that updating is likely to require care and some thought. If a district has changed its name, with little or no geographical alteration, then an article on it can simply be moved (leaving the old name as a redirect), and some text added about the changes. But if districts have been abolished and new ones created, then articles on the existing districts should be updated to show that they are historical, and new articles written about the new districts. And mentions of the districts in other articles, such as you mention, need to be looked at individually and updated accordingly (and sometimes, if they are in historical articles, left alone). I suggest you post at WT:WikiProject India to see if anybody wants to pick this matter up. --ColinFine (talk) 13:40, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

How to delete a non-free file?

How can I delete a non-free file when the deletion won't be a problem for anyone?

I saw something about making a request to the Deletion Administrator but I couldn't find out how to do that.

If a non-free file is uploaded but not used in the article named in its accompanying information nor anywhere else does it get automatically deleted after a time? In which case I would not need to ask for it to be deleted.

I uploaded the file but had forgotten to crop some unneeded stuff from the bottom of the image. I then uploaded the image under a different name after cropping it but realised a bit later that in any case it was not a very good choice for making the intended point. So I now want to delete two files.

The files would be of interest only to someone making minor edits to the article Michael O'Connell (artist) and at the moment that's only me.

The two files are:

Michael O'Connell, textile artist - Harpist.jpg

Michael O'Connell, textile artist - Stony harpist.jpg Tpsoconnell (talk) 10:44, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: File:Michael O'Connell, textile artist - Harpist.jpg and File:Michael O'Connell, textile artist - Stony harpist.jpg. non-free files get deleted after seven days of being marked by Speedy Deletion F5, or you can mark it for instant deletion through Speedy Deletion G7. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 10:50, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Can I amend or replace the image in a non-free file?

This ties in with my previous question.

If a non-free file is not used in any article can its image be amended or replaced?

I uploaded the file but had forgotten to crop some unneeded stuff from the bottom of the image. Could I have cropped the uploaded image? Or could I have cropped the source image and swapped it in in place of the original image?

The file would be of interest only to someone making minor edits to the article [Michael O'Connell (artist)] and at the moment that's only me.

The file is:

Michael O'Connell, textile artist - Harpist.jpg Tpsoconnell (talk) 10:46, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

hi again Tpsoconnell and welcome to the teahouse! you can replace an old non-free image with a new one, but now that both are here that doesn't really matter now. if you chose to upload a new image, older images would then have to be deleted by tagging the image with {{orphaned non-free revisions}}. since you have two similar copies of that now, if you want just one to stay, you can just mark one with {{G7}} and add the other to the page. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 10:59, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Can Ya'll Help Me Do A Wiki On The Latest 1950s

I'm Trying To Work On The Latest On The 1950s But I Don't Know How To Make It I Just Started YArnold2923 (talk) 11:54, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

@YArnold2923: Welcome to the Teahouse! Please see H:YFA, as well as why you might want to hold off on that for a while. Happy editing! Bsoyka (talk) 11:58, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Thank You YArnold2923 (talk) 12:02, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

YArnold2923 I think you mean a Wikipedia article; a "wiki" is a type of entire website of which Wikipedia is one example. 331dot (talk) 12:46, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Route Maps

Hello, Wikipedia Teahouse!

I work with VisualEditor and I recently came across this template:Template:Railway_line_legend. It is a route map for trains (subways/underground/metro) and wanted to make one for my local city's metro system. However, there is no place to edit or make one. How do I do this? Example maps are: Mumbai Metro, Line 1 (Mumbai Metro), Line 2 (Mumbai Metro).

Regards! *தருண் குமார்*, India (cstarunkumarhb@gmail.com) For talk page, click here. 13:45, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Narutmaru, welcome to the Teahouse! I believe the template in the template that you mentioned is Template:Routemap and its documentation will teach you a lot regarding how to make one for your local city's metro system. Unfortunately, I think it's much simpler to do this using source editor so you might have to switch to it. Would recommend enabling the 2017 Wikitext editor under beta features due to it's similarity to visual editor. Good luck and happy editing! Justiyaya 13:57, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Thank you @Justiyaya *தருண் குமார்*, India (cstarunkumarhb@gmail.com) For talk page, click here. 13:59, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

when is it appropriate to create an article

Hello, I have noticed that my attempts to create articles like Ethan Wacker, Other works of Jane Fonda, List of roles and awards of Troian Bellisario have been met with criticism and reverted. I was just wondering when is it appropriate to create an article?, as I thought they were useful additions. Did I have to ask permission? Samuelloveslennonstella (talk) 13:50, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

@Samuelloveslennonstella,

See, w.wiki/3qq (WP:Notability, WP: Notability) for Ethan Wacker. The show is not that notable. But, buddy cheer up! Even Ollivander does not! Maybe try Fandom!

