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

Miraheze

What??? When did that happen? Miraheze is run by WMF-banned users? It's recommended on the mediawiki.org wiki though. Can that seriously not go there? Among Us for POTUS (talk) 05:51, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Oh yeah, on here. Among Us for POTUS (talk) 05:52, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Almost nobody cares other than you, and that website is irrelevant. Cullen328 (talk) 06:16, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Erm. Mediawiki.org is an official WMF site. I'm simply asking because I feel that Miraheze is a good recommendation for people who want alternative outlets. Among Us for POTUS (talk) 06:21, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

If you want to ask, Among Us for POTUS, then a good place to ask would be Wikipedia talk:Alternative outlets. -- Hoary (talk) 07:06, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you Among Us for POTUS (talk) 16:20, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Among Us for POTUS, this was also being discussed on my talk page - if you have a question about by my edit, you should really just ask me directly (like the IP did)!

In any case, yes, a WMF-banned user has full access to the Miraheze servers, including users' private data, etc. I have no idea why people want to keep recommending it knowing that history. I request you undo your edit restoring it. Legoktm (talk) 07:07, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

I've removed it. Anyone wanting to readd it is welcome to argue on the essay's talk page for readding it. If they get agreement for readding it, then it may be readded. -- Hoary (talk) 08:57, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

That's quite surprising. What were they banned for? Among Us for POTUS (talk) 16:17, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

@Among Us for POTUSFor why someone is banned, Please contact ca@wikimedia.org Lemonaka (talk) 21:58, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

if we're not discussing the details of this drama, Why is this called the Tea House?? Etippins (talk) 16:19, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

FWIW:Special:CA/John F. Lewis Lemonaka (talk) 11:48, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

"Erm" is not actually a word. It is something that certain people type when they have nothing substantive to say. Cullen328 (talk) 07:44, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Maybe it's just a disfluency... David10244 (talk) 08:34, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

I'm well aware that "Erm" is not a word. It's a slang. People use knowing that it's not a word for the same reason that they'd use, say, "wtf", knowing it's not a word. Among Us for POTUS (talk) 16:18, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Disingenuous, Cullen. Whether "erm" is a word or not, it has a prgamatic function - something like "I'm about to disagree, but I don't want to be to forthright about it". ColinFine (talk) 13:39, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

What does that even have to do with this conversation?? You adding that was more non substantive than the "Erm" itself.. Ogusokumushi (talk) 20:36, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

@Ogusokumushi I disagree; I think CF was right to mildly "slap back" (IMO). David10244 (talk) 06:18, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Not really. This is Wikipedia, not really the place for "slap backs". Correct me if I'm wrong though, I just thought the remark was unhelpful. Ogusokumushi (talk) 14:30, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Cullen's remark on the use of erm was unproductive, sounds vindictive, and I would've expected better from a Teahouse host. This has already gotten off-topic, so any further discussion on this particular matter should go to Wikipedia talk:Teahouse.

In any case, it seems other users like Hoary, Lemonaka, and Legoktm have provided helpful responses, which Among Us for POTUS seems to have found satisfactory. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:29, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Are we really the largest encyclopedia here?

I'm new here so I just want to know. Sirhewlett (talk) 21:50, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Sirhewlett, welcome to the Teahouse. That depends on what you mean by "largest" and "here". Wikipedia's own article does claim it is the largest and most-read reference work in history. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 21:53, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

On the Guiness World Records, records show that Wikipedia is, the biggest encyclopedia online. Sarrail (talk) 21:59, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

@Sarrail, @Sirhewlett 55 million articles as of 2020? No. Per Wikipedia:Size_of_Wikipedia, the English Wikipedia has 6.5 million articles and 57 million pages as of now (Dec. 2022). Guinness says that in 2020, there were 55 million articles. (I presume they mean English WP.) I doubt that all WP languages have 55 million articles total.

Wikipedia and/or the English Wikipedia might be the largest encyclopedia(s) in the world, but Guinness has unfortunately messed up the concepts, and has wrong info. And bad grammar. And inexplicably places WP in the United Kingdom, which is not really a location anyway. David10244 (talk) 04:35, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Guiness World Records first says a total of 55,632,716 articles on 18 January 2020 and later: "on 18 January 2021, it had 6,231,239 articles in English, out of a total of 55,632,716 articles written in 315 languages." The first date is wrong but the quote is right. meta:List of Wikipedias says the current total articles is 60,121,102. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:42, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter Well, I was wrong. I was misled by the number of pages in en:wp being so close to the number of articles that Guinness mentioned. I'll strike my incorrect info.

I'm surprised to see that there really are that many articles, and also surprised to see that another language (Cebuano) also has 6 million articles. I thought that en:wp was "by far" the largest Wikipedia. I should have checked my sources. Now I have a better picture of all of WP!

Although, is WP one encyclopedia, or 300 encyclopedias? :P David10244 (talk) 12:46, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

The Cebuano Wikipedia has 6 million bot-generated stubs nobody reads. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:52, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter Oh, interesting. So WP has 55 million minus 6 million "real" articles... :p. David10244 (talk) 10:41, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

If we ignore similar articles in some other languages... PrimeHunter (talk) 11:58, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

@Sirhewlett And if you need a slightly more reliable source for the view that Wikipedia is the largest ever, then this arcticle from The Economist in 2021 gives that. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:08, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for not switching to that other Vector

Thank you, en.wikipedia, for not switching to that new style "Vector from mediawiki". Thank you for keeping wikipedia as we all know it! Sarri.greek (talk) 05:37, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Unfortunately, it has been decided that the English Wikipedia will be switching to the new Vector, probably next month. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 05:44, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello @Sarri.greek, welcome to Teahouse, to keep old style vector, why don't have a try on Special:GlobalPreferences#mw-prefsection-rendering. Set the preference appearance to vector-legacy may help you. Lemonaka (talk) 07:54, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you @Thebiguglyalien and Lemonaka: for your reply. I am so sorry that your community has accepted that Vector :( Is there a page with the Vote on this issue? the reasons of acceptance as the default, etc?) I come from el and en.wiktionary, with classic style. Sarri.greek (talk) 08:08, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

@Sarri.greek, I don't know either, a lot of tools also need to be modified a lot for this change, if my knowledge serves me right... Lemonaka (talk) 08:10, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

@sarri.greek: wikipedia:requests for comment/Deployment of Vector (2022) is where the request for comment took place. lettherebedarklight晚安 14:04, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

@Sarri.greek, the latest update post is here, and they do invite comments (but not votes, there's no voting to be done at the moment). 199.208.172.35 (talk) 15:35, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

FWIW, I've been using 2022 Vector for the last few months, and have no complaints. -- Doktor Züm (talk) 08:53, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Okay, I will have a try on that. Lemonaka (talk) 09:46, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

@Doktor Züm Translation tool on meta has terrible bug against Vector 2022, I have changed it back. Lemonaka (talk) 12:29, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Shauwn mkhize

im new here thanks for the worm welcome.i amrequest for shauwn mkhize's person or business email address. Im planning on opening a business i want our own business woman to help me on it.. 102.249.1.8 (talk) 13:07, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

As it says at the top of the page, the Teahouse is "a friendly place where you can ask questions to get help with using and editing Wikipedia". Wikipedia does not disclose email addresses for the subjects of its articles. - David Biddulph (talk) 13:11, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. Shauwn Mkhize has a link to her twitter feed, so you could contact her that way. Given that your only other post was to call somebody "soo rude" for giving an accurate summary of the position, I wonder if your "worm welcome" was intended ironically. ColinFine (talk) 14:13, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, @102.249.1.8, welcome to teahouse. Teahouse is a place for asking things related to Wikipedia. If you'd like to get somone's personal information, you are going to the wrong place. Please refrain from doing so, this is called Doxxing and likely to be blocked away. Lemonaka (talk) 21:16, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Her Instagram profile is linked from Shauwn Mkhize (Q107316660): you might be able to message her there if you can't reach her via Twitter. ⁓ Pelagic ( messages ) 07:27, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Confederation of African Football

why are my recent changes to the page regarded as 'not constructive'? M Bitton reverted my changes and I would like them to be return as they are very vital information! Mtu wa asili (talk) 20:47, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Good day, I noticed that one edit you made added Swahili as a language. Also you added a name in Swahili(?) which may have not been wanted. The editor that reverted you on the basis of "misleading summaries," most likely referring to when you said "Fixed typo" you changed the position of Arabic and French. ✶Mitch199811✶ [Talk] 20:58, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

I would like to note that I just glanced at the situation and I would ask the person who reverted you. ✶Mitch199811✶ [Talk] 21:01, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

@Mtu wa asili - Welcome to Wikipedia! I recommend you read Wikipedia:Canned edit summaries, but the TL;DR is that those buttons you see that say "Fixed typo", "Added content", etc, should only be used if you're actually fixing a typo or adding content. You aren't required to use them on every edit (though you are, to some extent, required to communicate with other editors).

