Wikipedia:Teahouse

Marchjuly, 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

dark mode

We need dark mode, please! One simple switch on top of every page. Thanks 2001:4C4E:29D2:C500:C559:A7ED:A9C4:3DCA (talk) 15:44, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

Please offer comments at the talk page of Vector 2022. 331dot (talk) 15:47, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, IP editor. We already have a 'Dark Mode' button at the top of every page. However you have to turn it on in Preferences (see here). But you'll need to be logged on with a free user account to change any of the defaults available to you. Nick Moyes (talk) 16:08, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, thanks for your suggestion. A technical side-effect of the current skin is that it will be possible to build the dark mode. You will find more information here. Until then, what Nick wrote above is the best solution. SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 16:17, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

sorry, i might not be the smartest tool in the shed, but where is the switch for dark mode in the preference pane ? Vincent-vst🚀 (talk) 05:22, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

@Vincent-vst It is one of the options on Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets in the "appearance" section. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:50, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

thank you Vincent-vst🚀 (talk) 13:58, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the answer.

Here is my corrected suggestion:

We need dark mode without any registration, any account, any logging on, please!

Thanks. 2001:4C4E:29D2:C500:BD2D:F6F8:A9:3AD8 (talk) 10:11, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

As outlined at the link given above - this link - the devs know that folks want this feature, but it's not currently in development, and may not ever be available to IPs. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:56, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes You said "We already have a 'Dark Mode' button at the top of every page. However you have to turn it on in Preferences".

Then, this link, mentioned above, https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Reading/Web/Desktop_Improvements/Frequently_asked_questions#Are_you_building_the_dark_mode says the feature is not in development, and further, if it were built, "we would not plan to add an in-browser toggle".

And from the WMF, @SGrabarczuk (WMF) says "it will be possible to build it [dark mode], but until then, what Nick wrote is the best solution". (Emphasis mine.) So the WMF person's answer says it's not built yet, but we should follow your answer (Nick), which says it is available. Why is all this info so confusing?

Even so, I turned the toggle on in Preferences, but I don't see a dark mode button at the top of any page. Why is there even a toggle if the WMF and the linked page says it "will be possible to build" this feature? Please help me understand... David10244 (talk) 08:03, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

To clarify, I am in desktop mode on an Android tablet, using the Chrome browser. David10244 (talk) 08:06, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

I hate to be one of those pushy editors, but ... No one has more info on this apparent set of contradictions, on whether the Dark Mode feature is already "built" or "now it will be possible to build" and "we do not plan to add..."? Thanks. David10244 (talk) 05:41, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

@David10244, it's a gadget, not an officially WMF-created dark mode. The latter is what folks keep referring to (it's been added to the latest wishlist, I see). 199.208.172.35 (talk) 22:04, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

OK, that helps. I thought I was going crazy, seeing the contradictions, with no one mentioning them! David10244 (talk) 08:13, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Linkity link: Dark mode. An experimental work by the design team + various volunteers, apparently. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 22:10, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Does the checkbox in Preferences actually do anything? Is it part of the gadget? David10244 (talk) 08:17, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

@David10244, that's something I can't answer for sure. It seems the checkbox you're talking about is supposed to make the dark mode toggle available at the top of pages. I'm not sure if it works in all skins, and it's always possible you have some other thing enabled which is interfering with the gadget. Very hard for me to tell how these things work. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:53, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. I'm using the new default skin that so many people complain about, but I like it. I don't have much fancy stuff enabled. But I'm good, thanks for the help. David10244 (talk) 07:18, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

@David10244 Sorry - I missed your 'ping', but I had suddenly wondered if I had previously loaded up some bespoke script which I'd forgotten about. (It's easy to do and then assume everyone else sees Wikipedia the way you do). However, I run an alt-account (NM Demo 2) for just this purpose and with all the settings just as a new user sees it when they first register for an account. I can confirm that (in Chrome on a Windows 10 PC) the dark mode function can be enabled in Preferences. By selecting the tick box labelled "Dark mode toggle: Enable a toggle for using a light text on dark background color scheme", saving the settings and then going to any other page and then 'purging the cache' to ensure everything is properly loaded from my preference, I can then select Dark Mode' from the new user dropdown menu, and toggle it on or off from there. I've not checked its availability in mobile view or in desktop view on my iPhone. I will if you need me to. Does that clarify anything you were unsure of? Nick Moyes (talk) 13:16, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes That helps. I see those things now and it works. (I use desktop mode on a Win PC and sometimes on a tablet). Thanks for checking this for me; I appreciate it.

I shouldn't fixate on the following two things, and I'll let it go after this comment, but...

I am still confused about the reply in this thread, where @SGrabarczuk (WMF) says "it will be possible to build it [dark mode], but until then, what Nick wrote is the best solution". I don't understand, SG. It seems that "it" has been built, given that "what Nick wrote" works fine. Will the same feature be built again?

And as outlined at the link given above - this is what discouraged me at first-- this link - says the devs know that folks want this feature, but then says it's not currently in development. Weird. David10244 (talk) 11:32, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

There are so many facets to Wikipedia, MediaWiki etc that it's perfectly possible there are pages floating around that are simply out of date. I honestly don't know. Nick Moyes (talk) 18:55, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

@David10244, after asking some more learned folks for clarity, I was told that the difference here is between a fully supported dark mode, custom-tailored to display all the different elements properly, being maintained and updated by actual staff (what folks want) vs. what is basically a color inversion hack maintained by whoever has the time and will to do so (what we have). As it was described to me, the former actually sounds like a fair amount of work, both to set up and to keep updated as software changes roll out. If enough folks think the current solution is good enough, the WMF will probably spend their resources on other things. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 15:15, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

 Yes,there is a dark mode option, but it is only available to registered users who edit. If you want to try, simply either log in or create an account in order to do so. 204.129.232.191 (talk) 16:16, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

I tried, but it does not work! Learning With Ameer (talk) 10:13, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

If you made a number of edits, then the dark mode is enabled for you. 204.129.232.191 (talk) 17:59, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Regarding Review of Draft:Bhaskar Sen

•  Courtesy link: Draft:Bhaskar Sen

Hello all, I got the following message on the review of the submission. "This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources." It seems I have referenced sources adequately and all sources are vetted and reliable. Including sources from reputed national dailies. Please let me know what changes to do, to get the write up published successfully. Could someone please help and explain the reason behind decline in a little more delay? Thank You very very much Mayukhsenkar (talk) 18:06, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Mayukhsenkar. If he competed in the Olympics, then why is there no coverage of his results there? Cullen328 (talk) 18:32, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello @Cullen328 Thank you for replying. He has been covered extensively for participating in Karate at Olympics. The Karate event was an additional event in Tokyo 2020 where it included pre-matches and test events. He may have participated in them.

The athlete has been a part of Olympic 365 community also which has been shown by his correspondence with the IOC. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 18:38, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Mayukhsenkar our article Karate at the 2020 Summer Olympics does not list India as a participating nation. Please clarify. Cullen328 (talk) 18:52, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks @Cullen328 for replying and guiding. On a brief check for Karate Event in Tokyo 2020, it did have test and pre-matches as recorded by various sources : https://www.wkf.net/news-center-new/ready-steady-tokyo-karate-test-event-underway-at-nippon-budokan/1060, https://olympics.com/en/news/karate-follows-judo-with-successful-budokan-test, https://www.wkf.net/news-center-new/ready-steady-tokyo-karate-test-event-shows-karates-determination-to-shine-at-olympic-games/1061. The event has been covered by reputed Sports Journals like InsidetheGames also. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 19:40, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Mayukhsenkar, none of those references mention Sen. They describe a test event that took place before the Olympics and the world class athletes were not present. Your statement Known to have represented India at the Tokyo 2020 Olympics seems inaccurate and misleading. Cullen328 (talk) 21:07, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

@Cullen328 None of the test event persons are mentioned , not only him. It mentions local representatives, which according to WKF definition is previous champions. His performance at Olympics has been widely published, also IOC has corresponded to him as Olympic 365 member and mentor, which is given to Olympians.

The statement is well corroborated. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 21:39, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

He did not compete in the Olympics. Olympic Athletes 365 is a developmental program that includes a wide range of athletes, not just Olympic competitors. Cullen328 (talk) 23:13, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

@Mayukhsenkar Hi there! You wrote "His performance at Olympics has been widely published". Could you please provide three published reliable sources that provide significant coverage of his performance? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 03:49, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Olympic 365 mentorship is only for Olympians as mentorship is in collaboration with WOA.

@GoingBatty https://www.youthkiawaaz.com/2021/08/bhaskar-becomes-the-first-indian-to-attend-the-olympic-karate-event/, https://readscoops.com/sports/bhaskar-sen-karate-olympic-hero/, https://www.hindustantimes.com/delhi/du-s-karate-kid-aspires-to-represent-india-at-next-olympics/story-7cPxsxLZLVKRIwCnxs3UBL.html two of the sources are primary and one is a national daily, on giving a quick look, there are many more sources which report on his participation. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 07:26, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

@Mayukhsenkar I asked you to provide sources that provide significant coverage of his performance in the Olympics. The Hindustan Times article is from 2016, so it obviously doesn't say anything about what he did in 2020. The YKA and Read Scoops mention his background and other achievements, but don't seem to contain even a single sentence about what Sen did at the "Olympic Karate Event". Do you have any independent reliable sources that state what he actually did at the Olympics? GoingBatty (talk) 14:08, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

@GoingBatty The source of Hindustan Times states about his selection into the Olympics, the other two sources speak at length about his qualification which is inline with the qualification guidelines of Tokyo 2020. I would like to politely make a correction to your sentence where you describe "2020" when Olympic Event happened on 2021. Since the Kata Event which he was qualified for was a round robin according to the Olympic rules, the articles stating his participation are technically correct. An olympic event is not 1v1 where his performance "against" an athlete needs to be shown. The Qualification happened based on ranking https://setopen.sportdata.org/wkfranking/ranking_main_competitor.php?ranking_country=IND&ranking_competitor=IND178&hidemenu=true, is the basis of ranking. This link could be traced back from archives to check his scores, however, current points on his profile may not reflect what the point were before olympics since, WKF follows a yearly depletion mechanism of points. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 16:43, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

@Mayukhsenkar I do not see a sentence in the Hindustan Times article that "states about his selection into the Olympics". Thank you for correcting me on when the Olympic Event occurred. I don't understand why the draft would state "Known to have represented India at the Tokyo 2020 Olympics" if he only attended an Olympic Karate Event in 2021. GoingBatty (talk) 18:00, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

The HT article speaks about his previous achievements marking him as a qualifiable athlete as per qualification guidelines.

The Olympic Event comes under the aegis of Tokyo Olympiad which ocurred on 2021. Hence, the athletes representation was passed by the NOC, that means that the athlete was not attending as "Bhaskar Sen" but "Bhaskar Sen(India)" as given in Olympic Organization Rules of 2021 released by LOC. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 20:20, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

@Mayukhsenkar While the HT article speaks about his previous achievements, it does not explicitly state that those achievements mark him as a qualifiable athlete as per qualification guidelines. Your draft should summarize what the published reliable sources state, without you adding any personal knowledge. GoingBatty (talk) 22:26, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

The reliable sources which are mentioned in the draft are primary, i.e. they are primarily obtained from the athlete and the others paragraphs contain information on his qualification trail, which details the stages and route. The published reliable sources state so in full. None of the statements are personal remarks but statements from sources and as released from Olympic bodies. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 08:20, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

@Mayukhsenkar If the sources say that he meets the qualifications for being selected to the Olympics, but do not explicitly say that he was selected, then you are making an inference, which is wp:Synthesis and the source doesn't support the statement. David10244 (talk) 12:59, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

@Mayukhsenkar Also, don't miss Cullen328's important note: "He did not compete in the Olympics. Olympic Athletes 365 is a developmental program that includes a wide range of athletes, not just Olympic competitors." Olympic development events are not the Olympics. David10244 (talk) 13:06, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

The NOC approved Karate India's participation in the Olympics as can be seen in the present sources, also please refer to the Sportdata point system which show he gained points which make him qualify, Olympic Pre-event is under Tokyo 2020 LOC, which means he did participate, the same happened for all other "additional sports" like sport climbing, baseball etc.