For Other Works of Jane Fonda and List of Roles and Awards of Troian Bellisario, if you have additional information, do add it in the main article. Permission is not required, however if the information is too little, not notable or can be part of main article, mostly the article is deleted. I suggest that you add your information in those main articles. *தருண் குமார்*, India (cstarunkumarhb@gmail.com) For talk page, click here. 14:04, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Samuelloveslennonstella A decision on when to split out a person's work from a biographical article is somewhat subjective, depending on size. So, for example Ernest Hemingway has a short list of works, with a link to Ernest Hemingway bibliography. For the two you attempted - Jane and Troian - an editor reverted your attempts as being in their opinion too small to bother. Standard practice for being reverted is to start a discussion on the Talk page of the article in question. David notMD (talk) 21:39, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

I've had the admittedly quite pathetic problem of really wanting to write an article, but understanding quite well what counts as notable and not being able to find anything notable to write about. casualdejekyll 21:51, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Welcome!

Welcome to the Teahouse, every user! 86.133.55.255 (talk) 13:57, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to you too! Do you have any question about editing Wikipedia? Kpddg ^(talk) 13:59, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Fixing Paragraph Position

Hey friends! Here I'm working on an article named "Roseate Sonnet" and I'm having a little trouble. I have added a paragraph named History but because of some technical fault, it's appearing below in citations section. Please fix the bug or tell me how it can be fixed.😊Sinner (speak) 15:15, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Fixed. You had swapped two characters in a ref name. —Wasell^(T) 🌻 15:40, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

olivia

Bold 164.83.115.10 (talk) 15:23, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Hello! Do you have a question about using Wikipedia? If you would like to test, feel free to use the sandbox. Happy editing! — 3PPYB6 — TALK — CONTRIBS — 15:36, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Business Page

Hi! I was looking for some more information for a company page. I do not want to disrupt or go against any Wikipedia rules/guidelines. My company is looking to create a wikipedia page but I know the rules are super strict on businesses as it cannot be for any promotional use. They were looking to hire a company to help create it but I feel like that is going against Wikipedia rules. I am not sure what the right steps are and how to go about it. I would appreciate any input or advice! - we are well established enough as most of our clients have wikipedia pages which is why I feel like my bosses believe we should too Finance1011 (talk) 15:26, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Finance1011 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia does not have "company pages", it has articles about companies, typically written by independent editors wholly unconnected with the company in any way(including being hired by the company). Those articles summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the company, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable company. Press releases, interviews, and announcements do not establish notability. Notability is also not inherited by association(such as through having notable clients). My advice is to not force the issue, if the company is truly notable an independent editor will take note of it and choose to write about it. Any article about your company will not necessarily say what the company might want. 331dot (talk) 15:33, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for coming here and asking, Finance1011. Clearly you understand that Wikipedia may not be used for promotion, but (like many people) I don't think you really understand what that means. Not one of your clients "has a Wikipedia page" because nobody and nothing in the entire universe "has a Wikipedia page". Wikipedia apparently has articles about your clients: the articles do not belong to the clients, are not controlled by the clients, are not for the clients' benefit (except incidentally), they do not necessarily say what the client would like to be said about them. If they are decent articles (we have thousands and thousands of seriously substandard articles that were perpetrated before we became as careful of our standards) they will contain almost nothing that the client says or wants to say, and will be almost entirely based on what people who have no connection with the client have chosen to publish in reliable sources.

Even if all the articles about your clients are excellent (which implies that each of your clients meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability, as without that an acceptable article is not possible) that does not necessarily mean that you meet those criteria - notability is not inherited. If for example you provide a service which independent commentators are not generally interested in writing about, then I'm afraid that you will not meet those criteria, however well-known you might be within the industry.