In this specific case, I would ask @M.Bitton here. Do note that "misleading edit summary" isn't a good reason to revert an otherwise good edit - if the infobox content is in dispute, though, you two should talk it out. casualdejekyll 20:25, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

@Casualdejekyll: what makes it a "good edit"? The addition of a non-official language or the misleading edit summaries to make it prominent? M.Bitton (talk) 21:48, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

@M.Bitton, I can't claim to know anything about the topic of the article, I was just WP:AGFing. casualdejekyll 00:24, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Mtu wa asili, I randomly picked one of your edits from March. Special:Diff/1074868607 is obviously incorrect. The reference at upenn.edu is not published by University of Dodoma. ⁓ Pelagic ( messages ) 07:59, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

... and the number inserted contradicted the cited reference. - David Biddulph (talk) 08:21, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation links added / Reverted

Hello. What's wrong to add working disambiguation links? 95.90.178.53 (talk) 10:56, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

You added a link to the dab page Sequencer. You presumably intended to link to one or other of the articles listed there, so you should have been specific. - David Biddulph (talk) 11:14, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

... mmh is not good to link through the wiki pages for readers too teach? Whats the correct disambiguation link for Sequencer? 95.90.178.53 (talk) 11:30, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Music sequencer ... got it :) 95.90.178.53 (talk) 11:31, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

done, I hope it's ok now. regards 95.90.178.53 (talk) 12:33, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Of more importance than the disambiguation link is the fact that PISCIDE has no references to independent reliable sources to demonstrate the notability of the subject, hence the article is at risk of being deleted. I see also that you are a member of the band, so because of your conflict of interest you should not be editing the article. - David Biddulph (talk) 13:02, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

But I know all details about the band which no fan can add correctly, we drive our own label. We live in the year 2022 ... what sources, the music speaks. What is to do know? You deleted PiCNT (talk) 13:37, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

@PiCNT, please read reliable sources and PAID. You cannot add information based on your own personal experiences and you should be making requests on the talk page rather than editing the article directly. 97.113.177.161 (talk) 13:49, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

lol, paid - the band is passion, we are friends and independent from any major - but the article was written by kinda major (see article talk) back in the days - but without no updates fixes etc for ages ... all I did was typo fixes, disco updates, added working disambiguation links - nowt more not less - it's your job or hobby to make wiki better ... so do it and take a look in the history of changes ... google is full of sources, and then you tell me again these links are not good ... it's crazy, anyway, if all wiki articles are written by "aliens" then who knows maybe wiki is completely "from another world" - I mean from time to time also wiki should ask the "living origin" to get more details known ... finally, do what do you like with our article - I'm out. PiCNT (talk) 09:51, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

@David Biddulph, new articles like this are just tagged, and left in mainspace? Finding sources is the best outcome, but based on what happens to other articles, if no one proposes an AfD, then ths unreferenced article might stay for a decade... I know that an AfD requires a wp:BEFORE, which would certainly help. (It ought to be a draft, until it gets sources.) David10244 (talk) 07:12, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Oh, wait, I suppose NPP will get to it at some point. Sorry for the intrusion... David10244 (talk) 07:15, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

It's been around much too long for NPP, but of course anyone can propose deletion if they wish. - David Biddulph (talk) 14:42, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Q&A etiquette

Hi,

I have to admit to finding the Q&A environment confusing. When I post something it seems to get archived very quickly so when I see a reply it goes to a ‘content has been moved or deleted pop-up 9x out of ten.

My questions are: 1) how often is this archiving? 2) is it automatic or manual (ie can I rely on it being after a precise amount of time so I know I should check back within x days)? 3) if someone does reply and I can’t find their reply because it’s archived somewhere is that considered fine or is it poor etiquette? 4) when I can find a record of the edit that was there answer I can see an option ‘thank’. my reflex is to use that but then I wondered does it just jam up another editor’s inbox and so better saved for when someone has done some serious work in a collaborative context or as advocacy in a dispute over editing?

TIA EthicalAugur (talk) 13:27, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

EthicalAugur, if "‘content has been moved or deleted['] pop-up 9x out of ten" I'm surprised. (1), (2): I don't know. (3) Is what considered fine? Surely not your inability to find something; so, your looking in the talk archive? If yes, looking in the talk archive, of course this is considered fine. (4) Thanking somebody (by clicking the "Thank" option) doesn't clog up anything. (It's about as vapid as "Like" in Facebook.) -- Hoary (talk) 13:34, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Many aspects of learning to edit Wikipedia involve things that are not apparent until they happen and someone has something to say about it.

RE: your response to 1 and 2) be surprised then, because this is the case. It is a bit doing archiving of messages.

Re your response to 3) I was asking whether it’s considered bad etiquette not to respond to a reply on a post I’ve put up, particularly when that post is in the teahouse, it seemed like people making the effort to respond probably prefer acknowledgement of their offer of a helping hand. Sometimes that isn’t the case in social media so I was asking.

4) Your belief that ‘thanks’ are as vapid as ‘likes’ are noted. I wasn’t sure how ’thanks’ exist for the receiver. Thanks to @Asilvering I now know where these show up and can make a more informed choice about whether or not to use that function. It’s quicker than typing a reply and at least would let someone know that I’ve seen their message if working on a project together.

I’d say that things work well for those of us who aren’t easily disheartened. I looked to join a group and straight away fell into a soggy pit of ‘is’ ‘is not’ WP:GRATUITOUS over a clearly gratuitous image. It’s no mystery why so few editors are women, the protocol and behaviour toward new editors makes politics look like a tea party, at least you get to know the actual names of the politicians. If I were to ever really seriously give this a shot I’d have to organise a team of people I already know to work in this space. I’m clearly far too much of a snowflake to take it on by myself. EthicalAugur (talk) 10:20, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

To answer your question 2, it is automatic, with the parameters set up to archive a thread at least 48 hours after the last contribution to the thread. - David Biddulph (talk) 13:41, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Unfortunately, the bot which used to deliver notifications of and links to archived posts is broken. I'm afraid there's not much more to do except check for replies more frequently. 97.113.177.161 (talk) 13:43, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

This makes sense. It was behaving differently to previous logins. EthicalAugur (talk) 09:46, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

"Thank" goes into a "thanks log" (here's yours, for example: [1], [2]). I'll thank you for your post so you can see what it does. That's it. You're just sending a smile to someone else. Anyone who doesn't like receiving the notifications for them can just turn them off, so don't worry about it. :) -- asilvering (talk) 00:48, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, that was really helpful. EthicalAugur (talk) 10:20, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Lydia Weld

I thoroughly enjoyed the article on Lydia (Rose) Weld, who was aunt to the person who raised me. When "Great Aunt Rose" heard in 1959 that my sister and I were to be sent to Baldwin School, a boarding school in Bryn Mawr, PA, she fired off a letter to my Aunt Dotty, Lydia's niece, in which she described her experience at Miss Baldwin's school, which she (and her twin sister Violet) attended in the late 1800's. It is a wonderful description, in her own words, of the school and of her world at the time. It's no question that she was a remarkable woman. Though only related to her by marriage, I am grateful to have heard the description of her experiences at Baldwin.

My Aunt Dotty died in 1986, and I always assumed that her Aunt Rose's letter was part of papers that she had saved. I spoke of the letter to other family members, and one of them located it, and sent it to me. I am elated to at last have it in my possession!

The question that now occurs to me is, can it be included in her Wikipedia page? If so, how? I have scanned the material, some of which is descriptive and not by her, but nevertheless interesting. The remaining pages were undoubtedly by her. I have a few family stories shared by those who knew her personally, but I don't know if they would add anything meaningful. The existing article, as far as it goes, seems accurate to me. Can the letter she sent to her niece be included in the page? Please let me know. I have scanned the pages, and can send them to you.

