Wikipedia:Teahouse

Shantavira, 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

If my article was moved to Draftspace, shouldn't the language that I copied from also be moved?

You see, I had made a translated page from Russian to English, and it got moved to draftspace. I added every cite there and it was still moved. Therefore, shouldn't the russian version be moved to Draftspace as well? Kxeon (talk) 17:22, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

@Kxeon: Each language Wikipedia is different and operates by different rules. Something that is acceptable for main space on a foreign language Wikipedia may not be acceptable on the English Wikipedia, because the English Wikipedia has more stringent criteria for inclusion than other language Wikipedias.

If you are referring to Draft:Vitaly Pishchenko, it violates multiple guidelines: WP:CREATIVE, WP:BLP, and WP:GNG. See Wikipedia:Golden rule for an overview of what is required for main space articles here. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:28, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

And on top of all that, @Kxeon, I'm afraid there's one more thing - you didn't attribute your translation. Please take a look at Help:Translation. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 17:38, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

The other thing to say is, you may well be right. Many (probably all) Wikipedias - including English Wikipedia - have many many substandard articles which, if they were presented for review in en-wiki today, would not be accepted. Unfortunately, few editors are interested in spending the time going through them improving or deleting them. See other stuff exists. ColinFine (talk) 17:58, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

And while I'm at it, what about the Ukrainian version? That has no cites AT ALL. Shouldn't that be deleted? Or is the rule just missing from the Ukrainian wikipedia entirely? Kxeon (talk) 20:59, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

@Kxeon: Same situation. You can try to nominate it for deletion there if you want, and see what happens. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 21:13, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

And how would I do that??? Kxeon (talk) 22:02, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Kxeon, English language Teahouse hosts cannot provide detailed instructions about Ukrainian Wikipedia. You will have to read their deletion policies and procedures. Cullen328 (talk) 22:18, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Kxeon, please follow the guidance at uk:ВП:КРВИЛ and uk:ВП:ВИЛ. Mathglot (talk) 01:25, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Content Removal

I could not understand why my edits to the page Aam Aadmi Party removed. I had added information from reliable sources and that pertains to the topic, although it was critical information. Please restore the information under the Funding section. Rrthakur22 (talk) 14:15, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Pinging Venkat TL in case they'd like to expand upon their edit summary for the edit in question. — Bilorv (talk) 14:54, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Better place for a dicussion would be the Talk page of the article. David notMD (talk) 09:39, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

@Bilorv thanks for the ping. @Rrthakur22 You should raise the matter on Talk:Aam Aadmi Party. The content was basically opinions sourced from newspapers and WP:UNDUE for the article. If you disagree with removal make a case on the article talk page. Venkat TL (talk) 15:03, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

To: @Venkat TL @Bilorv @David notMD The information that I added under the Funding section of Aam Aadmi Party is not opinion. It is from reliable news stories and this crucial information must appear on this page which at present exists as a PR pamphlet of Aam Aadmi Party. I am surprised to note that many other pages related to Aam Aadmi Party are also not editable. Please restore the information immediately. Thanks. Rrthakur22 (talk) 15:10, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

@Rrthakur22, this is not the right place to discuss this. Venkat TL (talk) 15:11, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

@Rrthakur22, you have been given a link to the talk page: Talk:Aam Aadmi Party. That is where you need to make your arguments, not here. If you cannot reach an agreement through talk page discussion, continue with other forms of dispute resolution - WP:30 and WP:DRN are options, but talk page discussion comes first. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 15:30, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Will this article pass if I submit it for review?

I want to know Draft:Baqibillah Mishkat Chowdhury Is the article worth submitting for review? Prince Tuhin13 (talk) 15:00, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

@Prince Tuhin13: the best way to find out, is to submit it for review. There's no harm in getting a "decline" on a submitted Draft; in fact, it can help you by giving you an evaluation by an experienced editor about exactly what needs to be improved. Before you do, though, have a look at Help:Your first article; do *you* think your Draft meets all the recommendations there? If not, go improve it. If yes, submit it! Mathglot (talk) 17:38, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

I would clean up the Name and lineage section. It is difficult to understand the writing in that section. If I am understanding the writing and the cited references, this information is mostly about Chandpur, so it might be helpful for a Wikipedia article on Chandpur, but most of it is not needed for an article about a person from Chandpur. Good luck to you! Larry Hockett (Talk) 17:51, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

As someone who works on Articles For Creation (i.e. reviewing draft articles) it is close but there is some text that needs work to make it more neutral and read better. Gusfriend (talk) 10:32, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Molang article almostly blanked

Report:

I saw that the Molang article in Wikipedia is almostly blanked leaving just the lead section, plot and series overview (the latter was just simply "

Season	Episodes		Originally aired
			First aired	Last aired

Closed the template to prevent syntax highlighting from acting up. weeklyd3 (block | talk | contributions) 16:43, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Suggested edits aged over 3 months - No response

Regarding this Talk Page Talk:Software Guard Extensions#Conflict of Interest Edit Request

The article about Intel Software Guard Extensions has a large number of inaccuracies and poor information but as an Intel employee, I cannot edit directly due to a conflict of interest. I submitted a list of edit requests back in April 2022 and it looks like no changes have been made by the editors. When I submitted in April, it said the backlog was 156 edits and now it is 210. Every week we have to dissuade customers about errors they read on Wikipedia about on Intel Software Guard Extension. I am trying to be respectful of the conflict of interest rules and understand Wikipedia is a volunteer effort, but is there any way to get editor attention on this page and get some of this misinformation fixed? Please advise. Thank you! MFJpdxOR (talk) 20:42, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, MFJpdxOR. You should provide reliable sources that are independent of Intel. A Wikipedia article about a company product should not be a company brochure. You have your own website for that. Cullen328 (talk) 20:57, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Also, MFJpdxOR, you need to make the mandatory Paid contributions disclosure. Cullen328 (talk) 21:01, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

@Cullen328, @MFJpdxOR It seems that this one is tricky, because Intel certainly knows more about how Software Guard Extensions actually work than anyone else. Regarding sources that are independent of Intel, Intel knows the facts. And yes, the temptation is always there for a company to write glowingly about its own products.

Even a write up at Tom's Hardware or a similar site, which could be used as a reference, might be based on info from Intel. We don't want a company brochure, but inaccuracies in technical articles don't help anyone.

Would a paid contributions disclosure, along with edit requests, achieve the objective -- if the edit requests are ever worked on? 71.228.112.175 (talk) 07:45, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, IP editor. I have owned a successful small business for 29 years and think in my own mind that I have a far deeper understanding of the challenges and opportunities that my small business faces than anyone else. But that stuff simply does not belong on Wikipedia. An acceptable Wikipedia article summarizes what reliable sources that are entirely independent of the topic say about the topic. Unless we are firm and unswerving about sticking to this core principle, the encyclopedia would rapidly devolve to a massive collection of marketing brochures with zero credibility. Intel is perfectly free to express their expertise on their own website. Not here. Cullen328 (talk) 08:23, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

@Cullen328 I suppose the proper sources need to study the Intel literature and work with the software guard extensions themselves, then write that information up in a reliable publication. I know the guideline... I must have had a momentary lapse of reason. Mea culpa. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 08:46, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, @Cullen328. I also see another editor commented on my suggestions. From their remarks, the main issue doesn't seem to be the content of what I'm suggesting, but rather the use of sources and citations that are Intel pages. I'll get to work revising my suggestions with non-Intel citations. Appreciate your consideration.