I think the reviewers and Teahouse counter-argue-ers are missing the Point. Olympic 365 did not organize the event for which he has been made noteworthy. The event itself is Olympic 2020. Olympic 365 being any program IS a program under the IOC, where mentorship is only for Olympians in WOA. Please consider. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 15:56, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

@Mayukhsenkar, you have not produced any reliable sources which refer to the subject as an Olympic athlete. You have not even produced sources which directly state that he participated in Olympic-affiliated events. It seems that you are relying on your own original research into primary sources. That is not allowed here on Wikipedia, and will only result in your draft continuing to be declined. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 16:17, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

The original draft does contain reference to the Olympic Athlete, I provide resources and sources here which "corroborate" the fact. The same corroboration is present for other noteworthy athlete who are approved on Wiki. The "original research" was only to corroborate and support the claim. The original research is not "emailing the IOC for a comment on his participation". All sources are secondary in nature. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 18:15, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

@Mayukhsenkar, please read WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS - the existence of other poorly-sourced articles does not justify including more poorly-sourced articles. So far, you have provided (here) no sources which corroborate your claims. Do you have other sources you haven't presented here yet? 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:28, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

I think Olympic qualification happening thru sportdata can not be categorized as poor. Citing qualification rules is not poor, athlete belonging to WOA is not poor, NOC's list for Tokyo 2020 is not poor. The article is not poorly sourced as defined by WP: VERIFICATION, YKA as a source has been listed for other athletes, SK is a regularly cited source, HT is a national daily. WKF is the world body. The said source already sets the claim. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 18:36, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

@Mayukhsenkar, none of those will be useful here. You must provide a reliable source which directly states that the subject represented India at the 2020 Tokyo Olympics. Not a combination or analysis of other sources which implies it. Do you have such a source? 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:44, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Two of the Sources in the article state explicitly he represented India. The Counter-argument here was regarding performance measure, which has been clarified, then the question was regarding sources for significant coverage, which has been clarified again.

'Implying' would be the act of deduction. Which is primary according to WP: Citation.

I have simply corroborated, thru media and Sportdata, which are all secondary. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 18:49, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

@Mayukhsenkar, please give us, here, the two sources which state that he represented India at the 2020 Tokyo Olympics. I assume they are not the same as the sources already posted above. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:55, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

The two sources are the ones which have been given in the article in question. https://www.youthkiawaaz.com/2021/08/bhaskar-becomes-the-first-indian-to-attend-the-olympic-karate-event/, https://readscoops.com/sports/bhaskar-sen-karate-olympic-hero/. The sources already cited in this Trail were corroboration of his qualification and endorsement from the NOC. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 09:17, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. I'll ping @Cullen328 and @GoingBatty, in case they want to review these added sources (I can't access them myself). 199.208.172.35 (talk) 15:16, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

@Mayukhsenkar We're going in circles. The YKA and Read Scoops mention his background and other achievements, but do not support the claim in the draft that he is "Known to have represented India at the Tokyo 2020 Olympics". GoingBatty (talk) 15:41, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

@Mayukhsenkar I agree with @GoingBatty that the Readscoops article does not say that he was a competitor in the Olympic games. It implies that he is close. The article has a bit of a rah-rah tone. I didn't read the other article.

Please quote the phrase from Readscoops that confirms that he was an Olympic competitor. David10244 (talk) 08:25, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

@199.208.172.35 Thank you for making your position clear. Reviewers with the ability to understand and comprehend are welcome. @GoingBatty I think we are not in circles, the terms of reference and context keeps changing here, your previous contention was regarding his performance which I clarified, regarding the Operation of an Olympic Karate Event. The article mentions 1. the place where the Olympic Event Occurred 2. The event which he participated. 3. How he got to represent India.

@David10244 The Readscoops article title and the intro itself contains the lines that he participated in Olympics. I think you are mixing up the sources, I encourage you to diligently "read", by which I mean please provide the paragraph(s) in the news pieces you allege to be out of context. Also, for simplicity please clarify what does "rah-rah" mean, since it is not mentioned as per WP: Citation and looks as a frivolous claim by a Teahouse reviewer.

For the record as requested by @David10244 I can state the sentence "You don’t usually think of karate and that’s where we want to introduce you to someone called Bhaskar Sen, who made the country proud by becoming the only Indian athlete to attend the Olympic Karate Event in Nippon Budokan." Mayukhsenkar (talk) 09:39, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Mayukhsenkar, you have been editing Wikipedia for about a week. If multiple editors with much longer experience tell you the sources are insufficient, chances are they are right. When you say stuff like "all sources are secondary in nature", it shows a lack of understanding of Wikipedia policies. It is entirely normal, but a bit of humility would not hurt.

In the present case, Becoming the only Indian athlete to attend the Olympic Karate Event in Nippon Budokan is not a sufficient source for is representing India. There is a significant difference between "he’s the only Indian attending" and "he was selected by official instances to represent India".

For an extreme example of this, Ian Nepomniachtchi (a chess grandmaster who will be playing in this year’s chess world championship match) is a Russian national. He will be playing under the world chess federation’s flag, because Russia is under sanctions. Presumably lots of Russians feel that he represents them, lots of non-Russians feel he represents Russia, and the Russian chess federation would give its OK for him to play under the Russian flag; yet you will not find a source that states that Ian "represents Russia", because officially, he does not. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 10:17, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

@Tigraan Thank you for replying. I think if you track my posts on this page, I have maintained a very courteous outlook to the whole counter-arguments. I doubt that editing many articles makes one gain extraordinary talent in a specific field having different niches and mechanisms. As has been pointed out several times in this thread. I respect the fact that reviewers here have immense experience, however, ignorance on some facts says contrary to that.

I understand the example and your point. The article states "attend" which is the frequently used word in the Karate discipline of Kata, where individual performances are evaluated. If I understand your point, represent( which is the commonly used word for NOC qualified athletes for a certain sport event ) would mean certain qualifications and endorsements by the NOC. Ian's sport is not an Olympic Sport so it is outside the purview and scope of discussion. Earlier in this thread I have shown proof of his qualification and his endorsement thru the NOC which is the legal representative of IOC in the athlete's country. Please refer to above thread where I clarified his Participation as Bhaskar Sen(India) and not Bhaskar Sen. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 15:29, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

India didn't compete in Karate at all in the 2020 Olympics. It didn't happen, so there is simply no way you are going to find a reliable source that makes this person an Olympian. And he's not going to have another opportunity next year, because the Karate events were dropped from the 2024 Olympics. You're going to have to establish notability some other way. MrOllie (talk) 15:38, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

A Karate Event consists of various events. Attending an Olympic Event does constitute participation. Especially if the athlete has been qualified and the NOC has endorsed, this is as per the LOC Organization Rules. If he would be able to participate in the next Olympics or the next-to-next is out of the purview of this discussion. The notability of the athlete apart from the Olympic Aspect can be established thru his wins at World Championships ( rank 6) which has been corroborated sufficiently in the article. His various previous achievement in retrospect are unprecedented by any other Indian, known in the public domain. This is in the premise of WP: Notability and WP : Sports.

On the notion of him being an Olympian, Please read the thread diligently. Olympic 365 Mentorship is only given to Olympians under WOA, hence his address as an Olympian is well established. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 09:32, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

No, you are mistaken. Athlete 365 memberships and/or mentorships are not limited to Olympians. MrOllie (talk) 14:06, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Please read the Statues of WOA, it is by virtue of that membership he was granted mentorship. I think there is clear definition difference between "membership" which you state and the "mentorship". A tertiary skim-through of the athlete365 home page does not warrant a thorough knowledge of the Olympic, NOC and WOA mechanism. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 21:31, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

No. He didn't complete in the olympics. The article also claims he ranked in the 2009 World Karate Championships - but there is no such event. That tournament is held every other years - in 2008 and 2010. It appears the entire article is a hoax. MrOllie (talk) 21:51, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Competing in Olympics is thru a verified and well maintained process for which sportdata reference has been given, which is further the core point system used for qualification. The 2009 World Cup is an official event by the WKF. Sudden adrenaline rush to give a shoddy search on Google and random hyperbole here regarding a niche event undermines the credibility of a reviewer and a counter-argue-er on this forum. Suggest you to be diligent on the subject accordingly. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 22:01, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

There was no 2009 World Championship. There was a Cadet World Championship in 2009 - the junior league for the teens. The article have as you have written it is simply incorrect - at best you are grossly mistaken. But given your resistence to correction I now think it is likely you are deliberately exaggerating this athlete's accomplishments. MrOllie (talk) 22:05, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Please check the reply on the separate thread, ignorance of Sportdata ranking points and non-diligence of Olympic guidelines and qualification criterion shall not be appreciated and shall not be entertained.

The Olympic event includes age group of 16 and above where the sportdata points were transferred from the cadet group. The sportdata link clearly shows his participation. The Sportdata points further sum up to his qualification score which was then endorsed by the NOC. The "resistance" here is not against the correction but due to shoddy overviewing of facts which are due to a non-diligent understanding from a reviewer. Athletes accomplishments are thoroughly vetted by national bodies and world bodies, any exaggeration is baseless as the article is heavily cited by relevant and thorough sources. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 22:14, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

None of that matters - he didn't participate in the events the article claims he did. Maybe he participated in other events organized by the same bodies, but that is not at all the same thing. - MrOllie (talk) 23:15, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

This brings to question your previous claims and hyphenation seen. Which in turns shows how shallow a diligence of a reviewer can be. The "events" has not been defined by you. Nor the Other "events" has been defined by you. Contention without basis renders it infructuous.

He did participate in the events the article states and so has been aptly and justly corroborated according to the relevant guidelines. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 23:33, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

The reviewer was 100% right. This article is full of false claims and unreliable sourcing. If it somehow ends up in the mainspace anyway, I am certain that it would be deleted. You should consider expending your efforts on fixing the article's flaws rather than arguing with the people who are pointing them out. MrOllie (talk) 18:10, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

When the reviewer points to baseless interpretation of superflous research, the edit is bound to be reverted. The article flaws have been fixed and the sources have been checked to the full extent. The "other people" have expressed their views and they have been answered accordingly. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 18:13, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

So far, I count 5 people answering you in this thread (including me) plus one reviewer at the draft. Of those 6 people, 100% disagree with you.

After such a long thread, whether you are right or not is irrelevant. What is relevant is that those are the sort of people you need to convince if you want your draft to be published. If it is impossible because they are too daft, there is no point wasting your time, is there? Just leave them altogether and go do something more productive, whether on-wiki (editing another article) or off-wiki (read a book, take a walk, etc.).

Of course, if you have a reason to believe that those 6 people are somehow more stupid or biased against you than the general population of active Wikipedia editors, you might have other options (but make sure to read WP:BOOMERANG before choosing them). Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 10:53, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

I think the "count" or the "number" of people is not the bone of the contention here. This thread is not about my editorial abilities or ex-wiki errands. The reviewer of the draft has been repeatedly unresponsive which goes against the Wikipedia:Active editing and Wikipedia: Golden Rules.

I would like to rephrase your comment about irrelevancy of my facts being right, the facts which are reported here are the bone of contention. The crux is not about who is convinced or not, for each one may have their own reasons of "interpretation" but it does not reflect the factual scenario. I am sure that a forum like Wikipedia does not support/is not a place of emotional whataboutery.