Sincerely yours,

Mariah Skinner 12.195.137.54 (talk) 22:29, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Mariah. What a delight for you to find the letter. Unfortunately, the answer is No. One of the core policies of Wikipedia is verifiability, which means that a reader anywhere, anytime, can in principle find the source for the information (eg online, or by ordering it from a library), and so we require that the information be contained in reliably published source. ColinFine (talk) 23:15, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Mariah: one way forward would be for you to send the letter to someone at the Baldwin School, who might be interested in having the story of Weld's experience there put on their website, given that she is of some notability. Once that was done, then the information would be published and could be cited in articles on Wikipedia. Similarly, if you could interest a local newspaper in publishing a modern article based on the letter, that would be equally good for citation. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:08, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

COURTESY TO TEAHOUSE: Article is Lydia Weld. David notMD (talk) 22:45, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Need help to understand the gaps

Draft:Pocket FM - This article has been put down twice citing promotion. However, this is completely factual citing references for each and every facts. Need someone to help me out. Rahulnag07 (talk) 02:25, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

You have asked this at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk too. Wikipedia is not a place to merely tell about something, Wikipedia summarises what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a topic, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability.

Theroadislong (talk) 02:40, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Would appreciate a straight and to-the-point response pertaining to the problem areas. Even I have gone through the policies, and even I understand, Wikipedia is not about writing random things. The draft has references from reliable sources from all the news website, and still it was put down. Hence, I would really want to understand what I may have missed. May I request you to point to the mistakes that needs corrections. Thanks. Rahulnag07 (talk) 03:18, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Rahulnag07. Your draft throws out the word "global" in the first sentence as if that word has any encyclopedic value in the 21st century. It doesn't. It is nothing but a corporate buzzword. Your first reference is to Forbes which is notorious for publishing lightly rewritten press releases as so-called "news" coverage. Experienced reviewers know this. They are volunteers and do not want to waste time on poorly referenced drafts. The word "blockbuster" is another red flag for reviewers. That pretty much hollers that the draft is not neutrally written."Blockbuster" is an overtly promotional term devoid of encyclopedic value. A sentence like It is also exploring IP licensing for its audio-series with leading production houses and video OTTs. is an attempt to predict the future and what the heck does OTTs mean? I have never heard that jargon acronym before and the Wikilink leads to a disambiguation page, which is really bad practice. You describe the company's revenue as It has recently surpassed US$25 milliion as if that is an impressive figure. It isn't and you misspelled "million". You describe "funding rounds" as if that makes this company notable although every startup goes through funding rounds, and the dollar figures are not impressive, but you try to inflate the importance by making the unreferenced assertion that the investors are marquee investors, which is blatant puffery and marketing language. After reading your draft, I am left wondering "why is this company distinctive or interesting?" and ending up not knowing. Cullen328 (talk) 09:22, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Where to discuss a few ideas to improve pages about organisms: Also, places to learn about syntax and semantics

I have been editing Wikipedia articles for quite some time (close to a decade). However, I have started editing more often in the recent past.

1. Still, I lack a clear understanding of all these syntax and semantics related to discussing issues and coding pertaining to the non-visual editing of articles. Do you know any place that is a good starting point for quick reference and still not highly technical? I am conformable with writing on topics and citing relevant primary literature as I was trained as a chemist and Biophysics with bachelor's and doctoral level education in Sri Lanka and the US. But I often find it is too demanding to deal with jargon and technical explanations provided on help pages. Moreover, the technical details provided are often not elaborated enough or only provide details to be useful if you already know some HTML or related coding languages. I don't say it is not useful, but I already have some background and am comfortable enough to search and find relevant information. However, this process takes away time to do actual editing of pages. Also, this might prevent actual subject matter experts from editing and adding information to Wikipedia pages.
2. There are no clear-cut ways to reach moderators of each page, and they often need to spend some time digging here and there to find where and when to report issues that go out of control.
3. Visual editing is limited to editing text here and there and but not adequately address editing and manipulations of images and such. Lipwe (talk) 04:58, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

@Lipwe: for 1), perhaps Help:Cheatsheet is a way to start source editing. Help:Introduction also has topics on both visual and source editing. Help:Wikitext is more advanced and lists a lot more possibilities. For 2), there are no "moderators for a page x". Content disputes should be generally resolved at the associated talkpage, following the BRD cycle. We do have admins and an arbocm, but neither of those settle content disputes. Things that went out control (i.e. when content disputes became conduct disputes) should generally be reported to some noticeboard. For 3), I believe most experienced editors and the WMF are aware that the Visual editor does have its limitations and problems, including but not limited to working only on pages that contain Wikitext (which is still the mayority) and poor mobile support. Victor Schmidt (talk) 08:13, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Lipwe, what kind of organisms are you interested in? You might find collaborators, and places to discuss ideas, at some if the many biology-related wikiprojects. Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory/Science#Biology ⁓ Pelagic ( messages ) 10:07, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

My new article submission got rejected. Need some expert help in getting it done.

I belong to Ghoghari Vishasrimali Jain community. It is a very minority sub-caste of Jainism. I recently got the history of the same and want to publish it on Wikipedia so that the Ghoghari community world wide can be aware of their history. I created the article here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Ghoghari_Visha_Srimali_Jain but unfortunately it got declined. I am not a pro-wikipedia creator but its a genuine effort and not meant for any commercial purpose. So if someone can look at it and guide me on how can I improve as per standards and can submit it again. Thank you in advance. Dharmeshrdoshi (talk) 06:28, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

@Dharmeshrdoshi You need references: footnotes to where the information is from. Have a look at WP:REFB and the links in the decline notice. -- asilvering (talk) 06:31, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. As I have mentioned that I find this historical references from some old regional language magazine scanned pages and that too is no where online. So I can't give any reference. My idea is that let it come on Wikipedia and if any other contributor having more idea about this can add more details to this page. Unfortunately, there is nothing available for Ghoghari Visha Srimali Jain community online and it is my sincere effort to have this page as the start point. Dharmeshrdoshi (talk) 12:40, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi,@Dharmeshrdoshi, welcome to the Teahouse. For submitting an article to be accepted, please give us Reliable sources to prove this article has enough notability. Happy editing. Lemonaka (talk) 11:32, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. As I have mentioned that I find this historical references from some old regional language magazine scanned pages and that too is no where online. So I can't give any reliable source reference as defined in the policy. My idea is that let it come on Wikipedia and if any other contributor having more idea about this can add more details to this page. Unfortunately, there is nothing available for Ghoghari Visha Srimali Jain community online and it is my sincere effort to have this page as the start point. Dharmeshrdoshi (talk) 12:41, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

@Dharmeshrdoshi There's no References under ==reference==, what are you talking about? Lemonaka (talk) 12:43, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

If you can't give any reliable source reference as defined in the policy, then there can be no article. Note that sources don't need to be online. You can give a citation to the magazine, perhaps with relevant parameters (such as date) filled in at {{cite magazine}}. - David Biddulph (talk) 12:49, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

I wrote a Master's Thesis in 1992, when "on-line" was still a novelty and rare. It didn't occur to me to look for my sources on line, and I doubt if I would have found anything (I don't actually remember the state of the Internet back then). It always seems a bit funny to me when people worry about whether picking up a physical book or journal to do their research (or who seem to think it's not allowed). I happen to have easy, physical access to one of the world's major libraries. And it sometimes feels a bit like laziness--getting flabby--that I look up pretty much everything on line now, disregarding the fact (that some people don't even realize) that most of it ISN'T on line. Uporządnicki (talk) 13:18, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

please move this page draft to artical (live space)

please move this page draft to the article (live space)

Draft:Brijendra Pratap Singh

I create this page with available reliable sources. this is the biography of the Madhya Pradesh state cabinet popular minister. and may I redesign this page please move this draft to live space on Wikipedia. I don't have a move option in my Wikipedia account so please help. Skpnthi (talk) 07:16, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