Question for you - What do I do if there is a statement about the design of Intel Software Guard Extensions that is incorrect, and the correct information resides in the public design specification published by Intel? Can I cite the design specification as a resource? No objective third party publishes the design spec. Appreciate any insight here. MFJpdxOR (talk) 16:05, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, MFJpdxOR. Perhaps an External link to the design specification could be added to the end of the article, as opposed to using it as an inline reference. Cullen328 (talk) 16:34, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

How to get Draft AfC Submissions reviewed faster

I am trying to figure out a way so that Draft AfC submissions can be published to mainspace in less than 4 months. May I know how article review works as well? WikiNarco (talk) 05:17, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

@WikiNarco: The review process works the same way everything else on Wikipedia does - a volunteer will get to it when they get to it. There is no formal queue, and reviewers are not assigned to articles. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 05:30, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Your draft Draft:Lucas Lynggaard Tønnesen has not been submitted yet? Theroadislong (talk) 05:39, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Not yet @Theroadislong apparently it didn't fit the guidelines (WP:NOACTOR and WP:GNG). Is there any other source that I can use to fit this criteria? (articles that encompasses this subject is hard to find) WikiNarco (talk) 05:45, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

if sources are hard to find, it is a sure indication that the topic is not yet notable. Theroadislong (talk) 05:57, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, WikiNarco. Here is how to get an AFC draft accepted quickly. Write your draft about an indisputably notable topic, namely one which has received significant coverage in multiple, independent reliable sources. These need to be sources of such high quality that no reasonable Wikipedia editor would challenge them. Present these sources as clean, well formatted references with complete bibliographic detail. Now, write neutral prose that summarizes what the reliable sources say about the topic and makes it clear why the topic is notable. Add your references inline. Do not try to pad your draft with mediocre references because quality is far more important than quantity. Do not write anything even slightly promotional and do not add endless detail. Be concise but briefly summarize all the main points that the reliable sources make. Drafts like this are accepted rapidly. On the other hand, editors who try to push through puffed up drafts about topics of dubious notability, crammed full of references to unreliable sources, and unreferenced praise or criticism of the topic, should not be surprised that their draft ends up stalled or rejected. Quality over quantity. Cullen328 (talk) 06:21, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks @Cullen328 WikiNarco (talk) 08:37, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

It is also worth noting that most drafts are looked at within a week or so and 4 months is generally for the problematic ones. Also AfC averages over 100 submissions a day so the 31 that were submitted 4 months ago are all that is left from over 3,000. Gusfriend (talk) 10:42, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

speedy deletion

Could somebody give me the link to where I can nominate an article for speedy deletion? Not the rules or a guide or a template or anything like that but the place where I can. I've been looking for more than 45 minutes! Dutchy45 (talk) 05:50, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Dutchy45 — there is no place to request speedies (or at least I don't know of one!); you do it by tagging an article individually, using the relevant db template. Best, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:55, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

ah, ok thanks. I've already done that. Dutchy45 (talk) 05:58, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

@Dutchy45 Welcome to Teahouse! I would recommend installing WP:TWINKLE if you haven't already. It simplifies nominating articles for deletion and also notifying the article creator. I noticed many of your edits do not have an Help:Edit summary, which I would strongly encourage to make it easier for people checking a Watch list or in my case, searching for what pages you may have nominated for deletion. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 09:16, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Article pending publishing

I have written a biography on an existing person. It is now pending review. Could someone here assist with reviewing so that the page goes live? Leo Muzivoreva (talk) 09:44, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Leo Muzivoreva Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. If you have an association with this person, please read about conflict of interest and paid editing for information on required formal disclosures. Declaring paid editing or a paid relationship is a Terms of Use requirement.

I assume you refer to Draft:Abel Tatenda Nyawanhu. It is far from ready to be accepted, as it does not summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the person, showing how they meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable musician. 331dot (talk) 09:50, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Unlikely to be that draft, which was declined in December after submission and doesn't seem to be currently awaiting re-review. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:21, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Or are you referring to the content on your user page(which actually is not for drafting an article, but for telling about yourself as an editor). 331dot (talk) 09:52, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Leo Muzivoreva WRONG PLACE! The draft you created on your User page is about to be deleted, with no record of it ever existing. Quickly copy if to off Wikipedia or to your Sandbox if you intend to create an article. Then, use WP:YFA to create and submit a draft. If it is deleted before you are able to transfer it, you can ask the deleting Administrator to help recover it. (Note: If there was a copyright infringement, i.e., content copied from a website, then it cannot be recovered.) David notMD (talk) 14:01, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Note - NONE of the references establish notability. The draft has lots of information about him that is not referenced. All content on living people needs to be verified by references. Referencing individual songs not needed. Delete all APPLE MUSIC refs to the actual songs and albums, which equals all of your references. David notMD (talk) 14:05, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Translation/Karasuma Strret

Hello! Please, delete redirect with mistake, thanks. Станислав Савченко (talk) 10:58, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

You have already tagged it for deletion. An admin will most likely delete the page soon. Kpddg ^(talk) 12:15, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Admin en-wiki, thank you for your deletion and thank you for your help!  Done--Станислав Савченко (talk) 14:39, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Question about WP:BLP and similar in relation to two extensive "crime" list articles

Greetings,

I was by coincidence made aware of two related, in my view very difficult list articles: List of major crimes in Singapore (2000–present) & List of major crimes in Singapore (before 2000). They both seem to contain a significant amount of "regular" crimes, or crimes where the name of victims and/or perpetrators might reasonably not appear on Wikipedia. I'm not sure about our exact policy as I had yet had little to worry about WP:BLP and similar, so I'd like the input of the expertise frequently to be found around here. I'm especially worried about phrases like "If found guilty", which indicate that the accused (with names given!) are sometimes not yet even convicted.

I'd like to add that we don't have anything remotely similar for other countries, e.g. only listing terrorist incidents and serial killers with their own article for France. -- LordPeterII (talk) 11:11, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Both articles begin with a link to the article Crime in Singapore, which iself starts its lede with "In Singapore, crime rates are some of the lowest in the world."

Perhaps therefore the standard of what constitutes "major" (and indeed 'notable') crimes in Singapore is lower than what might be the case elsewhere.

[Personal disclosure: as a small boy I lived in Singapore for a year – but for chance, the three deaths in the first incident entered for 1965 would have been five, with my mother and myself included.] {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.196.45.159 (talk) 20:31, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

I did some cleanup on the most recent years, removing names of those not convicted and one police shooting as it did not seem to match the theme of page. The Crime in Singapore page could use some love, which would make it clearer whether the lists are needed. Slywriter (talk) 23:49, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Source

Are movie reviews considered reliable if used as a source while creating a celebrity page? PravinGanechari (talk) 15:39, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Movie reviews usually comprise mainly of feedback about the movie, with very little focus on the actor. It may praise their performance, but that is a passing mention. The subject should have significant coverage, which directly addresses them. So though they can be put in an article about a celebrity, I do not think that they can be used to establish notability. Kpddg ^(talk) 15:52, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

They can be, if they are from a WP:RS. They don't necessarily help they case for WP:N. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:56, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Like many sources, it depends on the depth of coverage of the celebrity in question. If you look at our page WP:RSPS, PravinGanechari and search for the word "film", you'll see how we view individual sources in general. So IMDB is no good but Rotten Tomatoes is usually fine. You can ask about a specific source that does give an in-depth review you are thinking of using at the reliable sources noticeboard. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:58, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, PravinGanchari, and welcome to the Teahouse. Others have addressed your question; but (at the risk of sounding pedantic) I want to suggest that you think of the activity you are doing not as "creating a celebrity page" but as "writing an encyclopaedia article about the celebrity". ColinFine (talk) 17:21, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi ColinFine , Vidisha (actress) page has four movie reviews of two movies. I was going to bring that page to Afd as GNG is not passing. So I asked that question ( But now I have found two sources and added them to the page). Thanks for answering the question. PravinGanechari (talk) 02:22, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Ardennes Fury is not a True Story!

Why haven't you taken away the category of "World War II films based on actual events" if you are supposed to know that Ardennes Fury is not a True Story?  2600:1700:63D1:630:35F0:E855:146A:3A75 (talk) 18:13, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse! This is a place for new editors to ask questions about editing Wikipedia. Ardennes Fury's poster says that it is based on true events. Even if it is not an accurate depiction, nor was the movie meant to be serious (as it was a mockbuster), it is based on the German Ardennes offensive, so it does belong in the category "World War II films based on actual events". Have a good day/night!