I am having trouble understanding the "they" you use in your comment, since wikipedia is certainly not governed by the 6 persons you counted. On that note, what I do off-wiki is and should not be a matter of anyone's concern but me. I think you would appreciate that I never mentioned the 6 persons to be "stupid" like you perceived, nor did I "presume" an in-built bias against me.

WP:Boomerang talks of " reporting" which I have not done till now, nor did I have an inkling towards it. Instead, there has been highly hyperbolic and ballistic driven replies and threats of supposed "violation of WP policies" by one of the persons among the group. I would like to direct your suggestion of WP:Boomerang towards them. In collaborative efforts always, Regards. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 08:00, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

OK, let me try again.

You want certain things to happen on Wikipedia: that your draft be accepted, that it describes as a fact that Bhaskar Sen represented India in a given event, etc. These things will be achieved only if some other people take certain actions, or refrain from blocking your actions. (It is impossible to know who "these people" are in advance: decisions about individual pages are usually taken by a very small number of editors, fewer than ten, and there is no central committee exercising strong control.)

Therefore, you need to convince these people. If you don’t, the things you want will not happen. It may be contrary to Wikipedia’s own guidelines, it might be unfair in a sense of immanent justice, but such considerations will not change what the Wikipedia page will say to readers.

This is post #48 of that thread if I counted right. Before you type post #49, please make sure that it has a chance to work where posts #1 through #47 did not.

I do not intend to reply any further (which, contrary to your apparent belief, is entirely allowed either from me or from article reviewers - see WP:VOLUNTEER, which is a well-respected essay and not a historical page). Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 12:37, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Moving on from draft

Hi, We have drafted our page, how do we move it on to get it peer reviewed? I can see lots of third part companies offering to get it approved but would prefer to drive this ourselves. Phil HANTSAR (talk) 18:16, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Hampshire Search and Rescue - 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:18, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

@Phil HANTSAR: Hello Phil! First, I must ask, who is "we" referring to? Wikipedia accounts cannot be shared by multiple people. Second, I suggest you ignore those third party companies as they are all scams. Third, if this is about Draft:Hampshire Search and Rescue you do not have an AFC template on the page and also have no submitted it which I have done for you. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 18:21, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, just a clarification here, Did the user specifically ask for an AFC process? Draft articles do not need to go through AFC but can be uploaded directly on to the website. It seems presumptuous, not to mention misleading to take control of a user draft and submit it to AFC, without letting the user in question know the options available.Gumlau (talk) 09:30, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you Blaze. I could not see a button or a link to submit it so thank you for doing that for me. The us I refer to is the charity, we are not sharing an account. What is an AFC template ?, can you send me a link so I can read up about it please? Phil HANTSAR (talk) 18:26, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

The afc template is the big yellow-ish banner now at the top of the draft, Blaze Wolf added that. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:29, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Apologies, I tend to forget that newcomers may not know some of the more technical stuff here on Wikipedia. The AFC template I'm referring to is part of the Articles for Creation process which allows users to create and submit drafts in draft space to be reviewed and either accepted or declined by experienced editors. Specifically the template is {{AFC submission}}. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 18:30, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

At the risk of piling on, Phil HANTSAR: do you understand the purpose of references? You write certain qualifying members were honoured to be awarded the Queen's Platinum Jubilee Medal in 2022, the medals being presented at a ceremony at the police training college at Netley in July 2022 by the Hon. Hugo Cubitt DL, with one citation that shows that there is such a thing as the Queen's Platinum Jubilee Medal, and the other that shows that according to thepeerage.com, Cubitt exists. Meither of these does anything at all to support the claim. (In addition, thepeerage.com appears on the list of self-published, and so unreliable, sources at WP:RSP#Self-published peerage websites) The point of a citation is so that a reader in Birmingham next week, or Buffalo next month, or Buenos Aires next year can, in principle check that what the article says is so. ColinFine (talk) 23:04, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Right, @Phil HANTSAR, for the phrase "presented at a ceremony at the police training college at Netley in July 2022 by the Hon. Hugo Cubitt DL" you just need to specify where you got that information about the medal being presented. I'm sure you didn't make it up! Cheers. David10244 (talk) 13:42, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi David,

I was there and photos were taken but our press release was not taken up by the local media.

Thanks for your help Phil HANTSAR (talk) 22:19, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

@Phil HANTSAR Since the information about the medal and ceremony was not published by a reliable source that can be cited (so that other readers could verify the information if they wanted to), it cannot be used in the draft. Press releases, even when they do get published, also do not make good sources, since they are almost never independent of the subject of the article. The draft has many, many other assertions that are not backed up with inline citations. David10244 (talk) 08:39, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

@Phil HANTSAR See WP:TUTORIAL on how to add references correctly, and WP:N on what sources are required for an article to be accepted. However, afaict you have avoided WP:COPYPASTE problems, plus-points for that. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:27, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Recommended reading: Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:47, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Content review - rejected updates

Hello everyone, I'm Lucie, and I work for a company with a Wikipedia page. Unfortunately, most facts and figures are outdated (since 2016). I submitted new content today, and it got rejected. Can someone help me review it and tell me what should be changed? Thank you. LucieG-PR (talk) 14:54, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Lucie, and welcome to the Teahouse. Thank you for making the declaration of your conflict of interest; however, I'm afraid that is not enough. You are a paid editor, and you must declare that - see that link.

Then please read PSCOI. In short you should not edit Beretta Holding at all, but should instead make edit requests on its talk page. It is helpful to make them as precise as possible, and to include sources for any information you want to introduce. ColinFine (talk) 15:18, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Looking over the edits you made it is clear that you, like most people, have a fundamental misunderstanding of what Wikipedia is. Wikipedia is what reliable sources say about a company, not what the company wants to say. You edited that article to read like an advertisement. Wikipedia is supposed to be neutral. Esolo5002 (talk) 20:31, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

@LucieG-PR It looks like your edits were reverted. I removed a bit more puffery after that. It doesn't read too badly now, but Lucie, please follow ColinFine's advice and propose updates to the article. An editor will consider each of your proposed changes, check the references you supply, and make the edits if appropriate. Be sure to follow the steps at the link Colin gave. It's pretty straightforward.

We often tell editors that this is not "your company's Wikipedia page"; instead, it is Wikipedia's article about a company -- and of course you might have an affiliation with that company.

If you enter the edit requests, and they are backed up with sources, the changes you seek will probably be made. David10244 (talk) 07:54, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi David,

Thanks a lot for your positive and kind answer! LucieG-PR (talk) 06:14, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

'like most people'... LucieG-PR (talk) 06:15, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Enforcing Community Guidelines, Terms of Use

It has always been so impressive to see how well the larger community and/or admins moderate the content which violates the community guidelines. I assume that process is quite time consuming for the various people involved, between the vast uploads, pages, complexities in determining if content is violative, and across the many languages. There are various software solutions which help make that effort more efficient. I was wondering if this platform has any automation to this problem set, or if it is done manually by admins and the general user populace? Max, Not Bill (talk) 00:37, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

@Max, Not Bill: Hello Max! The answer is sort of. For vandalism we have User:ClueBot NG which works pretty good for extremely obvious vandalism. I know there are some other bots that handle images, but there's no bots that handle images. Generally things are not automated here because of the varying amount of stuff that can be vandalism and since there are actual humans here, the risk of a false positive is high. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 00:45, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Hey thanks for the response Blaze, very interesting. Do the bots also assist in flagging the harmful content of repeat offenders? I read that either the Wikimedia Community of admin can block or ban user accounts. How do you keep track of those persons? Max, Not Bill (talk) 01:13, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

@Max, Not Bill: No problem. Usually no they don't, although I wouldn't be surprised if that's partially how ClueBot NG functions. The answer to "How do you keep track of those persons?" is it depends. If they're an LTA (Long term abuse) then we used to create LTA pages on them so users would have information on how they function and what their edits might look like. IF they've been blocked and have created alt accounts to get around their block hen those are usually kept track of at Sockpuppet investigations pages. There are some other processes in which we keep track on users who have been blocked/banned (mainly the Arbitration committee), however most of the time after a user is blocked they either request an unblock or never return so there's usually no need to keep track of them. If a user has been blocked previously their blocks are recorded in their block log. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 01:19, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Hey Blaze, thanks for your candid responses. Do you think the admin community would benefit from some form of platform to manage the efforts you mentioned? Some kind of automated workflow system to become more efficient? And Cheers to your retirement (whenever that is in the near future)!!!! Max, Not Bill (talk) 15:24, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

@Max, Not Bill: Hello again Max. I honestly don't think so due to the intricacies of the project and the varying situations in which someone might be blocked. I don't think it would be wise to trust an automated system to block vandals for vandalism because if there's a false positive then it creates a lot of work and can potentially hurt the project by making people scared to edit. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 16:09, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

@Blaze Wolf The answer is always sort of, right? David10244 (talk) 07:59, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

@David10244: Mostly yes. There are some things that are for sure, but automation isn't one of them. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 13:38, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

• @Blaze Wolf: retirement? —usernamekiran (talk) 21:29, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

  @Usernamekiran: What about it? ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 21:35, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Difference

What's the difference between Wikipedia:Sandbox and Draft:Sandbox? Gooze1989 (talk) 17:31, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Gooze1989. There is no real difference. They are both places for short term testing purposes. Both are cleared out regularly by bots and human editors. Neither are intended for long term work. Cullen328 (talk) 18:11, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

@Cullen328 The Draft:Sandbox says this: "To edit this sandbox, you can either edit the source code ("Edit source" tab above) or use VisualEditor ("Edit" tab above)."

But it's not true. There is no "Edit" tab above. Do you think it's worth getting the text clarified? If so, where would I post this? Thanks. David10244 (talk) 07:06, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

David10244, I rarely use the VisualEditor, so I cannot provide advice about its numerous problems. My personal philosophy is that the Wikimedia Foundation should not roll out any new software versions unless they are as fully functional as the "source code" desktop site. But the WMF keeps cranking out less functional software, presumably to keep coders employed who have failed to meet their goals after years and years of effort. It is 2023 and there is still not a fully functional WYSIWIG interface that supports productive, collaborative editing. Very sad but who can stop a spending juggernaut with hundreds of millions of dollars in the bank? Cullen328 (talk) 07:36, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@Cullen328 I agree with your statement about having a fully functional WISYWIG editor. Other sites can do this, and it's not a new, unsolved problem. And there's no lack of money, except it's mostly being socked away. After lurking here and reading "backstage" stuff at en:wp for a couple of years, it's clear from the software development debates that the volunteer community should control which things are worked on by the WMF developers, rather than supplying a "wish list". David10244 (talk) 11:55, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

@Cullen328 And ny earlier point was that the instructions given are incorrect -- there is no "edit" tab for anyone who has not customized their sk8n. David10244 (talk) 12:00, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

I'm working on translating some articles in Portuguese. Wikipedia says: "This tool is limited to extended confirmed editors"

The question is: How can I become a extended confirmed editor? Goliv04053 (talk) 20:22, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

@Goliv04053: Welcome to the Teahouse. To become an extended confirmed editor, you need to have made at least 500 edits and an account that is at least 30 days old. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:24, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Goliv04053. If you are fluent in both English and Portuguese, you can translate articles without using a tool. Please read WP:TRANSLATE and WP:TRANSLATEUS. Attribution is a legal requirement. Cullen328 (talk) 21:34, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

I am fluent in Portuguese and English but use the translation platform as an aid. On the platform I can look at both articles at the same time, work and adapt the translation. Furthermore, the platform helps me translate faster by copying the complete original text and I make adjustments and the translations myself or if I have problems understanding a word or something I use a translator and correct the translation if it sounds and look strange or bad. Goliv04053 (talk) 21:42, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

@Goliv04053 In my opinion, it's unfortunate that you can't use the tool. I think the restriction is there to ensure that translators have a good amount of experience. It sounds like you know what you are doing.