It was submitted for AFC review just a day and a half ago. The submission box says: "Review waiting, please be patient. This may take 4 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 3,501 pending submissions waiting for review." - David Biddulph (talk) 07:35, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Skpnthi With the edit you made to this page, you should now be autoconfirmed and can directly create articles or move them from draft space. However, as you don't have a lot of experience in having articles accepted, it is highly recommended that you allow the review process to play out, so that if there are any problems with your draft, they are found now, and not later. Do you have a particular need to have the draft appear in the encyclopedia quickly, and ahead of thousands of others also waiting for reviews? 331dot (talk) 07:44, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Much of the content is not referenced. This will lead to the draft being declined again. Work on referencing everything (or deleting what cannot be referenced) while waiting for a review. If you decide to skip AfC and make it an article, the New Pages Patrol may revert it to draft status, or even start an Articles for Deletion (AfD) review. David notMD (talk) 08:27, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

User:Maproom removed seven references because those existed only in References rather than being embedded in the text of the draft. If those references have value, copy them and insert into the text. David notMD (talk) 08:38, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

continuation

please move this page draft to the article (live space)

Draft:Brijendra Pratap Singh

I edit again this page with available reliable sources and remove without resource content. this is the biography of the Madhya Pradesh state cabinet minister. and may I redesign this page please move this draft to live space on Wikipedia. I don't have a move option in my Wikipedia account so please help. Skpnthi (talk) 13:17, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Presumably you didn't read the replies which you received above. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:26, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

I'm not an expert, not involved in the process, have never attempted to create an actual article. But I suspect that to get anywhere with this draft of yours, one small thing you need to do (and I'm not saying there isn't a lot more) is, get rid of phrases like:

• "... one of the most eminent members of [his party]"
• "... has been doing remarkable work in ..."
• "With his bright academic future ..."
• "Seeing his diligence and his commitment to good work and excellence ..."

There are a couple of other questionable points; these are just the most blatant points that make your draft a CV/resume, not an encyclopedia article. Uporządnicki (talk) 15:10, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Is young stanna have a twin

I want to know — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.113.35.161 (talk) 12:05, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, @41.113.35.161, welcome to the Teahouse. However, your question is too vague for me to understand. For stanna, please see Stanna Lemonaka (talk) 12:28, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Young Stunna

Going through your edits, I assume you're referring to the singer Young Stunna? Unfortunately, I'm not familiar with him, but we have a reference desk where someone may be able to answer. You can click here to ask them. ◇HelenDegenerate◆ 18:02, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Creating new page

I need editing help as too much writing and reading are hard for me to comprehend due to my dyslexia Nesoul (talk) 13:45, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

What exactly do you need help with? Please read the reviwer notice at Draft:Halftime Chat R&B Podcast, and if there is anything there that you do not understand you are welcome to ask a more specific question here. Shantavira|^{feed me} 14:59, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Nesoul, and welcome to the Teahouse. I echo Shantaviraj in asking what it is you need help with. But I would point out that, as well as lacking proper references, the draft is written in a completely inappropriate style for an encyclopaedia, which is what this is. An article speaks with Wikipedia's voice, not the voice of the subject or people connected with the subject. An article should summarize what people wholly unconnected with the subject have published about it: that's all.

I also observe that your user name Nesoul, is close to the name of the proprietor, Nnamdi E.S. Okoye; which leads me to ask: are you Okoye? If you are, you should declare this fact on your user page (see WP:COI), and bear in mind that this makes the already difficult task of writing an article much more difficult, because you are likely to find it hard to write with a sufficiently neutral point of view for Wikipedia. ColinFine (talk) 20:44, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

@Nesoul Did you take that picture of yourself? It's listed as "own work". David10244 (talk) 07:20, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

What does ISBN mean?

I do not know what it means 2A00:23C5:A8C:C601:3563:7BB5:30B1:ED6C (talk) 15:05, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

See ISBN, and for WP uses, WP:ISBN. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:37, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Unable to figure out reliable sources

My article Draft:ESPNcricinfo Awards was declined for not containing required reliable sources. But, my article already had required references at Draft:ESPNcricinfo Awards#Awards by Year that's why, I couldn't figure out the actual reason. May I know what was the actual reason for which it was declined.? Perfectodefecto (talk) 16:43, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Is this about Draft:ESPNcricinfo Awards?Special:Diff/1127743368 is the version declined. Which has one source and wass the award itself be cited. So there is no independent sourcing to establish notability. The current version may pass as it does have additional references, though I have not reviewed them.Slywriter (talk) 16:54, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

@Perfectodefecto Your article draft is mainly about who has won the Awards, which is clearly important BUT not as important for Wikipedia's purposes as first showing that the Award itself is notable. Your could highlight those sources that are WP:INDEPENDENT of the rewarding body and themselves reliable by using the {{AfC comment}} template at the top of your draft to highlight the (say) WP:THREE sources that best illustrate this. Making the reviewer's work as easy as possible is the best way to go. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:45, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Reverting vandalism

Hi, a recurring vandal has once again been editing the Sandbanks page. Could someone with the ability please take a look and revert the edits from the last few hours? Thank you. Dontgiveupthedayjob (talk) 18:10, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Handled. Consider installing Twinkle which makes reverting to a specific revision easier, among other things. ■ ∃ Madeline ⇔ ∃ Part of me ; 18:41, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks you for the help, I've installed it and will give it a go in future! Dontgiveupthedayjob (talk) 22:31, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Whenever i'm on WP:RCP i use something called twinkle which makes RCP much easier, reverting vandals is just a singe click, highly reccomend.

OGWFP (talk) 20:58, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Not vandalism. User:EncyclopediaUK is editing in good faith on whether notable people (Wikilinked names, in blue) live or have lived on Sandbanks from personal knowledge as a resident. I recommended to E that the proper place for the dispute is the Talk page of the article. David notMD (talk) 22:14, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi thanks for the help, I referred to it as vandalism because of the talk on the article page and because it has been going on for a few years under different usernames (variations on encyclopaedia) and IP addresses. Hopefully it's good faith and they take your advice. Dontgiveupthedayjob (talk) 22:29, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Yes I've spent years trying to correct the mistakes. I used citations and references etc many times.

Wikipedia just reverts to the old, incorrect, information as if the legacy info is reliable (it is not and the citations do not even support the legacy info if you read them).

You will note it is the only thing I have ever edited on Wiki. It is literally too difficult to correct inaccuracies.

• Harry Redknapp used to live here. He moved to Canford Cliffs. This info was removed by some admin dope who doesnt know who Harry Redknapp is ("UKs top 10 most famous people").
• Graeme Sounness never lived on Sandbanks, he lives in Lilliput.
• Geoff Boycott used to live on Sandbanks. (heard of him?).
• Jamie Redknapp never ever lived on Sandnbanks. His parents did.

I placed citations before. They got wiped. I'm basically giving up now and cancelling my DD to Wiki.

Fixing a single page is a sisyphean task and has become pointless. EncyclopediaUK (talk) 22:51, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

I've added Geoffrey Boycott for you with reliable sources. If you have reliable sources for any other person feel free to add them. Unfortunately first hand experience doesn't count. Any chat or comments can go on the talk page. Dontgiveupthedayjob (talk) 23:33, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

oh and Celia and Nick Sawyer do live here. They are lovely. EncyclopediaUK (talk) 22:52, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Rules: No names added unless existing Wikipedia article about those persons. No names added unless confirmed by a reference. If there is a dispute, i.e., one refs says lives on, another says lives near, debate on Talk page. David notMD (talk) 23:06, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Use of different reference templates

Hi,

I was wondering whether or not using different reference templates in the same article is against Wikipedia's guidelines? I created an article awhile back (this one) and I decided, for stylistic reasons, to use different templates: the shortened footnotes as well as the typical <ref></ref> template. However, I've read that an article must have a consistent citation style and was wondering if this applies to reference templates. I have seen other articles do a similar thing, but I'm unsure if they are properly adhering to Wikipedia's guidelines.

Should I change it? Earle Bartibus Huxley (talk) 18:34, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

@Earle Bartibus Huxley, articles, including feature articles, often mix sfn templates with the use of regular citation templates. The shortened footnotes are especially useful for book sources which are cited multiple times for different pages, but often aren't needed for other sources used. See the Richard Nixon article. StarryGrandma (talk) 23:56, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

@StarryGrandma Thanks. Earle Bartibus Huxley (talk) 12:20, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Sport rivalry notable enough for article?