Courtesy link: Ardennes Fury

Asparagusus (interaction) 18:22, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Isn't pretty much any WWII-drama based on actual events? For a certain value of "based" anyway. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:40, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

It's a matter of judgement – the Doctor Who episode where River Song tries to assassinate Hitler would require a very low value for "actual events", for example. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.1905} 90.196.45.159 (talk) 20:35, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Agree, Inglourious Basterds comes to mind. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:37, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

If we are looking for well-known World War II films which are pretty far from actual events then I offer Captain America: The First Avenger. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:37, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Not my favorite MCU-film, but still ok. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:23, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

I see neither of the films have a "historical accuracy" section, that's comforting. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:27, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Guidance About Giving References For Article

Hello all there, greetings. Kindly guide me how to give reference for an article what is an SOP for giving reference on wiki article? shahzad 18:55, 13 August 2022 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hussayn.Shahzad (talk • contribs)

Hi Hussayn.Shahzad, welcome to the Teahouse. See Help:Referencing for beginners for some guidance on how to create inline citations, and for some information on the kind of sources reviewers will be looking for. 97.126.103.107 (talk) 20:17, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

@Hussayn.Shahzad: If you prefer to edit using the Visual Editor, you may find this guidance page of use. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:31, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

reception on Boss Baby: Back in the Crib

Any good sources on where to find Boss Baby: Back in the Crib? BMA-Nation2020 (talk) 19:37, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi @BMA-Nation2020, welcome to the Teahouse. I think you're asking where to find sources about that series? You can try the following search links: Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL. 97.126.103.107 (talk) 20:22, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Found one. Common Source Media. Does that help? BMA-Nation2020 (talk) 22:35, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

What is "Common Source Media"? is it a website? If so, please give us a URL. The only "Commonsourcemedia" I can find is the name of an Instagram user. If that's who you mean, then no: unless tha user represents an organisation which publishes articles with a reputation for editorial control and fact-checking, then it is not a reliable source. ColinFine (talk) 22:48, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

If you meant Common Sense Media, then this discussion on the Reliable sources noticeboard in 2019 doesn't seem to have reached a conclusion about whether it should be regarded as reliable or not. (Note that the last posting there, which says "Generally reliable" is, I think, one of the opinions advanced in the discussion, not the conclusion of the discussion). ColinFine (talk) 22:58, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Template of "Original Research" on "Paul Hartal" article

Hello,

We can help with documents, references to improve the Paul Hartal article in Wikipedia. Even in its present state the Original Research template is not justified. Among the available supporting material: Plaque of Appreciation for commissioned design of the 24th Olympic Games (Seoul) sport art album project; award winning Dutch short film based on Paul Hartal's poem, "Subway'.books by noted scientists, Clifford A. Pickover, Moses Feingold on Hartal's notion of time challenging the conventional mainstream theory of time as a flying arrow. We are requesting your help.

Pranek Pranek (talk) 23:19, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Paul Hartal

@Pranek: I'm going to remove EVERYTHING that has no source from that article. Do not readd any of it without in-depth, non-routine, independent news/scholarly sources written by identifiable authors and subjected to rigourous fact-checking. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 23:55, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

And with the obvious bographical errors removed, I can see two serious issues: First, what I didn't remove is almost entirely novel synthesis (especially as regards lyrical conceptualism) and second, the article relies far too heavily on Hartal's own writings. None of the sources you offer above are any good (and if anything, gives cause to look at the whole situation here with an eye towards sanctions). —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 00:11, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

@Jéské Couriano I'm glad you removed "lyrical conceptualism encapsulates no less a fusion of polarities than the term-amalgams of lyrical expressionism". It makes my head hurt. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 08:55, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

@Pranek: Welcome to the Teahouse. On a rather unrelated note, I would like to kindly inform you that if you are sharing the account with someone else to please stop doing so, as that contravenes the encyclopedia's sockpuppetry policy. If you have any conflict of interest in regards to Hartal, please disclose that on your user page at User:Pranek. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:13, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Great minds think alike; I dropped a warning to disclose along with the ARBPS alert. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 00:19, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

discussion

unable to create my article 2407:1400:AA42:1968:A116:1B17:28C7:F3DE (talk) 01:35, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello. Looking at your contributions, it looks like your only edit was to open this thread. I don't see more edits from the whole /64 CIDR range. So please provide more details about what you were trying to do. Thank you. weeklyd3 (block | talk | contributions) 01:38, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

hi ip user! if you're trying to create an article, I'd suggest you read Reliable sources (which details what reliable sources are, which are essential for an article), Notability (which details what kinds of articles about which subjects can be created), and finally Your first article (which actually goes into detail about how you can create an article). happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 02:07, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Is it possible that you tried to create an article while logged into an account? Or was it Speedy deleted, thus showing no evidence in your history of edits? David notMD (talk) 02:18, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

How do i report an IP

Hello how do you report an IP @ Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring?

I wanted to report an IP for the 3RR violation and edit warring on Amhara people article. However i couldn't report the IP, it showed red. Wanted to this yesterday, then gave up. Saw today more useless edits by this IP. Can someone tell me how to report non users? YonasJH (talk) 09:34, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Just as you'd report anyone else, I think, YonasJH. An IP number isn't a "non user"; they're a user who isn't logged in. Click on the link there that says "Click here to create a new report". You're asked to specify the user. Well, follow "User:" not with a username but instead with the IP number. -- Hoary (talk) 09:54, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

YonasJH, please note that the username showing in red merely means that the user has not created a userpage, which cannot be done as an IP and is optional for registered users. The userlinks template works for IP addresses too, e.g. {{userlinks|127.0.0.1}} results in 127.0.0.1 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 12:39, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Merge two Articles

Can anyone please help me in merging two articles. The articles are Manju Warrier and Manju Warrier filmography. The article Manju warrier is not big and both the articles can be combined each other. So it will be helpful for the readers also. Also I am trying to make the article by adding citations and making it a good article. Anyone please help me outPaavamjinn (talk) 09:51, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello @Paavamjinn, and welcome to the Teahouse! Personally, I would recommend against merging these two articles (they are actually both quite large, and shouldn't be merged per WP:NOTMERGE, as the resulting article would be rather large). I'd recommend having a good look at WP:MERGE nonetheless, as it has a lot of useful information about merging. Good luck with improving the article, and have a great day! HenryTemplo (talk) 10:31, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

I disagree with the proposal to merge those two articles, and add that the separate article listing her awards does not need to be merged either. Readers of Manju Warrier are clearly directed to the other articles if they wish to see details. David notMD (talk) 11:05, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

As for raising the quality from current C-class to nominating it to be a Good article, I recommend checking all the existing references to confirm those are valid, adding references whereever there is a citation needed, or just text without references (quite a bit), also consider cutting, moving text, etc. In my opinion the 2015-present section is far too long. David notMD (talk) 11:13, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

css in userpage

Hello there,

does anyone if it's possible to change the style sheet of my userpage ? And if yes, how ?

thank you Vincent-vst (talk) 12:05, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

I believe this is only possible in the template space. See TemplateStyles. Why are you trying to change the CSS on your userpage? Please remember that distrupting the MediaWiki interface is not allowed, even on userpages. small jars tc 12:18, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

hi,

thank you for your answer,

I just wanted to change the styling of my userpage, just for design purpose ... Vincent-vst (talk) 17:50, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Or perhaps are you referring to your common.js/common.css page, or just changing the design or layout of your userpage? Kpddg ^(talk) 12:43, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

i found this recently : https://2015.igem.org/Wiki_Requirements/Using_HTML,_CSS,_and_Javascript

but when i try to put a <html> tag, it doesn't render properly. i can't seem to edit the html/css in my userpage.

i can put some <div> but when i start to insert some div in another div, well, it doesn't work anymore... Anyway, i was just curious if some users succeded to make pretty userpage with html/css. Vincent-vst (talk) 19:09, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

@Vincent-vst: you can't use high-level tags like <html>, <head>, or <body> in your userpage code, because they're already part of the page. Whatever you put on your userpage is stuffed into the <html> tag in the MediaWiki interface, and nesting <html> tags is invalid. All you can really do for styling is to use inline styles or get fixed aspects of css functionality (eg. hover effects) from certain templates. small jars tc 22:02, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

thank you Vincent-vst (talk) 06:37, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Farhat Abbas Shah

pride of performance

Extended puffery

Farhat Abbas Shah is one of the most leading distinguished 'and popular poet of Pakistan. He started writing poetry from a very early age. His writings were published in distinguished literary magazines of our country ' Nayarang e khayaal and Nai Qadrian due to its standard of creativity and the poetic force. His entire work is characterized by excellence in terms of subject, and craft His Urdu poetry books have won paramount acclaim by breaking new ground and held in high esteem by the great critics of our time, who have considered his poetry as a landmark addition to the great tradition of Urdu literature. It is worth mentioning here that his books have been given different awards from time to time. Mr. Farhat Abbas shah is a dexterous trendsetter in Punjabi poetry. His punjabi poetry books banners new standards of Punjabi poetry. He is a promoter of social democratic and progressive platform. In the landscape of literature he has brought finest contributions. His books of critical essay and his novel idea of Takhleeqiat Passand Tehreeq was widely appreciated. His work is an emblem piece of art rich in excellence and wisdome. Mr. Farhat Abbas shah has annexed the poetry with phenomenal superior diction and fanciful symbols. Mr Farhat Abbas Shah has written more than 70 urdu and punjabi poetry books. His books on new economic theories and policies is another feather in his cap. It is not out of place to mention here that Farhat Abbas Shah, in his poetry has always spoken out not only against wars around the world but also economic injustice poverty reduction and equality in human social rights. Farhat Abbas Shah appears to be the only poet who has translated his economic vision not only into economic theory and microfinance model but also got recognition from an institution like Oxford University by doing practically successful pilot projects. A Book by Farhat Abbas Shah World Economic Crisis, Analysis And Resolve Contains details of his poetry being brought into the process of vision.