What I would very very strongly advise you against doing is paying somebody to write an article on you. This can work, but all too often people who try it end up losing out. If the company you hire are honest, they will tell you that they cannot guarantee that an article about you will be accepted, and that if it is accepted, they cannot guarantee that you will be in any way satisfied with the result. (If they do not tell you this, then they are simply lying). They will also conform with Wikipedia's terms of service by declaring their status as paid editors.

In the end, I'm afraid that "My company is looking to create a wikipedia page" is precisely what we mean by promotion. Whether or not Wikipedia ever has an article about your company is not in your gift or control, and will not (from Wikipedia's point of view) ever be for your benefit. ColinFine (talk) 16:04, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Thank you both for your explanations and input. I will tell them it’s best to just leave it alone and if one is created later on then that will be the best. I am disclosing I am an employee of the company but I am NOT being paid to create or establish any kind of article for or about this company (I do not nearly know anything to even attempt a task like that or have the skills required to do so). I just was looking for answers and figured This may be the best way to get these answers before doing something that is out of the realm of Wikipedia and would get immediately taken down. I also really disliked the option of hiring a third party because as you had mentioned they do “guarantee” which does not seem right to me. I appreciate both of your assistance it helps so much! ~~

Being an employee counts as paid (see WP:PAID) even if not specifically being paid to create a Wikipedia article. Being paid is allowed as long as that fact is declared on your User page. Creating a new Wikipedia is a hard task. Common advice is to put in months trying to improve existing articles. And as noted, once an article about the company exists, any editor can edit it, as long as facts are verified by references. Often, this means controversial content being included (lawsuits, government actions, etc.). David notMD (talk) 21:48, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

is my article good enough now to publish?

Hello!!! Could someone take a look at my work in progress page on Nourhane, famous singer from the 1940s, 1950s, 1960s in Egypt, Lebanon, Syria - and who suddenly quit. You can find the page here. I have tried added inline citations and references that have varied sources. I will continue working on it, adding more links / photos, etc... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Nourhane

awaiting your comments. thank you in advance. Sincerely, May Kassem MayKassem (talk) 15:52, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Hello @MayKassem! Apart from the citation issues mentioned in the comment on the draft by User:DoubleGrazing, there were issues with formatting (like instead of an infobox, you added an image over a table and using individual images instead of a gallery) and WP:NPOV (for instance, there's a line that says "she was sent to a boarding school where she was seen as a natural leader due to her wit, intelligence, and fearless nature" which is not neutral). So, for these, you can look at other articles about a similar topic and see how they are made, maybe check what templates are used in them. Excellenc1 (talk) 17:35, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

@MayKassem, the article has a bunch of formatting issues, which Excellenc1 and I have been addressing. The good news, though, is that the topic clearly passes the notability requirement for singers, largely due to the press surrounding your film. It'd help if you'd format them properly, though—read WP:REFB, fix all the press references in the bibliography section, and then place them throughout the article to support specific facts.

Another issue is that the images in the article will be deleted unless you fix the licenses. You claimed that File:Nourhane Blue paint.jpg was your own work when you uploaded it; unless you personally took it, that's false. For a non-living person, you can upload an image under fair use, but you need to answer the prompts in the wizard correctly. For the press images, they might be out of copyright, but that can be very difficult to prove, so they'll likely be deleted unless you go into the rabbit hole of copyright law in the relevant countries. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 18:00, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

@Sdkb, @MayKassem, yes, that photo's description says "by Photo Akl- Beirut". I suspect that company owns the copyright. 73.127.147.187 (talk) 04:19, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

I put that information in. Photo Akl is the Photo Studio that took the initial photograph and painted it by hand. A took a photograph of the large photograph, this is therefore a fragment. At any rate, the photograph in its entirety is the property of Nourhane and her family of which I am a part of. This is to reply to @Sdkb- let me know if it's okay with this clarification. MayKassem (talk) 09:36, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

thank you again @Sdkb - will read through the WP:REFB and revise. MayKassem (talk) 09:39, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

@Sdkb &@Excellenc1 - Thank you so much for reworking the formatting and phrasing of the article.