Hi, this is a new account but I've been on Wikipedia for about a year. I'm considering starting work on the Gerwyn Price - Gary Anderson Rivalry in Professional Darts, the sources I've found so far are listed here. I'd appreciate a temperature check on whether you would consider this topic notable enough to warrant it's own page (as opposed to expanding existing pages)? I know that this is an informal forum and the opinions here don't guarantee a consensus but WP can be disheartening when you spend time on something only for it to be deleted so this would make me feel more confident about starting. Thank you! Resequent (talk) 18:46, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Resequent. Let me begin by saying that I am an American and know very little about professional darts popular in the UK, although I am familiar with the recreational game. You should be aware that sports rivalry articles in general are controversial and many have been deleted. If you enter WP:RIVALRY in the search box, you can find quite a few such debates, mostly about professional tennis and American team sports at both the college and professional level. That being said, the most important factor is the quality of the coverage in reliable, independent sources. Are there other darts rivalry articles? Can you get input from other editors who work in the darts topic area? Cullen328 (talk) 19:23, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the reply, I wasn't aware rivalry articles were controversial, although WP:NRIVALRY did strike me as being fairly unsupportive of the subject. There are no current darts rivalry pages. I think it's probably better to assume it's not notable in this case then to save effort. Resequent (talk) 19:32, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

@Resequent, fwiw, I see they are mentioned at List_of_sports_rivalries#Darts. NRIVALRY sounds somewhat brusque, I read it as "existing is not enough." Category:Sports rivalries is far from empty. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:37, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

...ok, that may have been because you added it. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:45, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Without looking at the sources, it's possible that a mention on their wikipedia pages would be WP:DUE as the bar for including information is much lower than a stand alone page. Slywriter (talk) 20:49, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Are acknowledged rivalries between teams more likely to be accepted than between individuals? David notMD (talk) 22:16, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Can I ask a Wikipedia Articles Reviewer to review my Article

Hi,

If an article is already submitted but, it is taking a long time to get reviewed. Then, can I ask a Wikipedia Articles Reviewer to review my article at any time on talk page.? Thanks. Perfectodefecto (talk) 18:47, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

At the top of the draft it says: "Review waiting, please be patient. This may take 4 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 3,498 pending submissions waiting for review." Why should your draft take preference over the thousands of others? - David Biddulph (talk) 18:52, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

As best I can tell, you have submitted three drafts this month, two have been declined and recently resubmitted, and the third submitted today. How dp you get to "...is taking a long time to get reviewed."? David notMD (talk) 22:24, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

And in direct answer to the question, asking for a review on the talk page of the submitted draft gets nothing. If a reviewer looks at a Talk page at all, it would be after already having selected to do the review. David notMD (talk) 04:13, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Not sure if this is a question or a clarification or a proposal

I want to ask if there is a timespan to an unblock request, like how AFDs are usually addressed after 7 days. Even ANI gets addressed within a stipulated timespan. Is there any guideline/policy/essay that says unblock requests will be addressed after a stipulated period? This is for educational purposes. HandsomeBoy (talk) 20:34, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

HandsomeBoy, WP:UNBLOCK just says usually resolved in a day or two or more contentious may take a week or more. Not sure that matches reality. I'm not sure if there is any further direction given to Admins elsewhere that they should resolve in a specified timeframe. Though I do know some admins will procedurally close Unblock requests that sit around too long without any admin reviewing. Slywriter (talk) 20:54, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Using file from other language Wikipedia

Hey,

I was wondering whether it was possible to use a file from a Wikipedia of a different language on the English Wikipedia. I am specifically looking at this file to be used on the top of this page. I looked around everywhere but can't seem to figure this out :[

Thanks Soggy Pandas (talk) 22:27, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Soggy Pandas. When you say "a file", do you mean what Wikipedia means by a File (some media, or an external document, imported as a whole) or something else?

If you mean Wikipedia's sense, it depends whether the file has been uploaded to Commons or not. If so, it can be directly used in any Wikimedia project (in particular, any language edition of Wikipedia). If not, it will have been uploaded to the particular Wikipedia it is used on. You can download it to your divice, and it may be possible to upload it to English Wikipedia and use it here, or it may not, depending on its licensing. See Image use policy. ColinFine (talk) 22:43, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

It isn't on Commons, as it is a logo, which is non-free, so I suppose it will have to be re-uploaded to the English Wikipedia. FYI, I have linked the file in question above.

Thanks for the answer :) — Soggy Pandas (talk) 22:52, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

@Soggy Pandas The file you linked is an .svg file which probably means there are additional problems given that such files are vector graphics that can be zoomed, becoming high-resolution in the process and hence arguably copyright infringements. The safest thing to do would be to transfer a .png version of adequate (low) resolution for the article, uploading it on English Wikipedia by carefully following the instructions at WP:LOGO. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:23, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

draft pages

Is there a way ti view DRAFT PAGES about a particular person or subject, which have not yet been published? DrGeorge22 (talk) 22:38, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Dr George, and welcome to the Teahouse. If you know the name of the draft, you can search directly by putting Draft:name into the search box. If you do not, you can use Advanced search to search for the name in any draft by specifying "Draft" as the namespace (and removing other namespaces such as "Article" if necessary. See Help:Searching ColinFine (talk) 22:46, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Required Reliable Sources

Is it really necessary to gather all the third party reliable sources for each & every content, when the article is about on Awards and very long in length.

Can I have some idea, how much minimum references should I provide for such kind of articles.? Perfectodefecto (talk) 04:57, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Partially answered on your Talk page. You have started to reference confirmation of the award winners (yes, that could get very long!). However, your declined draft Draft:ESPNcricinfo Awards is about the awards, and you have no references yet about the creation and importance of the awards in the world of cricket. For example, what is the history of the awards, and how did it come to be owned by ESPN? David notMD (talk) 10:41, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Publishing articles translated using the "Content Translation" tool; they're NOT machine translated (that functionality is disabled), I just like the interface

Hello, I'm a relatively new user who has been working on translating a few articles from Japanese Wikipedia to English. I've just hit autoconfirmed status today, which as far as I know allows me to create new articles, including articles that are primarily translations of articles from other Wikis. I've been using the Content Translation tool to work because it's 1000x more convenient to use than plain text editing and it's just sort of where Wikipedia first pushed me when I first started. However, publishing anything directly through this tool seems to be a privilege reserved exclusively by extended confirmed users (which I am a long ways away from); but I am allowed to "save the article as a draft", which results in the article just being published to my user page. My question is, how would I go about changing this draft to a "real" article without losing all the fancy Wikipedia formatting stuff? I'm aware there's also some tagging stuff relating to attribution I have to do as well since it's a translation of another Wiki's article, and I'm not ready to actually publish it just yet, I just want to know how I'll have to go about doing that when the time comes. Thanks a bunch! Abnormal Shrimp (talk) 05:11, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

@Abnormal Shrimp: See Wikipedia:So you made a userspace draft. Once the draft is ready for the "main" encyclopedia, it can be moved there, including the entire page history and all edit contents. Victor Schmidt (talk) 08:43, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Okay great that's just what I was looking for, thanks! Abnormal Shrimp (talk) 12:12, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

@Abnormal Shrimp: Some things to remember about translating Japanese article's into English so as to create a corresponding English Wikipedia article is WP:TFOLWP and WP:OTHERLANGS. Any English Wikipedia article you try and create will need to clearly meet WP:N for it to have a chance of surviving a deletion challenge. Non-English sources can be cited to establish Wikipedia notability, but they may be harder for reviewers to assess. Moreover, as someone who has a little experience on Japanese Wikipedia, the Japanese Wikipedia community doesn't seem as rigorous as the English Wikipedia one when it comes to trying to cite only WP:SECONDARY reliable sources. Any source that is a blog or otherwise user-generated is going to be more highly scrutinized on English Wikipedia and perhaps quickly discounted than perhaps it might be on Japanese Wikipedia. In addition, You might find WP:PRIMARY sources (like official websites) much harder to use on English Wikipedia than perhaps on Japanese Wikipedia in general, but they have pretty much zero value when it comes to establishing English Wikipedia notability. There are also WP:MOS differences between Japanese Wikipedia and English Wikipedia that you will also need to be aware of when translating into English. These aren't related to a subject's Wikipedia notability per se, but they may be mentioned by reviewers and cited as a reason for declining a draft if there are too many problems. So, it might be a good idea, if you haven't done so already, to take a look at WP:JAPAN because it provides quite a bit if information on how English Wikipedia articles about Japanese subjects are expected to be written; WT:JAPAN is also a good place to ask questions about such articles. — Marchjuly (talk) 09:26, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Wow, okay, that addresses a lot of other questions I had during the translation process as well! Multiple times I came across something that I wasn't sure how to move over/translate but I was sure there was probably a precedent for; now I know where to go to find out! Providing sources definitely kind of scares me as for one article in particular I'm nearly positive there won't be any English sources for it, but practically all the sources in the Japanese article are from books, and the article itself is in the Japanese "Good Article" category, so I'm hoping it won't just be deleted outright! Thank you for all of the information! Abnormal Shrimp (talk) 12:17, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