Mr Farhat Abbas Shah is a distinguished poet. He is a thinker ' social reformer His poetry has been translated into different languages. Mr Farhat Abbas Shah is one of the most popular and noted poet of our country . — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:EA:5725:C00:511F:CF41:785A:C16E (talk) 12:50, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi IP user, welcome to the Teahouse. This is not the place to submit an article - please read and follow the directions at Help:Your first article if you'd like to submit a draft article on Farhat Abbas Shah for review. You will need to provide reliable, independent, secondary sources with significant coverage of him to prove his notability and support your facts. 97.126.103.107 (talk) 14:10, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

District 9 multiple edits

An IP editor has made around 70 separate sequential edits on this article, all being unexceptional but trivial, and I wonder why. Doug butler (talk) 14:42, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

You could ask on their Talk page at User talk:222.127.36.97 which they might respond to. Or you could just see if their contributions stray into disruptive editing at some point in the future. As far as I can see, this hasn't happened yet, so I'll assume good faith. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:08, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

update page

I am supposed to leave requests for edits to "Nancy Raabe" at the talk page there, but I don't think anyone sees my request. Nancy Raabe

My update request still stands, and here is an additional cite for that spot. Thank you.

https://www.thereporteronline.com/2022/08/12/local-pastor-named-president-of-association-of-lutheran-church-musicians/ DaneCoGuy (talk) 15:24, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi @DaneCoGuy, welcome to the Teahouse. No one is likely to see your request unless you use the {{Request edit}} template or the Edit Request Wizard. Both of those put your request into a queue for the attention of other editors. 97.126.103.107 (talk) 15:28, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Organization - how to?

How to create a wikipedia page for my organization 47.187.215.246 (talk) 16:40, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

47.187.215.246, I strongly recommend not doing so because you would have a Conflict of Interest. However, if you really want to do so, use the Article wizard to submit a draft. weeklyd3 (block | talk | contributions) 16:44, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Also, please be sure that your organization is notable enough for an article, as non-notable articles are frequently declined at Articles for creation or deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. weeklyd3 (block | talk | contributions) 16:46, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

And note that, if your organisation does meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, and somebody creates an article about it, the article will not belong to or be controlled by your organisation, will not be for the benefit of your organisation, may contain material that you would prefer it didn't, and should be amost entirely based on what people unconnected with your organisation have chosen to publish about you (favourable or unfavourable) and not on what you or your associates say or want to say. ColinFine (talk) 16:52, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Reliable Sources

I used an in depth film review from Variety Magazine as a reliable source, which I've seen in many Wikipedia articles and would also be accepted at the academic level. The film is by a notable director, as well, with an extensive Wikipedia page. I've seen comparable pages, so I really don't understand why it's not enough. Any help is appreciated. Thanks in advance.

Draft:America: Land of the FreeKS 2pisces28 (talk) 17:57, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, 2pisces28, and welcome to the Teahouse. The draft was declined not by "Wikipedia", but by the particular reviewer HenryTemplo. If you don't understand, or disagree with, the decline, the thing to do is ask HenryTemplo to explain. ColinFine (talk) 18:23, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

@2pisces28 leave a message at my talk page :) HenryTemplo (talk) 18:49, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you so much for clarifying that! 2pisces28 (talk) 12:34, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia

I’m looking for someone to write up a Wikipedia on me and my business. Where can I find someone to do this for me? 47.34.236.106 (talk) 19:31, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Most likely you cannot. Take the time to read what's at this link: Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing.

That said, WP:s basic rule for "Should WP have an article about X?" can be read here: WP:GNG. So based on that, what are the 3-5 best sources you know that are at the same time reliably published (WP:RS), independent of you and about you in some detail? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:58, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

FWIW, IP, if anyone offers to write an article about you and your business in exchange for money, they are preying on you. If you or your business are notable, eventually someone will do it for free. Valereee (talk) 20:32, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Like you would ever do that... (and that's a joke, people) Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:35, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

I'm free, but I ain't cheap. ;) Ba-dum-tsss. Valereee (talk) 20:50, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

It is not against policy, to hire a paid editor if they disclose it. I have done some paid editing myself with disclosure. The first thing you need to do is determine if you have significant news coverage. You can search Google or freelancer sites for such service providers, but just make sure they follow the rules and disclose that they are a paid editor. They should be able to tell you if you qualify and should not actually take you on if you do not have much news coverage. Freezejunk (talk) 04:06, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

But remember that no matter how reputable the paid editor, there is no guarantee their text will survive. In the general scheme of things, paid editors are treated with extreme suspicion by everyone else, and at the least hint of promotional writing, everything will get deleted or re-written by an unpaid and possibly unsympathetic editor. Unless your business is notable beyond doubt, a paid article will likely get nominated for deletion. You could easily end up spending your money for nothing. And if an article does appear, your business had better remain squeaky-clean and never have a scandal, because if it does, the scandal may be preserved here for ever. There is a lot to be said for sticking to social media for your advertising. 79.64.7.127 (talk) 08:44, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

generate citation from isbn

As I recall, at one time I would put only the isbn in a citation, and a bot did the rest. Then I started using OttoBib. Now neither of those methods work.

What is currently the best way to generate a wikipedia citation from an isbn? Comfr (talk) 21:53, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi Comfr. In the source editor, click "Cite" in the toolbar above the edit area, then "Templates" and "cite book". Fill out the ISBN field and click the magnifying glass. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:50, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Actually, there is a template for ISBN, You can also insert Template and search for ISBN, then insert the ISBN number. Freezejunk (talk) 06:25, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Comfr, there's also the WP:Citation expander gadget that can do books, and is super-useful for journals. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:15, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Mole's World vs. Mole Manor

These 2 pages should possibly be merged: Mole's World and Mole Manor. I am not sure how this should be done, whether one of them should be submitted to an AFD or not? What do you think? Freezejunk (talk) 04:00, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

hi @Freezejunk and welcome to the Teahouse! you can read Merging which details how this process works, then you can start a discussion in Proposed merges. absolutely don't delete articles that have been merged, since their history contains information from previous contributors and contributions that would be copied over to the other page, although after being merged you can turn one to a redirect to the other, which also preserves the article history. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 04:52, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, I will propose it on the merge page then. Freezejunk (talk) 06:27, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

WikiWho

I use the WikiWho extension, and run into issues where it does not work on many articles, with a notification saying "Failed to retrieve valid WikiWho data." Why does this happen, and is there a way to fix it?