I thought I read somewhere that EC can be granted in certain cases, before 500 edits. To the other hosts, is that true, and would it be a good idea? David10244 (talk) 07:11, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@Goliv04053: Assuming you want to translate articles from Portuguese into English, you might request an early grant of ECP via Wikipedia:Requests_for_permissions#Extended_confirmed. Given that you have a clearly-articulated need and a reasonable amount of experience on pt-wp, I think you have a good chance to get it. At the very least, that would not be a frivolous request. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 11:08, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for that info, @Tigraan. I hope @Goliv04053 can be approved. It might help to refer to this discussion, in your request. David10244 (talk) 12:04, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

I sent a request today. Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Extended confirmed Goliv04053 (talk) 14:31, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Horse Extinction in north America

I would like to reference this article on the BBC website on 28/01/2023 this link, https://www.bbc.com/travel/article/20230126-the-return-of-the-spirit-horse-to-canada On the article about the Horse extintion in wikipedia the paragraph on Taxonomy and evolution it states as follows "By about 15,000 years ago, Equus ferus was a widespread holarctic species. Horse bones from this time period, the late Pleistocene, are found in Europe, Eurasia, Beringia, and North America. Yet between 10,000 and 7,600 years ago, the horse became extinct in North America and rare elsewhere. The reasons for this extinction are not fully known, but one theory notes that extinction in North America paralleled human arrival. Another theory points to climate change, noting that approximately 12,500 years ago, the grasses characteristic of a steppe ecosystem gave way to shrub tundra, which was covered with unpalatable plants" The article on BBC refutes this theory by this in the article as follows:The Spanish did bring horses to what is now Mexico in 1519, but research by Dr Yvette Running Horse Collin cites written Spanish accounts that place herds in what is now Georgia and the Carolinas in 1521. Proof, she argues, that horses were here before the Europeans: as Collin notes, it would have been impossible for those Spanish horses to have multiplied and travelled so far in just two years. When it comes to the Ojibwe spirit horse, according to the Ojibwe Horse Society, DNA testing shows they are a separate breed from the horses introduced to North America by Europeans. Please correct or confirm if this is wrong or other as both can't be correct. 123.243.15.64 (talk) 03:38, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

We have no article on horse extinction, but we have a section on it in Horses in the United States. It would be best to start a discussion at Talk:Horses in the United States, not here. As for referencing it, be bold and go ahead. If you need help citing sources, see WP:CITE or look at other examples of citations in the article you want to edit. ~Anachronist (talk) 04:17, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

@Anachronist pure fringe, see Talk:Anachronisms in the Book of Mormon#Horses in pre-Columbian]]. I can't find the DNA test that was supposed to have been done and I spent a lot of time on it. Now at WP:FTN. Doug Weller talk 13:57, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

This Article is Authantic please Publish it.

Draft:Anurag dixit Shiwgndf (talk) 10:16, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Shiwgndf Hello. I've added the submission information to allow it to be submitted. You've never edited that draft, at least from your account; what is the source of your interest in it? 331dot (talk) 10:18, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Sir this all information's are Collected from better sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shiwgndf (talk • contribs) 10:21, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

See WP:TUTORIAL on how to add references correctly. And WP:N on what kind of sources that are necessary for an article to "stick". Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:00, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

The creator of Draft:Anurag dixit is globally locked. My understanding is that therefore this draft should be Speedy deleted. Even if not for that reason, there are no valid formatted references, and some of what is presented to establish notability - for example, minor awards - is not sufficient. David notMD (talk) 13:58, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

The OP's account was created 2023-01-28 10:06, and these Teahouse edits are their only contributions.

@David notMD, The page creator appears to be Akhilkumarwiki, who last edited 2022-11-27. I don't see anything in that user's block log -- do globally locked accounts not show up there? And am I allowed to state the obvious suspicion about these accounts? David10244 (talk) 07:34, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

The block notice is visible at User:Akhilkumarwiki's Contributions (global account details) rather than User or Talk page, and appears to be due to >30 edits at Simple Wikipedia. David notMD (talk) 09:06, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Ah, I see, thanks. David10244 (talk) 12:10, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

R U Alive ? Have U had a perfect Past ?

Ref:https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Village_pump#January_28 How much of your 'bad' past would u like to have plastered all over the web for the world to see ? How 'good' or 'bad' do we want Wikipedia to be? Please discuss at Village_pump. 60.240.196.168 (talk) 11:38, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

I dont understand? - From Dents (talk) 13:15, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean you need to fix it as the way you want it. - From Dents (talk) 13:19, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Are you Paul Hogan? doktorb _words^deeds 14:16, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

As one of Britain's greatest philosophers once said, "You can't always get what you want". David10244 (talk) 07:37, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

IP 60.240.196.168 is edit warring at Paul Hogan concerning whether a subsection on tax problems should be in the article or not. A discussion is taking place at the Talk page of the article, which is the only appropriate place. David notMD (talk) 14:09, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Partial italics in article title

How are italics achieved for one word in an article's title (without italicising the entire title) as is done in the Nassau-class battleship article? Thanks – Olympian ^loquere 13:12, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi Olympian. {{DISPLAYTITLE:''Nassau''-class battleship}}. It's often done via a template. {{italic title|string=Nassau}} is a general template for it. Some ship templates have code to analyze the page name and automatically try to guess which part to italicize. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:34, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, @PrimeHunter! – Olympian ^loquere 20:41, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter To be clear, does WP:MOS support italicising transliterated/romanised terms in an article title? For example, the Baku uezd (whose term uezd is romanised from Russian: уезд). Thanks. – Olympian ^loquere 04:38, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@Olympian: I'm not sure how to treat uezd but WP:ITALICTITLE says: "foreign phrases are italicized both in ordinary text and in article titles". PrimeHunter (talk) 05:07, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Can't save my edits to an article

Hi,

I have made a few edits to an article, but need to step away, and come back to editing later on. I can't however, save my changes. When I click on "Publish Changes", I see the "Save your changes" option, but I can't click it.

Please help.

Many thanks. Orenbn (talk) 19:54, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Orenbn, and welcome to the Sandbox. It is hard to know what to say when you won't tell us which article! ColinFine (talk) 22:03, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi ColinFine, thank you for your reply and question. I was editing this article - Business route, when I encountered the issue. In the meanwhile, I abandoned my edits and started again, completed editing the article, and published the changes. However, the question still remains as to how I can save changes I have made prior to actually publishing my changes, so I can leave and then come back to complete my editing work.... Orenbn (talk) 22:23, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Orenbn If you want to work on an edit that you think will take some time, you could write it out in your sandbox and then "Publish changes" will just save it to your sandbox. Then when you have finished the edit you can copy and paste it into the article. There is no other way AFAIK to save an edit in progress. 331dot (talk) 22:32, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Understood. Thanks very much. Orenbn (talk) 07:04, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

But if you go down the sandbox route as suggested by 331dot, you ought to check whether other edits have been made to the article during your time away from it. - David Biddulph (talk) 20:39, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Why was my edit reverted?

I made an edit to the movie Z (2019) where instead of the one line movie "plot", I wrote out the entire plot to the movie. However, it was reverted as not being "constructive" when literally adding the ENTIRE plot is constructive. Many other movies have the entire plot. I'm confused. Iamglory (talk) 22:59, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

@Philipnelson99: Could you please answer this question? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 23:11, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Iamglory, and welcome to the Teahouse. It can be discouraging when that happens. But it's the way Wikipedia works: it's edited by thousands of editors, each with their own view on what an article should say, and sometimes different understandings of what Wikipedia's policies mean.

So, when your edit gets reverted, this is not "Wikipedia" saying your edit is unconstructive: it's one particular editor, in this case Philipnelson99, who didn't think your edit was helpful. The thing to do now is to engage in a discussion with him: maybe you'll persuade him your edit was good, maybe he'll persuade you that it wasn't helpful, and maybe you'll come to a compromise. So, start a discussion on the article's talk page, maybe you won't be able to agree, and then there are ways to go further and involve other people. See WP:BRD for more about how this works. ColinFine (talk) 23:14, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Iamglory. According to MOS:PLOT, a plot summary should be "succinct" and no more than 700 words. Your summary is way too long and way too detailed. Cullen328 (talk) 23:20, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks @Cullen328, I've answered the editor's question below with the same. Philipnelson99 (talk) 23:23, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Yes, @Iamglory, I reverted it as nonconstructive. MOS:PLOT says plot summary length should be written relative to the size of the other section of the article. You added a plot section that was nearly 7 times more content than what was in the article to begin with, that's why I reverted it as nonconstructive. I hope that helps. Philipnelson99 (talk) 23:23, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

To be more specific, per WP:FILMPLOT, film plot summaries should be between 400 and 700 words - so the previous plot of 12 words was far too short, but equally, your summary of 4275 words was far too long - we need a happy medium - Arjayay (talk) 23:32, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

This makes sense. Now I understand. Thanks guys! Iamglory (talk) 20:31, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Draft: zr saimun

write an article about living person named zr saimun unfortunately the submission was declined. 2A00:23C5:9198:A901:D1D1:6DCE:CB36:66B2 (talk) 23:36, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

You copied the article Amal Clooney and changed it slightly. The references link to the Clooney page. There is no evidence in the article that Z R Saimun even exists. This appears to be a hoax article. If such a person is real, erase everything there, read Help:Your first article and find references, then start again. StarryGrandma (talk) 00:30, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

For the love of all things Wikipedia will someone please Speedy delete Draft:ZR Saimun. David notMD (talk) 02:35, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

David notMD, I have made this fervent wish of yours come true. (For those who might be wondering what this could be about, here's a representative sample: Amal has three siblings—one sister, Tala, and two half-brothers, Samer and Ziad, from her father's first marriage.This is a great lesson Europe has to offer…That we have today turned towards India's hoary past and have set our selves to glean rich resources from it is unquestionably the outcome of the new educative influence of Europe.) This is the third deletion of a concoction titled Draft:ZR Saimun; and if the first and second had been more recent I'd have salted the thing. Oh, and David notMD, I infer that you're not an admin. Time for you to fix that. -- Hoary (talk) 11:54, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Not, and no desire to be. Here at Teahouse I am more akin to that dog that ranges ahead of the hunters with shotguns, then freezes to a still point to indicate birds on the ground, ready to be flushed into the air. David notMD (talk) 15:25, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Great visual. David10244 (talk) 12:16, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Lacks independent sourcing. - Need help!

Hi there,

Today I submitted my first article. The article was focused on my business. I did tons of research and thought I did everything correctly but within an hour I received notice article my was reviewed and not accepted. The reviewer said this:

"Lacks independent sourcing."