@Abnormal Shrimp, your sources must be WP:RS, but they don't have to be in English, see WP:NOENG. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:11, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

@Abnormal Shrimp: You should also be competent enough in a source’s original language to assess it both for reliability and WP:RSCONTEXT. It’s not a good idea to simply assume that the person who cited the source in the Japanese Wikipedia article knew what they were doing. If you can’t at least access a source yourself to verify it’s being cited properly, you probably shouldn’t use it. Others (particularly those who assess your drafts) are going to expect this of you and they’re going to ask you to clarify anything that they themselves are unable to verify. If you’re unable to do this sufficiently, the source may end up being discounted and removed. — Marchjuly (talk) 20:29, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for the headsup! In the case that I can't (without a great deal of effort) access any of these sources because they seem to exclusively be books and periodicals kept in various public/university libraries across the USA and Japan, what should I do? I mean, I could request to borrow one, get it, and then I would be able to verify personally for myself that the citations in the Japanese article are accurate, but then how would the person assessing my draft verify that? Would they just take me at my word or would they too find a copy of it and check? I thought maybe I could circumvent this issue somewhat by the fact that the original Japanese article meets Japanese Wikipedia's good article standards... But okay, I understand, this is a new English article I'm creating, so by principle I must be able to verify all of the sources I use. In the case that I cannot access any of them and the article goes entirely sourceless as a consequence... I suppose I just won't be able to publish it? Do you have any recommendations on how to find scans of Japanese history books and the like? Tried the National Diet of Japan's digital collection but they didn't have a majority of them. Sorry, I guess I'm kind of reaching here. Abnormal Shrimp (talk) 21:25, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

@Abnormal Shrimp you don't need to translate or port over ALL sources, you merely need to assess that there are enough sources to satisfy WP:Notability. As long as that's the case, it doesn't matter whether it's a pure translation, partial translation, or a fresh creation of an Article, that happens to also exist on Japanese Wikipedia. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 23:09, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Oh! So, I guess the article might get hit with a "needs additional citations" flag (seeing as I can't verify most of them this seems fair), but since there's at least verifiably non-trivial coverage on the topic, the article will at the very least be allowed to exist. At least that's what I gather from WP:Notability. Great! I could be misinterpreting something else here, but I'll go ahead and just finish the translation and then cross whatever other bridges there may be when I come to them. Thank you! Abnormal Shrimp (talk) 00:51, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Maybe just focus on the content which you're able to verify. Don't try to create the article WP:BACKWARDS. Figure out the three best sources you're able to verify and then develop the draft based on them per WP:THREE. If those sources are sufficient to establish the subject's English Wikipedia's notability, then you can always expand the article at a later date as more acceptable sources are found. If you include lots of unverifiable content and cite lots of questionable sources because you mistakenly believe that "more is better", reviewers might be more inclined to decline the draft because the extra unsourced or poorly referenced clutter might make hard for them to assess the subject's notability. If you're only going to be citing Non-English sources that are hard to access, you might want to clarify them on the draft's talk page to aid others in assessing them. Provide as much information as you can about the source per WP:CITEHOW and describe it how provides WP:SIGCOV of the subject. Quoting the original source material might even be helpful. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:25, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Request for advice about Draft:Yaoi hole

I appreciate your advice on how to improve my article on Draft:Yaoi hole, which was declined on the grounds of notability.

• I know there are not many instances where the term "Yaoi hole" is defined in terms of notability, but I assume that gender expression in YAOI is a much debated topic. I have added some sources, I wish you could tell me how many sources are needed.

• I received a comment that there is a sense of WP:SYNTH in some parts of the article. I have addressed the tags I recieved, and I appreciate your letting me know if there is anything in the rest of the article that you feel is a synth.

• There was a comment of concern about the large citation on classification. The tree diagrams in the article were created by countless people on the Internet as Internet memes, copy-pastes, or templates, and the text was all completed in 2003. Kaneda did not process the text, merely introduced the text. As I understand it, there is no copyright on Internet memes. I thought I incorporated the story of how the tree diagram was created into the article, but my explanation may have been insufficient. Should I strengthen the explanation in the article, or include it as a note, or let me know if you have a better idea.

• I think my draft is probably rough around the edges. However, since the English version of the Yaoi article is substantial in terms of the amount of text and sources, if I had the help of the Yaoi editors, I think my draft could be refined. I would like to enlist their help, for example, would it be permissible to ask them to proofread the draft in Yaoi's talkpage? Also, if there is another appropriate place for the request, please let me know.狄の用務員 (talk) 12:56, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Left align sidebar

Hey I want to left align some contents in a Template:Sidebar but not all. I found these "heading{{{n}}}class" parameters in the documentation. But I've got no idea how to find out what values these can take. Talpedia (talk) 14:00, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Censorship

Why did you CENSOR Robert Malone and his truth revealing information. You scrubbed his book. Because of that, I will NOT contribute and I do NOT trust you and I will not visit anymore. CENSORSHIP is NOT constitutional, helpful and is very damaging. ( Reference the amount of harm being discovered with regard to the shoved on us shots). Maybe you don’t want our constitution. Then go find a better country. 67.214.28.210 (talk) 14:50, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, IP editor. I'm not sure who your comments are supposed to be addressed to and I don't know who Robert Malone is, but please remember that most Wikipedia editors don't live in the US and telling us to "find a better country" doesn't make much sense. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:07, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

I expect that the original thread starter meant Robert W. Malone. I assume it because it's now a hot topic in social networks. I don't understand however what the editor calls "censorship" because the article about the person exists and reflects the person's opinion. Philip Torchinsky (talk) 15:35, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Since I have no idea which Robert Malone or WP-article you are talking about, I have no idea. And per your statement you will not read this, but Merry Christmas anyway! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:07, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

I think he's talking about Robert W. Malone, because he's the only one who's dead. QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 15:31, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

@QuickQuokka, "In December 2022, Malone was reinstated on Twitter". Are we talking about the same guy? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:39, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Whoops, sorry, I got confused. QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 15:42, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Robert W. Malone has had some edit-warring, and there are extensive discussions at Talk (including archives), so not clear where you see or suspect censorship. Any article pertaining to COVID and vaccination is hotly debated. Again, not censorship. David notMD (talk) 16:05, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Help with Mongolian Wikipedia

Hello, fellow Wikipedians, I have recently found a Mongolian Wikipedia article about MongoDB, but although I am not Mongolian, and don't understand the Mongolian language, it is clear to me that this is not an encyclopedic article, but rather a copied tutorial from somewhere else. I think this page should be deleted, but I don't know the process of doing that in the Mongolian Wikipedia. WP:Help for non-Mongolian speakers is clearly inactive, and WP:Хурал is protected. Can a Mongolian please help me? QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 15:18, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Please help with Draft:BellSoft

I drafted the article about a company that does significant work supporting a specific JDK and JRE: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:BellSoft. This support is essential for the software developers' community because it allows them to have a choice. Sometimes a new company decides which environment to use in their devices or software bundles to rely on Java (or a language also compiled to Java bytecode). If the company has a choice, it's better for everybody. Thus, it's important to share the knowledge about the choice.

If someone unfamiliar with software development in Java reads my drafted article, it may not look clear enough. It needs improvement.

Therefore, I'd suggest first improving the Java Runtime Environment article, which a reader of my article may first look at, if they are not familiar with the topic enough. To be precise, Java Runtime Environment needs to be created because now it redirects to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Java_(software_platform)#Java_Runtime_Environment. It is much harder to read and understand than, for example, https://www.redhat.com/en/topics/cloud-native-apps/what-is-a-Java-runtime-environment.