If it helps any, this is an example of an article where WikiWho does not work. TheGEICOgecko (talk) 04:23, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

TheGEICOgecko We can only help you here with editing Wikipedia. To report an error with a third party app you would need to contact them. There is an email address on their webpage. Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:24, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Depending on what you are using WikiWho for, you might find WP:BLAME an equally useful facility that's fully supported as a tool here, TheGEICOgecko. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:10, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

North Korea: Reliability of sources

A long while back, I made this RfC on the source Daily NK. In the discussion, we discussed how sources are generally unreliable when it comes to the topic of North Korea due to the country being so closed off, so much so that even reliable sources like New York Times often reports false information on the topic. Here is an excert of the closing admin's remarks:

The Daily NK has been shown to be wrong multiple times; however, it has noticeable WP:USEBYOTHERS by some of our most reliable sources, not to mention the South Korean government, which you'd think would be the most interested ... For the area of North Korea we should treat all sources with a great deal of skepticism ... Certainly we don't use Daily NK alone for information in Wikipedia's voice, but does that mean "don't use" or "use with attribution"? It has to depend on the specific instance. That's not going to be an easy rule to follow, but a) we don't really have the option to write nothing about a nation of 25 million people that regularly makes front page international news, yet b) to be absolutely safe we'd basically have to do that, because there are no good sources. DailyNK seems as good as any, which isn't very. (There are plenty of worse ones!) We are here to present the world's knowledge, and the world talks a lot about North Korea, but what it says is often wrong.

In the discussion, it was brought up that perhaps there should be an addition to policies or guidelines, such that it addresses these specific issues. In particular, if it is the case that there are no reliable sources on something that needs to be covered (in this instance, modern internal affairs of North Korea), generally unreliable sources may be used without attribution, albeit with great caution. Should there be a discussion on making additions to policies or guidelines in regards to this? Or perhaps a different set of actions should be taken? If action should be taken, how would I go about initiating it? TheGEICOgecko (talk) 04:47, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

TheGEICOgecko, the "Teahouse" is a place where people new to English-language Wikipedia ask questions about the basics of using it. It is -- rather obviously, I think -- not the place to ask your (reasonable) questions. Not because it's rude to bring them up here, but because you're less likely to be read by people who've thought hard about these matters. Try WP:RSN. -- Hoary (talk) 12:12, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Or, for policy/guideline change discussions, visit WP:VPP (maybe after starting off in the idea lab). 97.126.103.107 (talk) 12:19, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Yes, that's better than WP:RSN. -- Hoary (talk) 12:27, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Gotcha, thanks! TheGEICOgecko (talk) 17:50, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

What's the correct thing to do when someone has requested that an article be improved by translation, but the original has no references?

The case in question is Appenzeller_string_music. It's been tagged for improvement by translation from the German article, which I would happily do. But the German original is supported by no citations. It's almost certainly accurate and decent text, so I could translate and add a citations needed template, but I don't want to waste my time if someone's simply going to revert all the changes as unsourced. 79.64.7.127 (talk) 08:38, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Each language version of Wikipedia is a separate project, with their own editors and policies. What is acceptable on one version is not necessarily acceptable on another. I don't know if what you speak of is acceptable on the German Wikipedia, but here an article must be supported with citations to reliable sources. 331dot (talk) 08:46, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

@331dot:, thank you for the reply. It sounds as though there is no point in doing the translation. I'm guessing we leave the tag on the English article suggesting that it could be improved by translation of the German, on the grounds that the German article may, one day, grow citations and become usable - otherwise the template seems a bit pointless? 79.64.7.127 (talk) 09:05, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

I have not heard of "improvement by translation". An article could be translated, and/or improved by adding references or improving the text, and these things could be done at more or less the same time. But I don't understand what "improvement by translation" is supposed to mean. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 09:10, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

"Improvement by translation" is a reference to Template:Expand language. Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:15, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

@Shantavira Thanks for that. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 03:00, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

It's normal for a poor article about a Japan-related subject to have a template suggesting improvement by ransacking the Japanese-language article about the same subject, and for the Japanese-language article to be terrible. Maybe the templates are added by editors who can't read Japanese and can't be bothered to feed the Japanese-language article into Google Translate, or similar, and who instead just appreciate bulk. I could investigate, but fear that I'd be depressed by what I'd discover. So usually I leave the templates in place. But I've been known to remove them. -- Hoary (talk) 12:25, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

@Hoary: Google Translate returns "blind idiot" translations when it comes to Japanese (or any other East Asian pictographic language) for anything other than small snippets of text. The same goes for any other automated translation service. Japanese is a bit too convoluted and context-dependent. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 20:49, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Jéské Couriano, please, no language is pictographic. (A script might be pictographic, but Japanese script is only tenuously and trivially pictographic.) Problems with machine translation from Japanese come from such features of the language as a lack of a grammatical requirement for a main clause to have an expressed subject. (This lack isn't at all unusual, of course.) My poorly expressed point was that Category:Articles needing translation from Japanese Wikipedia takes us to concoctions such as Alice or Alice, and that Google Translate is easily good enough to tell anyone that while the corresponding Japanese-language article may outweigh the English-language thing in bulk/cruft/trivia, that's about the extent of its superiority. -- Hoary (talk) 21:45, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

I remove these, with the edit summary "not suitable for translation as de-wiki article has no citations" or similar. -- asilvering (talk) 18:39, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Question about magazines and journals for referencing

Hello! This is the first time I ask a question after going through guidelines for Wikipedia. Is it possible to use journal or magazine for an article that has no much in newspapers? Maniboy77 (talk) 10:29, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi Maniboy77 and welcome to Wikipedia editing. Yes, of course. Many of the articles on science topics use almost exclusively journal and book references. See {{cite journal}} for one of the most important templates to do this. You might also like to read WP:CITE. (initially forgot to sign!) Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:04, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

What matters is not the format of the source, but whether it is published by somebody with a reputation for editorial control and fact-checking. Many newspapers meet this requirement, but not all. Equally, many magazine, journals, websites, and books, meet this requirement, but many don't. ColinFine (talk) 12:52, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Question of typography

Dear all,

I am in creating a contribution for the English Wikipedia. See: User:Alexander Peren. The subject of this article is for a recently installed museum in Germany (Place of Remembrance Badehaus), treating the special place Camp Föhrenwald from its beginning to its change towards a "regular" living quarter. It is mainly the translation of the same article of the German Wikipedia "Erinnerungsort Badehaus". However, I face some problems with typographic questions.

In my contribution appear names of associations/institutions and groups, so what is normally called "proper name". Addtionally, it appears names of books, films, exhibitions, which are as well "proper names", but s.th. completely different. And finally it appear some German expressions, for which no "official" counterpart exists in the english language.

I would like to distinguish these three typs of "proper names" (associations/institutions; titels; German expressions) with typographic medium.

My first idea was to put associations/institutions in italic, the titels in 'apostroph' and the German expressions in "quotation marks". You can see this version in looking older versions of my contributions

But then, with the help of Adakiko, my attention was attracted to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOS:FOREIGNITALIC. Inside this link I found (citation) When not to use italics Shortcut MOS:NOITALIC Italics are generally used only for titles of longer works. Titles of shorter works should be enclosed in double quotation marks ("text like this"). This particularly applies to works that exist as a smaller part of a larger work. These include but are not limited to: Articles, essays, papers, chapters, reference work entries, newspaper and magazine sections or departments, episodes of audio-visual series, segments or skits in longer programs, short poems, short stories, story lines and plot arcs; songs, album tracks and other short musical works; leaflets and circulars. (See WP:Manual of Style/Titles § Quotation marks for details.) (citation end) This means for me: titels belonging to a serie/sequence have to be written in quotation marks

In the same link it is written: (citation) Quotations Further information: MOS:QUOTE and MOS:WORDSASWORDS Shortcut MOS:NOITALQUOTE It is normally incorrect to put quotations in italics. They should only be used if the material would otherwise call for italics, such as for emphasis or to indicate use of non-English words. Quotation marks alone are sufficient and the correct way to denote quotations. Indicate whether italics were used in the original text or whether they were added later. For example: "Now cracks a noble heart. Good night sweet prince: And flights of angels sing thee to thy rest!" (emphasis added). (citation end) means for me, that German expressions (like Hitlerbeton) also have to be put in quotation marks.

And italic, as far as I believe having read in this link, is exclusively for standing-alone titels of books etc.

Per consequence, I face now the situation for my contribution that mostly the quotation mark is used, rarely the italic and not at all the apostrophe.

Can someone of you help me with my difficulties to distinguish the three different "proper names" in my contribution by help of typography? Which way is acceptable not to viol against the Wikipedia rules? As I already wrote, my preferred solution would be apostrophe for titels, italic for associations/institutions and quotation marks for German expressions without official english counterpart.

Furthermore, my contribution is - with the exception of these typographic questions - more or less ready. Might it please be possible for someone of you to have a look to my article and to make suggestions for improvement, if necessary, or if the article is already good enough to move it towards the regular Wikipedia.