All of my sources are independent so hoping I can get some guidance and help from this group! Thank you so much. Djconn (talk) 02:06, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Nope. Most of the content is what the company says about itself ("The initial vision for the company..."). All of that has to be removed. The company fails WP:NCORP. The three refs establish that the company exists and that it has a registered trademark, and describes a hoe. None of that has significant content ABOUT the company, published by people with no connection to the company. David notMD (talk) 02:43, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Given it is your business, your connection must be declared on your User page. David notMD (talk) 04:15, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Okay I think I did it right Djconn (talk) 02:20, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

I've removed the unnecessary copy as suggested. Djconn (talk) 02:21, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

@Djconn "Independent sources" in the Wikipedia sense are defined here. David10244 (talk) 07:55, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Great thanks. I add some additional independent sources. Djconn (talk) 02:20, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Contents/A-Z index

Is Wikipedia the only one that is Contents/A-Z index? What about other sister projects? See example below. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Contents/A%E2%80%93Z_index Ffyyff (talk) 02:41, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Ffyff. I have been editing Wikipedia actively for almost 14 years and had never heard of that page until now. When I look at the talk page, there has been no serious discussion in a dozen years. I have no idea whether or how this page is maintained, but it looks to me like an irrelevant relic of Wikipedia's early years. I have no idea if any sister projects have similar pages, but the Teahouse is to discuss editing of the English Wikipedia only. Cullen328 (talk) 02:58, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@Ffyyff: The alphabetic Special:AllPages is made and maintained completely automatically by the MediaWiki software which powers Wikipedia and our sister projects. The feature allows links like Special:AllPages/Xk to show pages starting at "Xk". Redirects are automatically shown in italics. The page Wikipedia:Contents/A–Z index is made by editors but the only thing the big box there does is to make such links to the already existing AllPages feature. Any wiki could easily make such an index page if they wanted. Wikipedia:Contents/A–Z index (Q3228080) shows three non-Wikipedia sister projects with a corresponding page but not in English. The underlying feature like wiktionary:Special:AllPages still exists whether or not the local editors have made an index to it. PrimeHunter (talk) 07:10, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

copyright

Since coming to WP years ago, copyright has been driven home with no exemptions when it comes to policy, authorship, public domain dates, etc. Can someone please explain how a full movie made in 1957 Plan 9 from Outer Space be uploaded here at WP and not be in violation of copyright? Thanks. Maineartists (talk) 03:19, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@Maineartists The movie is in the public domain because it was published between 1928 and 1977 without a copyright notice, hence why the movie was able to be uploaded in full. LilianaUwU ^{(talk / contributions)} 03:28, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@Maineartists: More information is available at WP:PD and there's this helpful chart: File:PD-US_table.svg. Also, there are some exemptions. See WP:NFCC for when Wikipedia allows use of copyright material. RudolfRed (talk) 03:33, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

I love that movie. I can't believe it didn't win any Academy Awards! David10244 (talk) 07:59, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@LilianaUwU. Really? Please provide sources to back this claim. This film has long been debated as to who owns the copyright to this film. According to IMDB "The film's actual copyright is 1957. It previewed as "Grave Robbers from Outer Space" at the Carlton Theater in Los Angeles on March 15, 1957." Furthermore, this is the information listed at www.copyright.gov:

• Registration Number: PA-102-338 Title: Plan 9 from outer space / written, produced, directed by Edward D. Wood , Jr. Imprint: [s.l. : A D. C. A. release, 1959] Description: 1 videocassette (V H S) (79 min.) : sd., b & w ; 1/2 in. Note: Title on housing: Plan nine from outer space. Filmed under the title Grave robbers from outer space. Narrated by Criswell. Deposit includes screenplay (1 v.) CAST: Bela Lugosi, Vampira, Lyle Talbot et al.CRED: Director of photography: William C. Thompson; music: Gordon Zahler; film editor: Edward D. Wood, Jr. Claimant: acReynolds Pictures, Inc. Created: 1958 Published: 1May58 Registered: 23Apr81 Author on © Application: Reynolds Pictures, Inc., employer for hire. Miscellaneous: C.O. corres. Special Codes: 4/X/L

Also, "According to the U.S. Copyright Office database, the copyright is live and is owned by Reynolds Pictures." Currently the only online sources that state that this film is PD is Wiki-linked. WP is an encyclopedia, not a cinema. There is no reason, given the uncertainty of this film's copyright to provide the entire film for personal viewing. Maineartists (talk) 05:39, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@Maineartists It looks as though you may be correct. The Wikimedia Commons file says it was sourced from youtube (at this link) but if you try the youtube link now, you'll find that they have removed it owing to a copyright claim. The file needs to be tagged for removal here also. Note, however, that the license note here on Commons gives a long justification for it being public domain. As I'm not a lawyer, I'm not going to make a judgement! Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:40, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@Mike Turnbull I do not believe a good 99% of editors making the decision re: copyright are lawyers here at WP. That being said, the lengthy license note is pure WP:OR and written with conjecture. Sources such as: COPYRIGHT NOTICE From Video-Cellar aren't the most reliable sources for WP. There was a section at the article on copyright in 2015 but was immediately removed per: policy WP:V. See Talk:Plan_9_from_Outer_Space#Copyright status unreliable. The license note took its "justification" verbatim from this section (now removed). I am in agreement that this file needs to be tagged for removal. Maineartists (talk) 14:25, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@Maineartists I found it surprising that anything on Wikipedia would be "removed" and indeed they have not been. There is relevant material at Talk:Plan_9_from_Outer_Space/Archive_2 which also shows that there was a deletion discussion on Commons, which concluded "Keep". That's available c:Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Plan 9 from Outer Space. This makes it much less likely the file will be deleted but you can, of course, make a new proposal at Commons: there's not much point continuing here in this thread. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:46, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Curly quotes in citation title

Hello,

Would you leave quotation marks as curly or convert them to straight quotation marks if the title of the article you are citing has curly quotation marks? I'm thinking you would convert them as per MOS:CURLY, but I'm not sure.

Thanks, Purplemountainman^talk contribs 04:13, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Purplemountainman. I think that you have pretty much answered your own question. As the MOS says "straight" quotation marks, not “curly” ones and Quotation marks and apostrophes in imported material should be changed if necessary. Cullen328 (talk) 06:10, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Citation template

How does one make a template for a particular reference's citation, for example {cite encyclopedia} or {cite eb1922}? – Olympian ^loquere 05:17, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Olympian, take "cite encyclopedia" for example. The template is already made. Read about it in Template:Cite encyclopedia/doc, which explains how to use it. If there's anything in that page that you don't understand, feel free to ask about it here. -- Hoary (talk) 12:00, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@Hoary Sorry, I used a poor example with "{cite encyclopedia}", what I'm trying to do is make a template specific to one commonly appearing source (Kavkazskiy kalendar), so it would appear something like {kavkazskiykalendar|1914|p=123}. Hope that explains it. Thanks, – Olympian ^loquere 12:59, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@Olympian: First, see Help:Template. Then you could go to Template:Cite EB1922, click "Edit source", and copy the wikitext. Then go to Template:Cite Kavkazskiykalendar, paste the text, and tweak it accordingly until it works the way you want. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 19:39, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@GoingBatty Thanks for your help, I made several template citations for pasting into the bibliography section of articles (e.g. template:Kavkazskiykalendar1917. My question is: is it acceptable for all sources to be made into a template so that they can be consistent across Wikipedia, or are template sources generally frowned upon? Thanks! – Olympian ^loquere 04:16, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

@Olympian No, it would not be acceptable for ALL sources to be made into a template - only those that would be frequently used. GoingBatty (talk) 05:09, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Table of contents (desktop version)

Hello all. How do you find the table of contents in whatever article you may be viewing when viewing Wikipedia in Desktop format (instead of mobile)? I don't know where it's at, and it has been a great help in the past to find content in the article easily. Many thanks, 63.248.183.70 (talk) 05:44, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Are you asking about a sudden change to Wikipedia's appearance? It is because the default skin has changed from the Vector legacy (2010) skin to the new Vector (2022) skin. If you would like to change back to the old one, you can, as a registered user, click on the in the top-right corner and choose Preferences. Once there, go to Preferences → Appearance → Skins → Vector legacy (2010).
If you would like to leave feedback, you can do so at Wikipedia talk:Vector 2022. Cullen328 (talk) 06:42, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. The table of contents has migrated to a sidebar on the left once you scroll down enough. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 07:57, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Admin

Hello how do I become a admin? Coco152562 (talk) 06:01, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Coco152562. Spend a couple of years making many thousands of indisputably useful edits. Write at least a few policy compliant and informative new articles, and maintain them. Improve many other articles. Participate in the review of new articles and drafts. Be consistently helpful and useful. Revert vandalism and properly report disruption. Participate in "behind the scenes" parts of the encyclopedia in ways that show you have a solid understanding of Policies and guidelines, and that you are indisputably here to improve the encyclopedia. Cullen328 (talk) 06:26, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

You created an account today, and so far, everyone of your edits has been reverted. I recommend WP:TUTORIAL. David notMD (talk) 09:15, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

What is considered an acceptable edit to become autoconfirmed

Hello All,

My apologies for the newbie question - but I was wondering what level of editing do I need to perform for an edit to be considered one of the 10 towards auto-confirmation. For example, is simply adding a single comma to an article considered a valid edit or is there some form of minimum work that needs to be done?

I ask, because I found myself editing an article yesterday, and I simply did not have time to continue. I did quite a bit, so I'm pretty sure its valid, but it got me wondering...

Many thanks, Orenbn (talk) 07:29, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Orenbn. If an editor's work comes under scrutiny, then the contexts of their edits will be examined. A hypothetical "new" editor who makes ten minor "comma" edits and then immediately plunges into making controversial edits on controversial topics is likely to be seen as trying to "game the system" to qualify to push a specific point of view. Editors are frequently blocked for this pattern of behavior. On the other hand, an editor who edits cautiously at first and with increasing confidence as time goes by, trying as they learn to comply with Wikipedia's norms, will be welcomed with open arms. Cullen328 (talk) 08:09, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Many thanks @Cullen328, I believe I understand. Orenbn (talk) 00:00, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Sometimes an article really needs a comma! David10244 (talk) 12:21, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

-)) Couldn't agree more. Orenbn (talk) 18:59, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Yugur peoples in western China, Xinjiang, just in general more information on them?

Hello!

I have been trying to read a bit more about the Yugur peoples, and I'm having trouble finding any resources for the History and culture of the Yugur peoples, not to be confused with the Uyghurs. Any resources or help is appreciated, thanks!

(also, History of the Uyghur people is a messy article and if anyone knows what are some first steps to clean it up that would be great) 98.59.80.64 (talk) 08:30, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

I can't tell if you're talking about the Yugurs or Uyghurs. Look in the #References, #External links, and #Further reading sections (if they exist) and you may find useful material. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 17:15, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

You can also ask for more info at the Wikipedia:Reference_desk, probably under Humanities. Someone may suggest some books, etc. Then you can certainly help improve the article, along with enriching your own knowledge. David10244 (talk) 12:26, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Draft Declined

Hi, Please help me understand why my draft was declined. Dacreativebox (talk) 09:17, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

At User:Dacreativebox/sandbox. David notMD (talk) 09:26, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Dacreative. Your draft was declined because it did not convince the reviewer that the topic is notable as Wikipedia defines that term, and that your draft appears promotional. I agree with that assessment. Cullen328 (talk) 09:44, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Now at Draft:Big I Art Foundation Siliguri and Declined twice. The Foundation's own website used as a reference does not contribute to establishing Wikipedia notability. David notMD (talk) 15:42, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Tool on the tip of my tongue, please help me find

Hi! A while back in one of my wiki-browsing adventures, someone linked to a tool (I think it was somewhere on xtools or toolforge) where you can input two editors usernames and it will tell you the articles they both edited and the interval between the edits on that of those editors. Now I can’t find it! Does anyone have a link? Thanks in advance :) BhamBoi (talk) 10:28, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi BhamBoi. There are a couple of "tools" that you can use to do this, but the one you're asking about is (I think) the "Editor Interaction Analyzer". -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:33, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Hmm, I actually don’t think that was it…

The one in the back of my brain was more like

(Inputted 2 usernames)

List:

PAGETITLE Edited 2 weeks apart

OTHERPAGE Edited 14 seconds apart

Someone used it in an RFA to show that they had the same interests by having lots of articles they both worked on. BhamBoi (talk) 10:53, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@BhamBoi So not: https://sigma.toolforge.org/editorinteract.py ? (Which produces results like this) Nick Moyes (talk) 12:52, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

That is is! Much thanks! BhamBoi (talk) 19:17, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@BhamBoi: That is the same "Editor Interaction Analyzer" tool that I linked to above. -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:39, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

@Marchjuly Yep - I knew that, too. Just thought I'd link to it directly as I was sure you were correct. Nick Moyes (talk) 10:50, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

That's OK Nick. I should've linked to that particular section instead of simply the page in general. -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:52, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