I will read all the pages you advise me to and reformat, create a photo gallery, and put in more supporting documentation. Thanks again. Have a lovely day. MayKassem (talk) 09:58, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

thank you @Excellenc1 very helpful comments MayKassem (talk) 09:37, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

Finding a source

Isn't there a noticeboard or forum of sorts where I can ask for help locating sources? I'm wondering if I could possibly locate the source I've mentioned at the talkpage of one of my drafts: Draft talk:Timber Wars. Just Googling bits of the quote doesn't bring up the source, and I was wondering if other people on Wikipedia have access to tools that might help locate the source. TipsyElephant (talk) 15:57, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

@TipsyElephant: Is it the WP:Reference desk or WP:Resource Request? The Tips of Apmh 16:02, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

@TipsyElephant—You can access the Wikipedia Library here, which provides over 90+ reliable sources free for Wikipedians. I should note that you have already have access, since you have over 6 months of experience, 500+ edits, have made >10 edits this month, and you are not blocked. Let me know if this is not the answer to your question. Hopefully this helps! — 3PPYB6 — TALK — CONTRIBS — 16:07, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

How to reduce the number of citations?

Like in Richard H. Ebright? Probably the biggest best example of WP:OVERKILL. Excellenc1 (talk) 16:37, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

@Excellenc1: The WP page you link to has some suggestions on how to solve it. Can you clarify what you are asking for? RudolfRed (talk) 16:43, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

@RudolfRed, there are some lines whose citations are papers on the topic, like 7 journal citations on his research in transcription initiation, 6 for antibacterial drug discovery etc. How to reduce these? Excellenc1 (talk) 17:02, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

In other articles about academic scientists I have seen a section of selected publications, often limited to 5-10 journal articles. There was also no need to ref so many newspaper articles (NYTimes and WashPost) that mentioned Ebright in passing or had a short quote from him. I deleted 17 refs. David notMD (talk) 22:08, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Why not recommend WP:TWA?

Moved to Wikipedia talk:Teahouse

 – This page is for asking questions about editing Wikipedia; moving to the talk page. Bsoyka (talk) 19:04, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

AfC versus Move (be bold?)

Advice appreciated. I submitted a draft (Draft:King James (play)) to the 'AfC' process a little over 2 weeks ago, hoping for fairly rapid consideration and for ideas on how to improve it. I believe that it is in pretty good shape, and is now a credible Wikipedia article. Would it be bad form on my part to switch strategy now, and 'Move' the page from Draft to Article space, in hope of a speedier response? CWBoast (talk) 01:29, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

The backlog at AfC is close to 3,000 drafts, but the system is not a queue. Reviewers decide what they want to review next. Converting your draft to an article goes to New Pages Patrol rather than AFC reviewers. NPP can also take months. In the interim, it will exist as an article, but be invisible to search engine searches. David notMD (talk) 04:21, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

Be Bold. Regards, Ariconte (talk) 05:02, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

Flags in Wikipedia logo

I noticed that in the Ukrainian version of pages, the Wikipedia logo has the colors of the Ukrainian flag. I think that is a great idea. Would it be possible to extend that idea to the pages in all the other languages? I realize that there is a potential issue with the fact that some languages are spoken in many countries while others are spoken mostly in a region or province of a country. I am sure some kind of protocol can be devised for these cases. 67.186.48.166 (talk) 04:51, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

hi ip user! each language Wikipedia is a different project with different standards and different members, so I believe you would have to raise this proposal in each individual wiki language. happy reading! 💜  melecie  talk - 07:06, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

Moving image to Commons... from other language Wikipedia

Hello. I am trying to move a Wikipedia free image file that should be suitable for Wikimedia Commons. I have read the Wikipedia:Moving files to Commons guideline. However, this file is from the Japanese language Wikipedia. Can anyone help perform this export from the Japanese Wikipedia to Commons? The image link in question is: https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%83%95%E3%82%A1%E3%82%A4%E3%83%AB:NW-A900.JPG Morita Akio (talk) 10:43, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

Properly formatting userboxes

Hi, a few days ago I added several userboxes to my userpage, and as you can tell by my aforementioned userpage, I have not been able to find a way to properly format them into neat rows and columns. How would you go about in organzing these userboxes properly? Maerenneburg (talk) 12:35, 13 April 2022 (UTC)