This would be great. I already thank you in advance so much for all your help and your proposals.

Best regards, take care and stay healthy

--Alexander Peren (talk) 13:41, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Alexander Peren, and welcome to the Teahouse. Your user page is not an appropriate place to draft an article, and I have moved it to Draft:Erinnerungsort Badehaus. You can move it to Erinnerungsort Badehaus when it is ready, or if you prefer to ask for review, paste {{subst:submit}} at the top. (I have not answered your question because I find it difficult to get any interest in questions of technologytypography. I'm sure somebody else will do so). ColinFine (talk) 13:49, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Alexander Peren This rather technical issue must be something that's been discussed before by members of WP:WikiProject Germany, so I suggest you post on their talk page and also look at their archive. The draft article seems to be coming along well, although I did notice several Wikilinks to disambiguation pages rather than the best targets. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:56, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

@Alexander Peren Titles of books go in Italics. For German-language text, you can use Template:lang-de. This template has the added bonus of helping text-to-speech programs read the words more correctly. -- asilvering (talk) 18:33, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Social media verified Link

• Social media verified account link can be added to Wikipedia page under which rules? ( WP:NOSOCIAL , WP:ELOFFICIAL )

> A Senior editor with sixteen years of Wikipedia experience had deleted a social media link from a page. [1] >A user with one year experience added that social media link again in that page. [2] PravinGanechari (talk) 14:02, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

@PravinGanechari you correctly cite WP:EL. This is a good example where policy understanding trumps any notion of seniority. If they disagree, they should raise a discussion on the talk page. Happy editing and dispute resolving! ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 14:31, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

@PravinGanechari If there is a pretty offical website, you can use that instead, but if you can't find any, Instagram is perfectly fine, it has the blue checkmark and everything. Note also WP:ELMIN and don't add more such socialmedia EL:S. Similar discussion at Talk:Johnathon_Schaech#Facebook_as_External_link. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:17, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

@PravinGanechari I agree with @Shushugah. However, I feel that any 'official' link by a person or company should come at the top of a set of external links, so I would swap the position of the IMDB EL and the Instagram EL. And Gråbergs Gråa Sång has just dropped by as I was drafting this and said the other point I was going to make about only including the bare minimum of 'official' links. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 16:19, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Company username?

I just set up an account for the company I work for, I chose the company name as a username. Is this not allowed? Do I need to change my username? The rules are confusing! Gopher Sign (talk) 14:38, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Gopher Sign, welcome to the Teahouse. That is, in fact, not allowed - the account belongs to you, not the company, and the user name needs to represent you, not the company. Something like "Susan at Gopher Sign" is acceptable (though there's no need to use your real name, or anything remotely resembling it). Since this is your only edit, it may be easier to simply abandon this account and start another one. Be sure to disclose per WP:PAID, whatever you choose to do. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:48, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

So I cannot just delete the account? How can I "abandon" the account when I need to use my email to start a different account? Gopher Sign (talk) 15:31, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Gopher Sign The email you use with an account is not relevant. You may use whatever email you wish, you don't need a different email with different accounts. All you need to do to abandon an account is stop using it. You can remove your email from it if you wish, but it's not required. 331dot (talk) 15:43, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

The alternative is to WP:RENAME the existing account. See that link for the details, Gopher Sign. It is possible to have multiple accounts lined to a single email address and some editors do so (see WP:VALIDALT). Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:43, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Michael D. Turnbull I've seen varied opinions on this, but the account of the OP had only one edit; we renamers usually recommend that such an account simply create a new account so that we have more time to address rename requests with more substantive edit histories. 331dot (talk) 16:20, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Gopher Sign, and welcome to the Teahouse. Please forgive me if you are already aware of what I'm going to say, but experience indicates that when somebody creates a "company account" they nearly always fail to understand this.

Wikipedia does not permit promotion of any kind - and "promotion" is interpreted more widely than in the world in general. If your company meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability (but not otherwise) then there can be an article about it. Such an article would not be "a company page", as on social media. It would not belong to your company, would not be under the control of your company, may be edited by almost anybody in the world except somebody associated with your company (anybody with a conflict of interest is encouraged to make edit requests, rather than editing the article directly), and should be based almost entirely on what people unconnected with your company have chosen to publish about it, not on what the company or its associates say or want to say. Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only 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, having read this, you decide to go ahead with the (much more difficult than it looks) task of creating an article about your company, and you have found the substantial, reliable, independent sources necessary to establish that it meets the criteria for notability, then you may try. First you must formally declare your status as a paid editor, then you should read your first article, and use the articles for creation process to create a draft. ColinFine (talk) 16:03, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Venerable Aureliano of the Blessed Sacrament

Please correct the article by spelling AZCUTA to AZCUETA 2603:6000:A402:F900:2983:D3B5:5D07:E7F1 (talk) 17:17, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Pedro Landeta Azcueta - 199.208.172.35 (talk) 17:27, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

 Done. You could have done that yourself, IP editor, since it was a simple typo, given the title of the article. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:30, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

how to create a new article

how to create a new article Sumukha Bharadhwaj (talk) 17:48, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Sumukha, and welcome to the Teahouse. Your first article is the place to start. ColinFine (talk) 17:53, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

not sure to understand watchlist

Hello,

I'm a bit new here and I still struggle to understand what whatchlist are.

Is there a way to save a page for when I find an article that is worth reading but do not have time ?

thank you Vincent-vst (talk) 19:22, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

The whatchlist updates you when a page on it is edited; It's not a static list of articles. Maybe you could add a "to read" section to your userpage and save them there. small jars tc 19:42, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

thank you ! Vincent-vst (talk) 19:43, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Vincent-vst. Read Help:Watchlist. Experienced editors use their watchlists to look for possible vandalism or disruptive editing on articles they care about, and to look for ongoing discussions that they may wish to contribute to. Your watchlist can be very useful once you learn how it works. Cullen328 (talk) 19:47, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello @Vincent-vst and welcome to the Teahouse! You can choose articles to be on your watchlist so if you press "watchlist" above you can see the edits made to them. To add an article to your watchlist, press the empty star near the "edit" button on a page. It will turn blue, indicating that it is now on your watchlist. Happy editing! 𝙷𝚎𝚕𝚕𝚘𝚑𝚎𝚊𝚛𝚝 👋❤️ (𝚃𝚊𝚕𝚔🤔) 01:24, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

@Vincent-vst: Welcome to the Teahouse. Adding on to what people have said about the watchlist, should you decide to use that to keep track on articles you're interested in, please note that by default it marks X changes made in the past Y days, where X and Y are positive integers. If a page you've added to your watchlist hasn't been edited in a very long time, you won't see it. To see the whole watchlist without that constraint you can click on the "View and edit watchlist" link near the top of the page, or go directly to Special:EditWatchlist in Wikipedia's search bar. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 04:28, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

thank you Vincent-vst (talk) 06:39, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Afar Triangle Democratic Republic State

Afar Triangle Democratic Republic State Wollo Media (talk) 20:50, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello. Do you have a question about editing Wikipedia? That's what this page is for.

Incidentally, your user name looks as if it is representing an organisation: that is not permitted. All accounts are individual (though you do not have to use your real name). Please either change it, or abandon it and create a new account with a name which represents you as an indvidual. See SHAREDACCOUNT. ColinFine (talk) 21:08, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

No profane word in TimedText namespace.

Can't not use profane word due to errors can be use Asterisk symbol (*) is use. 2001:44C8:4204:946D:B52E:108A:4C14:BC8C (talk) 02:25, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

It's unclear what you are trying to say but Wikipedia is not censored so I have reverted [3] your removal of correct lyrics. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:37, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

We do not bowdlerize words in direct quotations. Never. Cullen328 (talk) 02:41, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

undo pls 2001:44C8:4204:946D:B52E:108A:4C14:BC8C (talk) 02:43, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

 Not done Cullen328 (talk) 02:56, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Not a social media captions. 2001:44C8:4204:946D:B52E:108A:4C14:BC8C (talk) 03:01, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

We have no control over how social media networks (ab)use our content as long as they comply with Wikipedia's licensing. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 03:10, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Offensive material#How to treat offensive material in articles says "words should never be bowdlerized". The lyrics are displayed at Stay (The Kid Laroi and Justin Bieber song)#Composition and lyrics when the audio sample is played so the rule applies. When a rule says "articles" it generally means all reader-facing material. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:14, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

I wonder what "TimedText" signifies. It doesn't really matter, because the policy has been explained three times. It won't change, and it shouldn't. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 05:32, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

To understand TimedText, please read Commons: Timed text. It is closely related to Closed captioning for hearing impaired people. In the spirit of full disclosure, my wife is deaf. I object to the notion that hearing people can listen to "bad words" but that deaf people cannot be allowed to read "bad words". That is a condescending and patronizing attitude that I have opposed for 40+ years. Cullen328 (talk) 05:46, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

@Cullen328 Thanks for that info. And I know that the Deaf community have rich, full lives, and some of them who I knew had a "ribald" sense of humor. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 10:44, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

When to warn?