My bad too. I was on mobile so the site was hard to navigate if I wasn't on the exact right page to use it. Thanks to both of you! BhamBoi (talk) 20:15, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

help

i have a article on my page and they said I made a mistake and like if someone can take a look at it if possible Michealscott2000 (talk) 14:55, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@Michealscott2000 You had a draft of the biography in your sandbox at User:Michealscott2000/sandbox and essentially the same draft has been reviewed and declined today at Draft:Yun Kobe. Among several issues with the draft is that it does not have reliable sources to back up the facts. Wikipedia is particularly strict when it comes to biographies of living people. You need to read WP:CITE carefully: we don't use external links within article text, for example. There are other helpful links in the decline notice. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:11, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Michealscott, and welcome to the Teahouse. As well as Mike Turnbull's comments, I suggest you look at your first article, WP:BACKWARD and NCREATIVE ColinFine (talk) 15:14, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@Michealscott2000 Yes, please delete the content of that page before an administrator deletes the entire page for not being the appropriate place to create a draft article. If the version is more up-to-date than the one in your sandbox, by all means copy it over. But make getting rid of it from your userpage a priority, please. Nick Moyes (talk) 15:34, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

oh okay .I understand

do you mind taking a look at it and see which have to take off plz Michealscott2000 (talk) 15:37, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Per the reviews and the comments at Draft:Yun Kobe, remove all hyperlinks from text, create reliable source references, remove promotional wording. David notMD (talk) 15:47, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@Michealscott2000 I think that Nick Moyes may have misunderstood where you located the drafts. The only inappropriate place would have been your own User Page but I don't think you have ever placed contents there. I noticed you had used your sandbox (that's fine) as well as Draft:Yun Kobe and I now see that you have yet another version at User:Michealscott2000/Sample page. Creating subpages for you own purposes is allowed but it is unwise to make multiple drafts as you and others will be confused about which one is to be reviewed. I suggest you incorporate everything useful at Draft:Yun Kobe and blank all other subpages. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:47, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull Yes, my mistake - a clumsy error. Sorry Michealscott2000. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:47, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Example of unacceptable language: "He is commonly regarded as one of his generation's most influential hip-hop artists and is often cited as one of the greatest rappers of all time." And "This talented artiste keeps showing he is a born talent, with positive vibes, lyrics, and rap skills." David notMD (talk) 15:48, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

okay i understand i remove my sandbox now so u mind checking see if i did well and just did the yunkobe draft Michealscott2000 (talk) 15:49, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@Michealscott2000 The version you just re-submitted had no citations at all and hence has immediately been declined. It is mandatory that you provide a citation for everything written. I have checked and can see that some of what you have written came from this webpage. It uses a cropped version of the image you have uploaded to Commons as being your own work. Please can you indicate what your relationship to Kobe is and whether you have a confict of interest? Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:20, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

so yun Kobe is a friend and musician and that page is mine also that why i use that so please if you can help me with the right one be nice please i took off the ref and ext all so please Michealscott2000 (talk) 16:24, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

I think the best course of action here, to save your time and Wikipedia volunteers' time, is to simply abandon the draft. If Yun Kobe is truly notable, someone unaffiliated with him will come along, notice the news coverage, awards, or something else in line with WP:NMUSICIAN, and create the article.

If you truly wish to continue, you still have not added references, the tone of the draft is too promotional and unencyclopedic, and there might be copyright issues mentioned above. Fix those. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 16:54, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

okay so let say if you were to write it how will do that because i am the only one he want me to or asking if i can and i try .he has 5 award post on different website .can i get ur email so we talk more about it if we have to pay we will Michealscott2000 (talk) 16:59, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Michealscott2000, you should simply list the reasons why he is notable, why he meets the criteria for WP:NMUSICIAN or WP:GNG, at Draft talk:Yun Kobe. A reviewer will see this and will decide if the explanation is sufficient. I am not an AfC reviewer.

It is impossible to 'pay' for a Wikipedia article. You can pay someone to write an article, but in the end, notability needs to be demonstrated and you cannot artificially create it. If you want to hire someone to write a Wikipedia article for you, be very careful of scams. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 17:05, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

So please can you help me with it Michealscott2000 (talk) 16:53, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Micheal, a whole load of people have given you help above, in the form of advice on what to do and what to read. It is unlikely that anybody here is going to work on your draft.

My advice, beyond what I've already given, is to put aside the very difficult task of creating a new article, and spend a few months learning how Wikipedia works by making improvements to some of our six million existing articles.

Judging from what you have just written above, your purpose here is to promote your friend. Please understand that promotion or any kind is forbidden in Wikipedia. If Kobe meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability, then there may be an article about him, but it will not belong to him or to you, it will not be controlled by him or by you, and it should be based almost entirely on what people wholly unconnected with him have chosen to publish about him - good or bad - not on what he says or wants to say about himself. Please see An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. ColinFine (talk) 17:05, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

This essay is a very good read Wikipedia:Writing_Wikipedia_articles_backward; If you're writing the content then going off to find sources to support what you already believe to be true, you're writing the article backwards. Once you're at this point, just 'Adding references' is not a good way to proceed. You need to start and end with what reliable sources say. JeffUK 18:58, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Teahouse hosts are here to advise, but not to be authors or co-authors. Do not resubmit until you find valid references, and then delete all content not confirmed by those references. David notMD (talk) 03:16, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Mathematics composite numbers

mathematics composite numbers 41.115.20.148 (talk) 18:14, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. What is your question about editing and using Wikipedia? We have articles on Mathematics and Composite numbers. ColinFine (talk) 18:19, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

how would you continuing Composite numbers 41.115.20.148 (talk) 18:22, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

I don't understand your question. What do you mean by "continuing"? ColinFine (talk) 18:51, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

National park

National park 41.115.20.148 (talk) 18:15, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! Do you have a question about Wikipedia regarding a national park? GoingBatty (talk) 19:31, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

WP:RM/Elapsed listings

Hi, I've tried in the past to have the elapsed listings (WP:RME) displayed on my user page, every attempt has failed; the entire WP:RM page ends up being displayed rather than the elapsed listings only or nothing at alll. Does anyone know how to have it displayed on the user page? Thanks. Jerium (talk) 18:35, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

I think you can use {{#section-h:Wikipedia:Requested_moves/Current_discussions|Elapsed listings}} (Seems to work on my user page..) JeffUK 18:53, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

That worked, thank you very much. Jerium (talk) 19:01, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Deleting a draft

Is there a way to delete a draft? Another user moved my user page to a draft under my name, thinking that my user page was a draft for a different person that I’d put on my user page. I don’t appreciate having a draft under my name, and I left it for more than six months and it didn’t delete itself. I can’t find a way to delete a draft but I’d appreciate it being deleted, and I’m wondering if there is a way to do so? Thanks. DRYT.Motorsport (talk) 18:52, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, DRYTMotorsport. If you are the only author of the draft, you can request deletion by pasting {{db-author}} (just as you see it here, including the double curly brackets) anywhere on the page. ColinFine (talk) 19:11, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Criticizing Wikipedias F and EF Scale color change

This isn't really a question, but i thought i would get this out there, and i really didn't know where else to put this, and this place is what came to mind.

A few months ago, Wikipedia changed the color of the Fujita and Enhanced Fujita scales. The most notable changes are to the EF4 and EF5 ratings, as they have both been replaced with a lighter color. This is mostly unnecessary, as every other tornado-related group or company uses the old colors (e.g. EF4 is red and EF5 is purple). Secondly, the colors don't really represent the significance of these tornadoes. For example, the 2021 Western Kentucky tornado was extremely powerful (mind you some people believed it should have been rated EF5), and yet after devastating multiple towns on a 165-mile track, the rating color is shown as a reddish orange, which is absolutely ridiculous in showing the power of that tornado.

I'll also say that EF5 tornadoes are badly misrepresented. Take a twister like the Joplin tornado. That thing was even more powerful, and despite literally shifting an entire hospitals foundation and sweeping multiple well-constructed and anchor-bolted homes off their foundations, the rating color is red. This does not show the tornados power very well, which is a problem with a tornado of that magnitude.

The EF3 tornadoes also had their color changed, but to a lesser extent that probably nobody will care about. I'd also like to talk with the person who brought up these new colors in the first place. Anyways, feel free to oppose me, as these are just my thoughts. Poodle23 (talk) 19:46, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Poodle, and welcome to the Teahouse. It's not "Wikipedia" that changed it, but "a Wikipedia editor" - perhaps on their own initiative, or perhaps after a discussion with others. The best place to discuss this is probably Template talk:Infobox storm (I'm assuming it's the colour in the header of the infobox you're talking about); or else at WT:WikiProject Severe weather. Have a look through the archives of those talk pages - you might find a previous discussion; otherwise you can start a new one. ColinFine (talk) 20:01, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. Poodle23 (talk) 20:03, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@Poodle23: Last year there was some activity with colors mentioned at Module talk:Storm categories. Might have something to do with the above? DB1729^talk 20:38, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Found the guy who started it all. I sent him a talk page message, so now i guess i just play the waiting game. Poodle23 (talk) 21:18, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@Poodle23, ColinFine, and DB1729: The colours have had to change, so that we can be accessible to various editors, who may have difficulties reading the colours because of health reasons (Cataract, Colour Blindness etc). As a result, the weather project is basically located inbetween a rock and a hard place as while people dont want them to change, we have been told that they have to change so that our articles can remain accessible to all. As a result, I applaud @Hurricane Noah: for all of his work so far on trying to get them changed. If you wish to discuss the colours or help us figure out which colours should be used, there is an ongoing conversation here.Jason Rees (talk) 21:34, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Edit Kalamazoo River oil spill

Can someone correct the article; it lists the spill as occurring near Grand Rapids Minnesota. It Occurred south of Grand Rapids Michigan, near Marshall Michigan, Battle Creek Michigan, and Kalamazoo Michigan MKuiper269 (talk) 21:23, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@MKuiper269 Welcome to the Teahouse. Thanks for your concern over the accuracy of an article (Kalamazoo River oil spill). Please would you post you concern on the talkpage of that article (see here), citing a reliable source that supports what you say. If you're able to suggest the precise wording that you would like to see it changed to, that will really help a lot.

To call attention to your post, you may, if you wish, follow the guidance at WP:EDITREQUEST to ensure someone's attention is drawn to it. Otherwise it could be some while before another editor interested in that article spots your post - as it doesn't look like an article with heavy traffic. I hope this helps. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:11, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, MKuiper269, and welcome to the Teahouse.

Are you the person who made this edit to Kalamazoo River oil spill earlier, before creating your account? The reason that you did not see the change in the article is that you did not edit the text of the article, but the title of the source. I have reverted your change, because the source https://www.grandrapidsmn.com/opinion/happy-anniversary-the-largest-inland-oil-spill-in-u-s-history-happened-in-minnesota/article_2ade2706-004f-11e7-9023-2b31a01741a6.html is quite clearly titled "Happy Anniversary: The largest inland oil spill in U.S. history happened in Minnesota", and Wikipedia works on the basis of what the reliable sources say: see WP:V.

If you think that the Herald Review was wrong, then you'll need to find other reliable published sources that say differently, and then argue the case on the Wikipedia article's talk page. That, or get the Herald Review to publish a retraction. ColinFine (talk) 22:12, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@MKuiper269 I believe the parenthetical statement you're concerned with is talking about a different spill, not the spill of the article. To paraphrase, "This resulted in one of the biggest spills in US history (the actual largest was in Minnesota)." HerrWaus (talk) 22:51, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Correct, and the first state mentioned in the article being Minnesota, not Michigan, is evidently not as clear as it could be. I've added the location to the first sentence, but left in the parenthesis (it seems relevant enough, it a little tangential, maybe it should be a 'See Also') JeffUK 09:03, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

When will the article I created be indexed on Google?