What else would you suggest to improve my article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:BellSoft? Thank you! Philip Torchinsky (talk) 15:26, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Federation of International Sports Table Football (FISTF) was 'deleted'.

Dear Ladies and Gentlemen,

I have been notified today (18th Decmber 2022) that the Wikipedia page "Federation of International Sports Table Football (FISTF)" with all its content (100% deletion) is therefore no more readable. I was not able to find the page anymore. Why is the page gone? Reason? Who deleted all the content? Justification? We have had in the past a person troubeling the FISTF content with wrong information and 'teasing' to annoy!

Kind request to Wikipedia: "Please be so kind as to restore 'FISTF' content. I thank everyone in advance for the welcoming help and support. It will be appriciated if we can then install a lock to FISTF so that damage can be avoided.

kind regards sporttischfussball „Sporttischfussball“ (talk) 16:52, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

The article was replaced with a redirect in this edit, with the summary: Wikipedia:Database reports/Pages containing too many maintenance templates: boldly replace article with redirect to Sports table football as this org doesn't seem notable and the article content is unmanageably dense). CC @Duckmather ■ ∃ Madeline ⇔ ∃ Part of me ; 16:58, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

@Sporttischfussball: The article was in a truly awful state. It looked like a page run by a sports organisation to publicise when competitions have been held, and who's been elected to the organisation's governing body. Since Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not a club social page, what it should have been is a brief account of this federation and its history, as seen through the eyes of independent sources (i.e. if the only people who write about he FISTF are the FISTF themselves, then unfortunately they are not a suitable subject for a Wikipedia article). The general references in the article were mostly to the game itself, i.e. Subbuteo, which has its own article. I'm not surprised the article got blanked; it needed a complete re-write, and in the state that it was, would unfortunately have been a valid candidate for outright deletion. But do feel free to re-write it as a proper, and correctly sourced encyclopaedic article! Elemimele (talk) 17:22, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the kind and open answer. „Sporttischfussball“ (talk) 06:35, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Why is the wiki project SPECTROSCOPY defunct?

Certainly new developments in spectroscopy are happening every year. There has been much development in applications and new techniques. DrGeorge22 (talk) 17:18, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

@DrGeorge22, the usual Wikipedia:WikiProject#Inactive_projects, probably. WP:REVIVE may be of interest. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:32, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

No mention of World Cup winner

The main page is no mention that Argentina won the World Cup I tried to mention it on the talk page but It was removed 107.19.16.177 (talk) 18:49, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi IP user, welcome to the Teahouse. Your edits were reverted because you had suggested this at the wrong venue - please see WP:ITN/C for more details. Harobouri • 🎢 • 🏗️ (he/him • WP:APARKS) 18:53, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

In addition, it has already been nominated, so you may feel free to voice your opinion here. Harobouri • 🎢 • 🏗️ (he/him • WP:APARKS) 19:00, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Why aren't newspaper articles and documents published sources

Submission declined on 14 November 2022 by Eagleash (talk).This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are: in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject) reliable secondary independent of the subject Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

I made jpg copies of the referenced sources (newspaper articles and documents sent and received) and put them on the scenic7creeks website as web pages so they could be referenced. Why aren't they reliable or in depth or independent of the subject? Scenic7creeks (talk) 19:20, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Because your website is unreliable by our definition, See WP:RS. - Roxy the dog 19:35, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

and the "article" was a copyvio thereof. G12 filed. Star Mississippi 22:13, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

You can reference physical documents. Nobody's stopping you from that. You can't reference your own website. casualdejekyll 19:38, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

@Scenic7creeks - Welcome to Wikipedia! Please read Referencing for beginners. casualdejekyll 19:40, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Courtesy link User:Scenic7creeks/sandbox. Theroadislong (talk) 19:40, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

(Ec)Your website besides being unreliable is violating the copyright of article publishers. Setting that aside, you need to cite the specific articles, not the links to your hosting of them. Then you need to read WP:PAID and WP:COI and comply with them. Plus request a change of your username. After all that, please read this guide and decide whether the subject meets Wikipedia definition of notability before resubmitting. Yes, it's alot but following all that will make your time here more pleasant and productiveSlywriter (talk) 19:43, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Donated in error

I thought I was donating to Greenpeace but somehow donated to Wikipedia. How can I get a refund. It was very misleading as thought I was on Greenpeace webpage 2A00:23C6:6A1E:B801:9020:D280:DBDD:201C (talk) 19:59, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Please contact donate@wikimedia.org for inquiries on this. Tropicalkitty (talk) 20:03, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

"Wikipedia:How to create a page" (English) in Slovenia (slovenščina) langue

Search the "Wikipedia:How to create a page" (English) in Slovenia (slovenščina) langue. Anyone know where this page is? Regards, Wname1 (talk) 20:04, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia:How to create a page has links to other languages at the foot of the left-hand toolbar. The one you want is to sk:Pomoc:Ako vytvoriť nový článok. - David Biddulph (talk) 20:10, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

I mean this country https://sl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glavna_stran SL or sl not SK or sk https://sk.wikipedia.org . Where is it? Regards, Wname1 (talk) 20:31, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

There does not appear to be a corresponding page on that project, based on the list of linked pages. It's possible that a page has been created there but hasn't been linked across projects yet, but in that case editors here on en.wiki are not going to be much help in finding it. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:38, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, I missed the one letter difference between slovenčina and slovenščina. The latter doesn't have a direct equivalent of Wikipedia:How to create a page. Probably best to ask at their help desk. - David Biddulph (talk) 20:40, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

I can not find the help desk also on "sl." page. Anyone know where it is? :-) Regards, Wname1 (talk) 20:47, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Our WP:Help desk links to sl:Wikipedija:Forum za pomoč. - David Biddulph (talk) 20:51, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the good solution (Wikipedija:Forum za pomoč). Great would be "Wikipedia:How to create a page" in "sl." page to know? Wname1 (talk) 21:07, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

@Wname1 you are more than welcome to boldly create the Slovenian page for it. I don't speak Slovenian, but if useful, the Bulgarian page bg:Уикипедия:Вашата първа статия might be linguistically most similar. Otherwise, take a stab at translating from the English page. Keep in mind, that each language edition of Wikipedia has different policies and cultures though, so translation may not be super straight forward. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 23:06, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Assistance on writing about a Coffee Company in Tanzania and Zanzibar owned by a young Tanzanian entrepreneur

Hello,

Thank you so much for this space and help.

I'm seeking assistance to write about my coffee company located in Tanzanian (mainland) and Zanzibar (Island) which has gained a popularity and to bring more awareness as we proceed on coffee farming in 2023 in Zanzibar and produce Speciality Coffee, Liberica and finally open doors on coffee tourism in Zanzibar.

I would appreciate anyone willing to help.

Thank you,

Muntazir, Founder & CEO. 102.217.80.231 (talk) 20:36, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello Muntazir, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid that "to bring more awareness" is another way of saying "to promote us", and promotion is forbidden anywhere on Wikipedia.

If your company has been discussed in depth by people wholly unconnected with your company (and not prompted or fed information on behalf of your company), and published by reliable independent sources - and only if those criteria are met, see WP:NCORP - then Wikipedia could have an article about your company. The article would not belong to you, would not be controlled by you, would not be for your benefit except incidentally, would not necessarily say what you wanted it to say, and should be based almost entirely on what those independent sources have published about the company, not about what you or your associates say or want to say. (See WP:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing).

You are strongly discouraged from writing such an article, but not forbidden. However, writing an article successfully is difficult for a new editor, and much more difficult if you have a conflict of interest, as you have.

What I suggest you do is:

1. look for published sources wholly unconnected with you and your company that contain significant coverage of the company. They do not have to be in English, or online, but they do have to be published by somebody with a reputation for editorial control and fact checking. See WP:Golden rule.
2. If you cannot find at least three such sources, give up, as any further time and effort you spend on this is guaranteed to be wasted.
3. If you can find such sources, then there is a possibility of an article. If you wish to continue, you must make a declaration of your status as a paid editor - this is mandatory, and you really need to create an account to do this effectively.
4. Then read your first article to see how to proceed.

But my recommendation would be that you give up this project. If your company is notable, then at some time somebody will notice it and write an article about it.