At Academic studies about Wikipedia, I reverted two edits I thought were vandalism. Should I also add a warning to the user’s talk page? If so, which level? What would you do? LumonRedacts (talk) 04:35, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

hi @LumonRedacts and welcome to the teahouse! when reverting a disruptive edit, it's best to warn so the user may be able to take notice about the reversions and why those edits were reverted. in this case, you can use {{subst:uw-disruptive1}} to warn them. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 04:47, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, @Melecie! I just ran out brain space there for figuring out that next step. Happy editing! LumonRedacts (talk) 04:56, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, LumonRedacts. When to warn is a personal decision, since every action that a Wikipedia editor takes is voluntary. In this case, a warning for changing Wikipedia's founding date from 2001 to 2021 is justified. But the editor is an IP editor who made two edits in one minute and disappeared. That's what happens with many IP vandals. The effort to warn needs to be balanced against the fact that many IP vandals never see the warning. A benefit of a warning is that administrators, in general, are quicker to block if warnings have been given and the vandalism continues. So, I would recommend that you focus your warnings on editors who are more likely to respond positively to your warnings or to those whose disruption is ongoing. Warning fleeting vandals may be a waste of your time. In the end, that decision is yours. Cullen328 (talk) 05:07, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Issues with Captcha not showing up, preventing publishing.

I was reading the Pinkerton Academy page and noticed some outdated info and links, so I made an account and fixed it, but now in order to publish the changes I have to fill out a captcha. Only problem is, the captcha image does not show up. So I just have a textbox to type in letters that I cannot see. Reloading the page doesn't work. Lretc (talk) 04:42, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

nevermind, I guess it just needed to wait ten minutes, because all is well now. Lretc (talk) 04:52, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

discusion

i had in lonely hil lonely legs beat me

210.1.105.34 (talk) 04:50, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Do you have a question about how to edit Wikipedia? Cullen328 (talk) 05:09, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Looking for a specific barnstar.

Is there a barnstar for reviewers of good articles? — VORTEX³⁴²⁷ (Talk!) 05:52, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

There are several reviewer's barnstars (though good articles don't generally need reviewing). Take a look at Wikipedia:Barnstars. Shantavira|^{feed me} 10:34, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Those reviewer barnstars are for pending changes and such. I wanted to thank a reviewer who has gone unrecognized in his GA reviews. — VORTEX³⁴²⁷ (Talk!) 10:42, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Vortex3427 Why not just add a personal comment on his Talk Page? I think that barnstars are a bit naff and a proper thank-you a better way of expressing your recognition of someone's work. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:03, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

@Vortex3427, I found this template, which might be what you are looking for. Kpddg ^(talk) 12:15, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Help moving a page

I created Draft:The Forever Story and I need help moving it to The Forever Story. Castlepalace 10:32, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

FYI - JID's previous two albums, The Never Story (2017) and DiCaprio 2 (2018), exist as articles. Those have much more detail than this draft. David notMD (talk) 10:58, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

I know that. The album hasn't been released yet, that's why it lacks detail. @David notMD Castlepalace 19:18, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

i messed up

I tried to upload an image on my sandbox, and now it's in commons.wikimedia.org

I don't know why it's there, how can I delete it ? (also i thought it was an image i made with an AI and i claimed it as mine but after a quick reverse search on google image it was clear that the image was not one of mine, Hencewhy i don't want to claim it as mine.)

Thanks in advance Vincent-vst (talk) 10:54, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Vincent-vst Add the template {{Db-author}} at the very top of the page Commons:File:Lofi2.jpg. It will then be speedily deleted by an admin. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:54, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

thank you ! Vincent-vst (talk) 13:39, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Reason of reverting the information I added to a page.

I would like to know the reason why my recent edits to the page Ramagundam has been reverted. I added all correct information based on the government sources. The original page is missing a lot of information about the city. Biswabandan Satpathy (talk) 11:12, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

The editor that reverted you left a message in the edit summary "Rv mass of totally unsourced additions + deleting templates", which sums it up pretty well. Any additions need to be supported by reliable source. See WP:V. - X201 (talk) 11:34, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

The article was already tagged as having an excessive amount of intricate detail but instead of tackling that problem you added a mass of more detail, including in the WP:LEAD, which is supposed to summarise the rest of the article, not present independent information. All additions must be WP:CITEd with inline sources, so readers can verify the information themselves without working out which "government sources" you actually used: express specific information in your own words but cite sources to back up what you add. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:48, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Commons image changed

Hi, please see this discussion at commons [4]. Someone at commons changed two images of Olivia Newton-John, blurring the background. The new blurred images are terrible. Note one of the images is in the infobox at Olivia Newton-John which is currently listed in RD on the main page. I tried to revert the changes but the images appear to be protected - it also seems the blurring affects previous versions of the images for some reason. Does anyone here use commons or have sufficiently elevated rights there to revert the two images back to their original state? Polyamorph (talk) 12:21, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Ah, looks like the one in the infobox at Olivia Newton-John has already been reverted. Polyamorph (talk) 12:22, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

And Now reverted back to the crap version. Polyamorph (talk) 12:48, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

I think you should ask about this either on the Commons, or at wp:Graphics Lab. small jars tc 13:20, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

I did ask at commons. All sorted now, thanks Polyamorph (talk) 14:27, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

I've reverted both back to the originals and have left an edit notice explaining how many different Wikis they are affecting (over 20 in one case). Told them to upload blurred version as a derivative work. - X201 (talk) 13:22, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

thanks for sorting it Polyamorph (talk) 14:27, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Linking to Spanish version of wikipedia

I am trying to link a person to his spanish wikipedia article as he does not appear in the English wikipedia. But having trouble doing this. So when your click on his name it redirects to the spanish wiki.

I am trying to link from an english wiki page) to https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enrique_Florescano

Can anybody help with the code please. Yozick72 (talk) 12:52, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Use template:ill. {{ill|Enrique Florescano|es}} will produce "Enrique Florescano" small jars tc 12:57, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. Guess that will have to do.

I did actually try that before but was hoping one could do it without the es, so it would link straight through.

Thank you. Yozick72 (talk) 13:03, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

You can do just that, but it's not ideal because people will think it's in English and become confused when they end up on a Spanish article. small jars tc 13:11, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Academic article

Good afternoon.

If I would like to publish an article (New Knowledge) which references my PHD, would I be able to host that article on Wikipedia.

It will have links to the the body of work hosted at the University library, as well as additional journal references.

Kind regards

Craig Craighorne (talk) 12:53, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. What do you mean, by new knowledge? Could you clarify what "referenc[ing] my P[h]D" means? Are you going to talk about yourself in the article? If so, that would be a conflict of interest and/or an autobiography which goes against Wikipedia guidelines. What university? It is hard to understand what you are asking. Have you started a draft already?