Kaifi Khalil created this article yesterday. But won't show up on Google results by searching it by name?

I added more content with reliable sources after notability tag was placed on it. So I think there is no notability issue? Uzek (talk) 21:54, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@Uzek: It won't be indexed by search engines until it has been approved by the New Pages Patrol or 90 days, whichever happens first. RudolfRed (talk) 22:10, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@Uzek And the article has been proposed for deletion. David10244 (talk) 14:47, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

@Uzek You have a history of adding content without references. I see that on 11 January, @Anand2202 wrote a lengthy admonishment on your Talk page about references and your editing style. Before that, @Ad Orientem blocked you for (I think) adding unreferenced material. Since you have EC status, you can certainly create articles directly in mainspace, but I predict this article will eventually end up in a deletion review. If the references are good enough, it should survive. If not, it probably won't. David10244 (talk) 15:13, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Do you mean deletion discussion, as opposed to deletion review? - UtherSRG (talk) 15:19, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

I think there is enough cited coverage that I'm not comfortable with a Prod and have declined it accordingly. If doubts remain, I suggest AfD. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:36, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

@David10244, @RudolfRed the article is now at AfD. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:45, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Yes, @UtherSRG, deletion discussion is what I meant. Thanks. David10244 (talk) 07:52, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Draft Submission Reply

Hi, I have been working on a page: Draft:Truescope and have gone back and forth with a few edits etc. however I was wondering if anyone has any suggestions on what can be done to improve it? Techora (talk) 23:18, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello @Techora and welcome to the Teahouse! This is what I see after a quick skim:

• I would rename the "Features" section, since that makes it sound like an advertisement.
• The sources seem a little bit questionable to me. Are there any others you can use?
• "Truescope partnered with Dataxet to operationalise its Singapore business and Fuseworks in New Zealand"- reword this to maybe "In ____ (when?), in the intent of putting its Singapore business and Fuseworks in New Zealand into operation, Truescope partnered with Dataxet, a ..... company. (what kind of company is Dataxet?)"
• "Founded by John Croll and Michael Bade, Truescope is headquartered in Sydney, Australia, with additional offices in New Zealand, Singapore and the US. - This seems fine
• "In 2022, it was announced leading venture capital firms Investible and Jelix Ventures led Truescope’s $6.2 million seed round, with the funding to support the company’s international expansion plans in the US."- Change maybe to "In 2022, it was announced by ____ (whom?) that a venture capital firm, Investible, and Jelix Ventures (who are they?) had led Truescope's $6.2 million seed round, with funding to support plans to expand the company into the United States."
• The lead needs to be cited.
• Overall, the article reads like an advertisement. It'll need more cleaning up.

I'd like any other editor input. Hope this helps! Happy Editing -- ‍ ‍ Helloheart ‍ ‍ 23:36, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@Techora: Hi there! I see that most of your edits have been about Truescope, and that another editor posted about conflict of interest on your talk page. I made some layout tweaks and updated some of the references. The first two references are from the same day with the same quotes, so these seem like rehashed press releases. The other references seem to be of similar quality. I hope you can find independent reliable sources that provide significant coverage of the company to improve the draft. GoingBatty (talk) 04:17, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

There's only half a sentence on what the company's products do. More on that would be more relevant than its history and its fund-raising. Maproom (talk) 08:32, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Yes, @Techora, fund-raising information doesn't tell the reader much, if anything, about why a company is notable. I recommend that you remove this. It's also quite boring data, IMO. David10244 (talk) 15:16, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks @David10244, @Maproom, @GoingBatty and @Helloheart. Much appreciated. Will look into all thoughts and suggestions. Techora (talk) 21:43, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

How to open a Simple wikipedia

get of link to https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page and go now to Simple wikipedia 122.52.84.177 (talk) 02:48, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! You could try [[:simple:Main Page]] to generate simple:Main Page, or a piped link like [[:simple:Main Page|Simple Wikipedia Main Page]] to generate a link like Simple Wikipedia Main Page. Hope this is what you're looking for. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 03:45, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi IP user. Note that the template {{ill}} works with simple English. So you could have Prime Minister of New Zealand for example, linking to the simple and the French versions of Wikipedia as well as the English article. See my source code for the way to achieve this. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:29, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

i am buisness man in uae

I am a indian Buisness Man Buisness Setup In UAE 2015 Steel Trading Buisness Iam here In UAE Job Purpose But UAE My LIfe Line In Change Steel Trading Group Shams Al Madina Steel Group UAE No 1 Steel Trading Company in middle east All kind of structural steel items sale Rajeev saluja (talk) 12:02, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Well, Rajeev saluja, if you have a question about using Wikipedia, then you can ask it here. -- Hoary (talk) 12:34, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

@Rajeev saluja Wikipedia is not a place to advertise your company. That would best be done at your social media of choice. Club On a Sub 20 (talk) 16:43, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

And I am a retired software engineer in Yorkshire. Welcome to the Teahouse, Rajeev

Like most of the people on this planet, I do not meet Wikipedia's criteria for WP:notability, so there is not, and will not be, a Wikipedia article about me (even though I am mentioned in one article). Do you meet those criteria Rajeev? ColinFine (talk) 16:43, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Ryu Si-won & BLP?

I'm trying to improve the article Ryu Si-won, and there's been an edit on there since December of last year of 2021 made by an IP. It just added the sentence "[Ryu] was convicted of stalking his wife (now ex wife) in 2013" in the lead section. It is true that Ryu was convicted of this offense (see this link), but 1. I'm not sure this needs to be in the lead section and 2. The source provided for the claim has nothing to do with it (it's an article about a Japanese album release by Ryu, IIRC). I've been hesitant to delete it without adding my own section about it, though, because I'm scared I'll start an edit war or be accused of removing it because I'm his fan (I'm not) if I just delete it. But the issue regarding him and his wife is complicated, so it'll take time making my own section.

Still, Ryu Si-won is a living person, and criminal records are contentious information. Citing the biographies of living persons policy, is it safe to remove the edit without adding a better section about it?

(I'm not sure if this is the place to ask, I'm not new to Wikipedia but I'm new to this big editing stuff. I just had a question to ask, and this is the only place I know where to ask questions...) Wuju Daisuki (talk) 12:28, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Wuju Daisuki, the first place to bring up the matter is Talk:Ryu Si-won. If a problem persists, then the next place to ask is probably WP:BLPN; however, before doing so, please digest what's said at the top of that page. -- Hoary (talk) 12:41, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Since it's not a very seen page, I'm not sure if it'll get a reply. Still, I'll try bringing it up there. Wuju Daisuki (talk) 13:12, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

That's a good message you placed there, Wuju Daisuki. In your place, I'd now wait one week; and then, if there's still no response (which is indeed likely), put a brief message up on WP:BLPN mentioning your question on the talk page and inviting people to comment on that talk page (rather than on BLPN). -- Hoary (talk) 22:04, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

December of the year before last, not last year. - David Biddulph (talk) 12:44, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

large data table views

I'm just a Wiki user and would really like to see the title row of large data table stay locked on top as i scroll down the list... when i get to the row I'm interested in, i have to scroll back up to see the headings This not something I'm trying to do, but rathe ask the developers to promote locking header header rows. Thank you 142.116.69.122 (talk) 12:40, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

This is available to registered users as a gadget named Make headers of tables display as long as the table is in view, i.e. "sticky".

Head over to Special:CreateAccount, and you'll be able to turn it on in Special:Preferences under the gadgets section. WindTempos ^{(talk • contribs)} 14:26, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

@WindTempos Thanks for your really helpful answer to the IP user. TBH: I hadn't noticed that gadget before, and have just turned it on. Incredibly useful! Nick Moyes (talk) 18:40, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Help on my Draft

Hello. I'm trying to submit my article once again, but I want to ask for help before I do it and, maybe, get declined again. The issues seems to be the reliable sources. I've tried adding more so every statement has claims, but I don't know if I could be missing something important.

The article is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Universidad_Modelo

I would appreciate any help, as this is the first article I've tried to submit and it's not impossible I overlooked some sort of mistake. If there's any tip of suggestion of how it could improve as an article, I'd also greatly appreciate it. Either way, thank you for reading. TheXaton (talk) 15:30, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

In general, when there is an issue with reliable sources, it isn't the quantity of sources being called out, but the quality of the sources. For a large (but far from exhaustive) list or sources and which ones are allowed and which aren't, please see WP:RS/P. I hope this helps! - UtherSRG (talk) 15:56, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Gevi Movie article Creation

Hi Team,

We are trying to create an article in Wikipedia regarding our film which is to be released in theatres soon, we submitted the draft for approval. Due to some reasons it has been rejected can the team help us in creating the Wiki page for our Movie Gevi.

Thanks Gevi Movie (talk) 15:55, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Gevi Movie You must A) change your User name (see Comment at the draft); B) you must declare your paid status on your User page (see your Talk page and WP:PAID); C) it was Declined, which is not as severe/final as Rejected. Lastly, until the movie is released and reviewed, and the reviews used as references, probably WP:TOOSOON to have a draft approved by a reviewer. David notMD (talk) 16:40, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Taj Mahal

I read the Wikipedia insight on the Taj Mahal and was confused. It says the Emperor was born in 1628. Then the construction of the building was commissioned in 1632 after his wife died in 1631 giving birth to their 14th child. I'm usually pretty fair at math. But this has me puzzled. 2603:6010:210B:6FD6:F0ED:BC7F:158D:EC3E (talk) 17:21, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

The emperor was born in 1592, but the article states when his reign began, in 1628. – dudhhr ^talk _contribs (he/they) 17:23, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Specifically, Taj Mahal says: "It was commissioned in 1631 by the Mughal emperor Shah Jahan (r. 1628–1658)". I see a dotted line under "r." to indicate there is hover text: "reigned". PrimeHunter (talk) 20:32, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Lost articles

I am curious about an article that used to exist but now is gone. I'm not talking about a stub that never got going but a modest but true article: getcited.org . That it once existed is attested at https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/2175/what-are-getcited-org-and-getcited-com-for . When I entered "getcited" into Search, I got a message that it didn't exist and a few hits where it was mentioned in articles about various scholars. I am worried that some other articles will also simply disappear. Kdammers (talk) 19:48, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

@Kdammers: GetCITED was deleted in 2017 for lack of notability at this discussion. – dudhhr ^talk _contribs (he/they) 19:53, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

@Kdammers: articles get deleted literally every day, for a variety of reasons. See WP:DELETION -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:38, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

@Kdammers One of the flaws with the Wikipedia search box is that when you "search for pages containing getcited" when that page doesn't exist, you will be offered output saying The page "Getcited" does not exist. You can click on the redlink and create it. However, it is only when you use the specific capitalisation of the original article, which was GetCITED that clicking on the redlink will point out that such an article existed in the past, giving a link to the deletion discussion and date (try these two redlinks and note the difference). There may be a way round this limitation but I don't know it! Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:10, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Has there been a discussion or guideline established about AI-generated images?