One other possibility is to post at WT:WikiProject Tanzania, and see if anybody there is interested in working with you. ColinFine (talk) 23:38, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

How to establish notability

Hi,

If I have required independent sources for an article, then, where should I put these on my Article body to establish notability. briefly, I want This Article's subject to be notable. so, May I have some examples to resolve this issue.? Thanks. Perfectodefecto (talk) 21:37, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

The sources should be placed directly after the content that they support. See WP:REFB for extra help. Theroadislong (talk) 21:56, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Question

There is a user who is repeatedly replacing information on an article. They keep saying they want to write an article, but they won't let me direct them to the Article Wizard. What should I do? Professor Penguino (talk) 23:22, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

I've warned the user using Template:Uw-hijacking which gives him a few useful links. - David Biddulph (talk) 01:52, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Who Can Create Pages?

I am an actor, director, and producer. How do I have a page created? People contact me all the time about creating a page for me but I want to make sure it's legit and that it's done right according to Wikipedia rules. How do I get this done? Mcgier (talk) 23:43, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Mcgier Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia has articles, not pages. This is an important distinction. Articles are typically written by independent editors wholly unconnected with the subject. If you meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person, someone will eventually take note of coverage of your career in independent reliable sources and write about you- but it will not be yours to control or dictate what appears there. An article about you is also not necessarily desirable.

Third parties often attempt to contact people and claim to offer Wikipedia editing services, but these have varying reputability, and many are scams. If you hire someone to write about you, do not hand over any money until you see the product. They can make no guarantees(such as writing an article that will not be deleted). They must also declare that you hired them, per the Terms of Use. 331dot (talk) 23:49, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Please help me get my article published

Hi. I am really struggling on writing an article about a person because there are not much third party sources about him. Please help how I can get that person's biography published still. Madona Jace (talk) 00:46, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. Which article are you referrin’ to? Your deleted user page? Sarrail (talk) 00:50, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

hi @Madona Jace and welcome to the Teahouse! the first thing you absolutely have to do is to read and understand the policies Conflict of interest and Paid editing, and disclose your status as a paid editor somewhere.

I am unable to view what your article contained as it has been deleted, however the given deletion reason seems to be that it was deleted due to "misuse of Wikipedia as a web host". keep in mind the purpose of Wikipedia is not to promote people or anything in any way, but to be a factual, neutral encyclopedia with equally factual, neutral articles (which means you cannot promote your subject at all - you have to describe them objectively as if you are a detached researcher, not working for pay, writing about what you have read elsewhere)

i think that could be a good way to write an article however. gather up as many good reliable sources as you can that are independent from your subject, gather up the facts and information that are stated in these sources, then write only basing off these sources without adding in your personal knowledge of things.

if by "there are not much third party sources about him" means there's only just one or no sources, it might not be notable enough, which means he isn't eligible for an article yet and you cannot turn your draft into an article. perhaps it may just be too soon however, and if more sources cover him he would be eligible for one.

unfortunately, I am not an article writer, however I believe someone who does could add more regarding this subject. happy wditing! 💜  melecie  talk - 01:45, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

I very much disagree with the deletion of this page. The subject clearly meets WP:NPOLITICIAN as a two term member of the House of Representatives of the Philippines. The editor made a common beginner's error in writing their draft on their userpage. As a new editor in 2009, I drafted an article on my talk page. In my opinion, the correct thing would have been to move the user page to draft space, and give the editor some advice about how to improve the draft. Pinging Fancy Refrigerator who tagged the page for deletion and Jimfbleak who deleted it. Cullen328 (talk) 02:16, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Yes please. Please help me improve my article. I am willing to change the tone of my article if it really gave an impression that I was promoting the subject. I am indeed new to editing and publishing in wikipedia so I did not know how to maximize interface nor was I an expert in its policies. If you would allow me to publish the same article and help me edit it, it would be really helpful to me as well. Thanks. Madona Jace (talk) 02:42, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Here is the official Philippines government page about this congressman. Cullen328 (talk) 02:44, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Given the circumstances, can't we just treat this as a WP:REFUND request? Slywriter (talk) 02:50, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

There's another discussion related to this currently ongoing at the Help Desk. It might be best to close both discussions and move then to the OP's user talk page to avoid confusion and possible conflicting advice. It would also probably be a good idea for the OP to explain things like WP:PROUD, WP:LUC and WP:OWN to whomever is paying them to make sure the subject of the article understands that they will have practically zero editorial control over any article created about them. Finally and perhaps unfortunately for the OP, if the subject clearly meets WP:NPOL, there's no need for the subject to pay anyone to create a Wikipedia article about them and there's no added editorial control gained by paying someone to do so. Of course, the OP should be as upfront as possible about this with whomever's paying them, but that's up to the OP. The OP, even if they're paid to create the article and are able to get it accepted, should understand that they too will have zero editorial control over it once it's been created and they too (like the subject of the article) will be expected to not edit the article directly, except under certain specific conditions. The Op should also realize that others aren't very likely going to help create an article that the OP is expecting to be paid for creating. -- Marchjuly (talk) 03:08, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Good article criteria

How do I make 1996 Otokoto Riots or Ikeji festival into good Wikipedia's good article format? Pravin555777 (talk) 03:02, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

You nominate it, and then someone will review it per the criteria for Good Articles. DS (talk) 03:14, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

But what improvements should I make? Pravin555777 (talk) 03:24, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Pravin555777, welcome to the Teahouse. Either you can submit one of the articles to peer review (PR) where an uninvolved editor can help you improve the article (layout, grammar etc)., or you can nominate them for good article (GA) status where a GA reviewer can help improve the article too - they can put your review on hold for about a week (or so) to give you time to fix errors in the article before consideration for GA. Additionally, if the article needs a copyedit, you may request a copyedit at the Guild of Copy Editors. Hope this helps - Harobouri • 🎢 • 🏗️ (he/him • WP:APARKS) 04:03, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Hidden archive

User talk:Celestina007/Archive 1 is an hidden archive. How to add it to main talkpage formally without vandalizing? Pravin555777 (talk) 03:27, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

If I understand you problem correctly you can add a link to User talk:Celestina007/Archive 1 on your talk page. --Bduke (talk) 03:48, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

@Bduke - I think they want to link that archive page to Celestina007's main talk page (they have been inactive since this May). Harobouri • 🎢 • 🏗️ (he/him • WP:APARKS) 04:15, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi Pravin555777. Why are you worried about one of Celestina007's archived user talk pages? Celestina007 hasn't edited Wikipedia since May, but perhaps their user talk page is set up the way they want it to be set up. As Archer1234 pointed out in the edit summary they left when reverting the edit you made to User talk:Celestina007, it's not your user talk page so it's not really something you need to be concerned about unless there's a serious policy violation involved. I'm also going to point out that all of your edits to Wikipedia with your Pravin555777 account seemed to be focused on Celestina007's user talk page. That's an odd page for any user tto be focusing on, but it's especially odd for a new user such as yourself to be worrying such a page about unless there's a specific policy-based reason for doing so. The very first edit you made to Wikipedia was to randomly remove content from Celestina007's user talk page, and that edit was also subsequently reverted. So, maybe it's time for you to move on to doing something else and just leave Celestina007's talk page be. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:49, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: The behavior you describe sounds very much like a second account was created because the first account is inaccessible for some reason (like a lost password). ~Anachronist (talk) 06:23, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

That's fine, but that's something Pravin555777 should clarify if they plan on continuing to try and edit Celestina007's talk page. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:27, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Creating a new article

Hi All, I tried to create a new article about an Indian composer I admire. He composed close to 5000 songs. But he does not have wikipedia page. I created Draft:Sai Madhukar and asked for review. Feedback is all the sources I quoted are not reliable. I can only quote the sources where something is written about this person. He published hundreds of songs in YouTube, but youtube is not reliable source. Same thing with Spotify which is not reliable as well. Honestly, I am not sure how else I can proceed with this article. Any advice is helpful. Thanks. Waimea92 (talk) 06:01, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

@Waimea92: Being prolific doesn't necessarily equate to being notable. Exactly which criteria in WP:MUSICBIO or WP:COMPOSER does Sai Madhukar meet?

See also Wikipedia:Golden rule. We need reliable sources that are independent of him, not associated with him, and those sources need to cover him in some depth, not giving trivial mentions. ~Anachronist (talk) 06:20, 19 December 2022 (UTC)