Asparagusus (interaction) 13:14, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Craighorne, and welcome to the Teahouse. If you mean what I think you mean, the answer is No. Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought. If your research is part of a larger subject which is already documented in a number of reliable published sources, you may write an article which summarises those, and one of those sources could be your thesis (though if you did that, you should declare a conflict of interest). But if you do that, you should not include any argument or conclusions which are sourced only to your own work. ColinFine (talk) 13:56, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

My husband’s Wikipedia page disappeared

My husband, Skeeter Zachary Reece, an American clown, had a Wikipedia page. Several months ago, the links to the pictures disappeared, but the biography of him remained. Two months ago, we noticed it had been taken over by something called “people pill” and no longer shows up as a Wikipedia page. Does anyone know anything about this? Can it be restored to Wikipedia with the links to the pictures? What is this “people pill”? Is it connected to Wikipedia? Thank you. Mamadancer (talk) 14:07, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

It was deleted as the result of a community discussion here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zachary "Skeeter" Reece, it is unlikely to be restored as consensu was reached and after looking for sources myself, I fail to see how he meets notability criteria PRAXIDICAE🌈 14:10, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

His career happened before the internet. He is 70 now and mostly retired. He did perform at the White House. He was with Ringling for 10 years, then worked for 20 years in Las Vegas performing in several hotels. He was on a news segment in Palo Alto, California in 1982. All of this was before YouTube or any online links. He was in the Geo magazine April 1981 which is on the Internet but has his name listed INCORRECTLY as “Skeeter Heece”. He is in several books: “Clown Alley” by Bill Ballantine. “Jokes My Father Never Told Me” by Rain Pryor. “A Very Young Circus Flyer” by Jill Krementz. Mamadancer (talk) 14:26, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Mamadancer, you are free to recreate the page as long as these extra sources can establish notability. Sungodtemple (talk) 14:46, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

The caveat being it needs to go through WP:AFC, @Sungodtemple. Please do not tell people to outright create AFD'd articles. PRAXIDICAE🌈 14:48, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

@Praxidicae: The AfC process is optional, though it should also be used by anyone with a conflict of interest (link in original), which Mamadancer has essentially disclosed in the opening post. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:15, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

The AFC process is optional but for COI editors and for articles that have been DELETED AT AFD, it is strongly encouraged to the point that we nearly require it. It was bad advice. Period. PRAXIDICAE🌈 15:17, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

It wasn't great advice, but saying that it needs to go through WP:AFC (link in original, emphasis added) is incorrect. Necessity is not the same as vehemently recommending it. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:27, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

You're missing the point that I was correcting bad advice and trying to actually help the OP and save them from immediately getting a G4 slapped onto their article. PRAXIDICAE🌈 15:29, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

I didn't miss your point; I'm saying that in your plight in helping the OP you misrepresented the optionality of AFC. OP can choose to go the same route again, but potentially suffer the consequences you mentioned (or worse). It's like telling people they can't write about themselves on here; they can, but the result is virtually always going to be disappointing for them, which is why we strongly discourage, not forbid. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:32, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

I agree @Tenryuu, and I misrepresented it as well when I said that @Mamadancer must go through the AFC process. I said that because I was trying to help the editor avoid the disappointment of doing all the work and the results being the same. It may be the inevitable ending but in my desire to help them I misspoke. AFC is optional but strongly recommended. --ARoseWolf 16:20, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

@ARoseWolf@Praxidicae, other interested. I've got these:[5][6] (see [7] on what that is) [8]. Not brilliant but we've seen worse. Also, these from ProQuest (via the WP-library) [9][10], am I getting the full text or just an extract?

This [11] doesn't help with WP:N but has some useable info. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:58, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello Mamadancer, welcome to the Teahouse, I know it seems our responses can be a little harsh sometimes and Wikipedia policies can be extremely confusing for experienced editors much less someone just wanting to know why something disappeared that was there a short time ago. Please know that every editor responding to you is a volunteer and they are taking time out of their day to respond so by them replying they are trying to help you with your question. As Prax explained, the article on your husband was deleted after a discussion by editors came to the consensus that the sources in the article were not sufficient enough to prove your husband's notability. Wikipedia can not make someone notable, they have to already be notable. Of course, seeing as your husband's career was mostly before the internet then online sources may be scarce. Written sources can be used, such as books and newspapers. Extra care must be given when providing these sources because all information must have the ability to be verified. That does not mean it has to be freely accessible to the public at any point as some written sources may be in specific university libraries or behind a pay wall. These sources are still valid and can be used to prove notability. As you have an obvious COI being the spouse of the subject in question it is strongly recommended that you not try to create or edit an article on your husband. If you do decide to recreate the article then you mustare strongly encouraged take the article through the Wp:AFC process. However, I would suggest you try going to WT:BIOG, which is the talk page for WikiProject:Biography, and see if anyone there might be willing to take on the task of seeing if the sources you know about would prove his notability. Remember that we are all volunteers here. I understand your frustrations, just know that if your husband doesn't have an article on Wikipedia that doesn't mean that your husband isn't important to you or any of the children or adults he may have brought joy to during his career. Thank you for asking your question at the Teahouse. --ARoseWolf 14:56, 16 August 2022 (UTC) --edited 16:31, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

I got curious about this "people pill" thing. When neither your husband's name nor "people pill" turned up in a search here, I Googled your husband's name. I found a short piece about your husband on a website called "people pill." Without having looked further into the site, I'm supposing it has little write-ups on ... well ... PEOPLE. It's not at all unusual that when you Google something you'll find sites with write-ups that are word-for-word the same as a Wikipedia article on whatever you Googled. I believe that these sites have just copied the Wikipedia article. And sometimes they've copied an old version, with errors that have since been corrected--in Wikipedia; those errors might or might not get corrected on the sites that lifted the articles from here.Uporządnicki (talk) 15:06, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

If you do decide to create a new draft, see List of clowns for many examples of articles about individual clowns. David notMD (talk) 15:08, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

I had never encountered people pill before. And the website looks strange. Mamadancer (talk) 15:42, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

@Mamadancer It's one of several so called Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks. Basically, they take WP-content and put it on their own website. It's allowed if they do it right. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:22, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind reply. I will work on it. Mamadancer (talk) 15:41, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Inline interlanguage links

When is it necessary to put an inline interlanguage link in english Wikipedia? I've seen a lot of inline interlanguage links in english articles with a rather "local" subject (e.g. Indonesia's Next Top Model, Vietnam Idol, etc), especially links to a person's biography (mostly celebrities) that don't have their english article counterpart. These links don't include a language code either. Should they be unlinked (black)? I personally think the majority of english speaking public will not find a non-english page useful for them, and putting them under a blue link in an english article might lead them to think it leads to another english article when it's not. Your input would be much appreciated for my future edits. Thank you! 「HypeBoy」^TALK 14:10, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

If the person is notable, I prefer to use a red link with a small link to other language Wikipedias. This can be done using {{interlanguage link}} (shortcut {{ill}}). See Ludwig Ferdinand Huber for a couple of examples. I find direct links to foreign Wikipedias better than nothing, but some people prefer them in some contexts where the formatting of {{ill}} is inconvenient. —Kusma (talk) 14:31, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

That's the thing, most of the people linked in those articles I mentioned are not known outside their country, and definitely are not known worldwide/among english-speaking public. How am I to determine their notability? From what I noticed, celebrities that are actually notable in their own country almost always have their english article. These people who don't (only having an article in their own language), are not as notable. 「HypeBoy」^TALK 14:53, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Being known outside their home country is not a requirement for notability. But whether celebrities are notable can be difficult to determine (most reality show participants should not have standalone articles, but many actors should). The general rules are at WP:N. —Kusma (talk) 16:38, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. Based on MOS:REDLINK, too many red links leads to overlinking and unassuming black text color is the "most productive". Since many of these names are cluttered together on the same paragraph, I will stick with not linking them. I believe notable people (particularly the ones in the articles I mentioned) will have their own english article anyway, so I'll use that as an indicator. 「HypeBoy」^TALK 18:22, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Relevant information to include

Hello everyone. Lately I have been wondering, when it comes to artists, poets, photographers, and people like that, is it relevant to list books that their work appears in? For example, if a poets work is included in something like a "Best poems of the decade" book collection, if that is considered an accomplishment or something note-worthy. Wimpkitty (talk) 14:41, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

@Wimpkitty Not usually, since Wikipedia is not supposed to be an indiscriminate collection of all information on a topic. If there's something particularly unusual or notable about it though, by all means go ahead. For example, if the poet was an unknown before appearing in a "best of" and this made them famous; if the "best of" is an extremely notable list in its own right; if this appears to be the highest recognition any of the creator's pieces have achieved; etc. For a very famous classic work that appears on many such lists you might go for something like "The novel still regularly appears on major 'best novel' lists, like [example], [example], and [example]." -- asilvering (talk) 18:20, 16 August 2022 (UTC)