I've done a cursory bit of searching, but didn't find anything in this area of policy. I personally believe we do not need imaginings, for example, of how historical figures or events might have appeared, but maybe not everyone shares this opinion. — Anon423 (talk) 19:56, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

@Anon423 AFAIK there is no policy just yet, however, this has been discussed Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Wikipedia response to chatbot-generated content and there is a policy proposal at Wikipedia:Large language models. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 21:21, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

@Anon423 My view is that there is little to no place whatsoever in an encyclopaedia for 'imaginings' unless a reconstruction is based upon serious academic research. I get quite cross seeing certain users uploading colourful but amateurish and incompetent imaginings of pre-Cambrian lifeforms as if they were academically sound. Recently , a well-meaning project met with community concern when artists were employed to make drawings of certain notable individuals, based on photographs which really should have been used instead. Reconstructions of how an archaeological site might have looked at the time could be valid if done by a competent authority. But, I agree with you, that there is no place here for wild imaginings in order to make an article a bit more pretty to the eye, whether human drawn or done by AI. The key driver for any opinion would be this. We don't need pictures to have an article. A misleading or imaginary image just promotes misunderstanding if not done with academic rigour. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:08, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

@Anon423:, I totally agree, and in a sense we don't actually need a different policy. An AI-generated image of what a historical personality might have looked like is clearly based on some information it got from somewhere. And since it hasn't referenced from where it got the information, it can be removed as unsourced. I cannot write "Cleopatra had brown eyebrows" without finding an Egyptologist to back it up. Why should I be allowed to show a picture of her with brown eye-brows? Elemimele (talk) 17:52, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

entry change/title change

I am trying to change the name of the article since our congregation has changed its name. I don't know how to change the title. Unitarian Church in Westport. We are no longer a church, we are The Unitarian Universalist Congregation in Westport. I made that change in the text but don't know how to change the title. ENCliff (talk) 20:02, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Hiya ENCliff and welcome to The Teahouse! You do that via a page move. However, we have some strict policies on this. The primary one is WP:COMMONNAME - we care about what the entity's most common name is, not what it's official name is. Currently, the article has the correct title given this policy. You can look at how to request a page move at WP:RM. - UtherSRG (talk) 20:25, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

those d*ng unsigned comments

Just to be sure. Is it a good idea to add the unsigned comment template whenever one of those mild inconveniences pop up?

If I haven't been using everything wrong, that would involve tracking down who said it and when, but that should be a small price to pay for having the reply button. cogsan (talk) 20:08, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

@Cog-san: User:SineBot normally handles that, although there are some cases it won't sign. You can see more details on that bot's user page. RudolfRed (talk) 20:21, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

oops, typo RudolfRed (talk) 20:22, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

minor spelling mistake, i win

_{what was the minor spelling mistake} cogsan (talk) 20:31, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. Unless I misread something, unsigned IP comments seem to be just an oddly common oopsie, which isn't really worth addressing. cogsan (talk) 20:30, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

@Cog-san - Unsigned (and therefore undated) comments can cause a section to not archive automatically. I use User:Anomie/unsignedhelper.js to add {{UnsignedIP}} when appropriate. GoingBatty (talk) 22:27, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

editing/review

Hi Im new here, i think its worth to write about this organisation, can you help me to check/review the draft it https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Zo_Indigenous_Forum Pangkhua (talk) 21:39, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

@Pangkhua: Welcome to the Teahouse. I'm not a reviewer but I'll tell you that no reviewer will accept it as is because it is blatant advertising for this group. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:54, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Pangkhua, and welcome to the Teahouse. Please understand that 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. ColinFine (talk) 22:26, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Understanding WikiProject Spam/linkReports

I have recently joined Wikipedia, and a friend of mine sent me your "fakesources" page, which is very useful. Thank you. Currently, I am in the process of increasing my understanding of policies and norms on Wikipedia. In this regard, I was checking sources and their usability/credibility on Wikipedia. Some of which appeared in multiple Wikipedia: WikiProject Spam/linkReports. However, they were not mentioned in your list. I want to understand, what's the purpose of WikiProject Spam and how they help us. Should we consider sources appearing in Wikipedia: WikiProject Spam/linkReports, as non-credible, or the specific article would be considered non-credible? Please, help.

Thanks in advance. 1OA9 (talk) 21:46, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

@1OA9: Welcome to the Teahouse! If you don't receive an answer here, I suggest posting at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 22:24, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Ok. Thank you, a lot. 1OA9 (talk) 13:49, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

@1OA9 The spam project is specifically aimed at removing links that people add to articles to promote their own websites or for other WP:VANDALISM (i.e. they know their addition will damage rather than improve the encyclopaedia). They are in general not "sources" for anything useful and there could not be a full listing as they pop up all the time. It is better to approach sourcing the other way round: we have a page about reliable sources and a list of possible sources which are regularly debated about where consensus one way or another has been agreed (see WP:RSPS). To take an example from the list, the Internet Movie Database is not considered reliable, although it is frequently mentioned in the "External links" section of articles about actors or films. On the other hand, Rotten Tomatoes is considered reliable, especially for film reviews. As a newcomer, you should probably read WP:REFB. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:48, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Colonial Bread on old screen doors

From years ago there were screen doors located at mom and pop grocery stores that had printed in red paint”colonial Bread”Am I wrong about this? 198.13.94.86 (talk) 22:42, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, IP user. This page is for asking about using or editing Wikipedia. We don't seem to have an article about Colonial Bread (which is why that link appears in red), but it is mentioned in Bud Light Daredevils. The place to ask this sort of question is at the Reference desk. ColinFine (talk) 22:53, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

If you Google "colonial bread screen door", you will find plenty of nostalgia about this marketing campaign. Cullen328 (talk) 01:42, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Editing

I'm working on the page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Jingbo_Wang, It was declined due to the sources not being adequate. The sources are all peer reviewed journals. I'm unsure why these sources are not reliable. Massie314 (talk) 01:22, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Massie314. I believe that Wang meets the Notability guideline for academics #3 as a Fellow of the Australian Institute of Physics. I am pinging TheChunky, the reviewer who declined the draft, for their input. Cullen328 (talk) 01:35, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks Cullen328. I'm new to wikipedia, is there anything that I can do or should I wait for some further feedback from TheChunky? Massie314 (talk) 01:43, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Most of the sources seem to be to her own work, not what others say about her work. 331dot (talk) 01:39, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

331dot, WP:NACADEMIC is an explicit exception to the usual requirement for independent sources. Cullen328 (talk) 01:46, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Cullen328 Thanks for pinging me. The subject might pass WP:NACADEMIC, but the personal information about the subject should have at least secondary and independent reliable sources. But I saw that most of the sources were self-published. The subject shouldn't depend on self-published sources (as per WP:SELFPUB). Notability is not so simple, and if a subject is connected to the source, we can't consider it to establish notability. Thanks again.❯❯❯ Chunky aka Al Kashmiri (✍️) 02:59, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

I agree more references about her would be helpful. As it stands now, refs 2-21 are to scientific journal articles (in peer-reviewed journals, thus in my opinion not self-published). David notMD (talk) 03:15, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

TheChunky, articles coauthored by Wang and published in respected, peer-reviewed scientific journals are not "self-published" in any way, shape or form. What gave you that idea? Cullen328 (talk) 03:17, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

TheChunky, the nutshell section of WP:ACADEMIC says that Many scientists, researchers, philosophers, and other scholars (collectively referred to as "academics" for convenience) are notably influential in the world of ideas without their biographies being the subject of secondary sources.. Notability of academics is evaluated with completely different metrics than other topics. Drafts that are more likely than not to survive an AfD debate should be accepted. I cannot imagine a biography of a fellow of a major national academy of physics being deleted at AfD. Cullen328 (talk) 03:29, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Cullen328 Thanks for your explanation. Well, I am not much of an experienced reviewer of academic articles; I just observed that the subject was connected with most of the references, so I declined the submission. As you said, there are exceptions to the academic notability criteria, so this can be accepted. The creator should resubmit and any reviewer who have academic articles experience can review it. Thanks again.❯❯❯ Chunky aka Al Kashmiri (✍️)

On diffusing sub-categories

Hi! I was a bit curious on when to and not to diffuse a sub-category. Should a category be diffused in all cases when an article fits in both, or only some? For example, I understand that categories specifying gender and whatnot are almost always diffused, but what about those specifying levels of experience or rank within a profession. An example using the category that prompted the question would be whether articles in Category:Bolivian trade union leaders should also be included in Category:Bolivian trade unionists. Krisgabwoosh (talk) 01:57, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi Krisgabwoosh. I think your question is best answered by the section Wikipedia:Categorization#Subcategorization. Generally an article ...should be categorised under the most specific parent categories possible and Items may belong to more than one category, but normally not to a category and its parent. There are exceptions to this rule, like with non-diffusing categories.

The next sections of that guideline go into explaining diffusing and non-diffusing categories. An important point it makes is Non-diffusing subcategories should be identified with a template on the category page.

In other words, follow WP:SUBCAT unless stated otherwise. Using this rule in your example, articles appearing in Category:Bolivian trade union leaders should not also appear in Category:Bolivian trade unionists, assuming the category structure is correct.

If you need further explanation, a good place to ask would be at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Categories. --DB1729^talk 06:12, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Forgot to ping @Krisgabwoosh: and it seems you may actually be asking if we should convert the categories in your example to non-diffusing? I'm not sure how to answer that, but I can say I deal with categories a lot and non-diffusing cats seem to be pretty rare. I assume they are larger ones and made non-diffusing for a good reason. The US state river cats are none-diffusing, see for example Category:Rivers of Colorado, Category:Rivers of Colorado by county and note the notification banner on those, but I don't know or remember why they were made that tbh. Again Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Categories would be good place to ask. --DB1729^talk 06:14, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

@DB1729: Am I correct in saying it's a bit arbitrary, then? All women politician categories are non-diffusing. This is because they're both "women politicians" and, definitionally, just "politicians". Although trade union leaders may be, definitionally, also trade unionists, they only go into the one category.

I'm not suggesting any changes, mind you, but I'm curious as to what the cutoff is for when to and not to diffuse. Krisgabwoosh (talk) 08:18, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

When working with and trying to make sense of Wikipedia categorization, sometimes it's easy to fall down a rabbit hole and often find at the bottom, nothing makes sense. DB1729^talk 12:46, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

How existential, ha ha. Thanks anyway for the thoughtful response. Krisgabwoosh (talk) 16:21, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

@Krisgabwoosh take a look at WP:EGRS which specifically addresses categories related to ethnicity, gender, and other factors where non-difusing is important. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 16:35, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

David Del Valle article

Hello, everyone. I just did a pretty complete overhaul of the writer about horror David Del Valle, adding many non primary source citations like from Entertainment Weekly, Video Watchdog, the Texas A&M University Libraries, Fangoria and a lot of others. There were tags for "primary sources" and for "notability." I just wanted to let everyone know in case it wasn't OK to remove them but I think it probably was? Thank you to everyone here. - The Horror, The Horror (talk) 04:09, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

@The Horror, The Horror: Thank you for improving the article. I suggest posting this information at Talk:David Del Valle, as people interested in that article probably won't come here looking for information on why you removed the templates. Keep up the good work, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 14:00, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Instagram as a Reference: Notable if from verified source?

I'm working on a new project and wasn't sure if I was able use an Instagram post as a citation. The source in question was posted by the official "TikTokCreators" account which is run by TikTok/ByteDance. If I were to use a post as a source, referencing my subjects involvement with the platform through this post, is this source considered notable or should I strictly reference other online news?

Source in Question: Here DestinyinDestiny (talk) 06:08, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi DestinyinDestiny. Generally, Wikipedia is more concerned about reliability than notability when assessing a source. Instagram is certainly Wikipedia notable and thus can have a Wikipedia article written about it, but it's generally considered to be user generated content and a self-published source, and thus not typically considered to be reliable for Wikipedia purposes. In some cases, a subject's official Instagram account might be considered a WP:PRIMARY source, but the way primary sources can be cited is limited to certain types of content; moreover, they are never useful in establishing a subject's Wikipedia notability. Furthermore, if content in question is related to a living person, then there are even more restrictions in place per WP:BLPSELFPUB and WP:ABOUTSELF. Is there a specific article where you want cite this Instagram post? Perhaps if you can give the name of the article, someone might be able to give you a better assessment of the source. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:03, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

@DestinyinDestiny: The linked post says (paraphrased) that persons X, Y, Z are part of program W from TikTok. I will assume that the account is indeed run by TikTok.

That post is certainly a reliable source for the assertion that X, Y, Z are part of program W. However, that assertion might be undue weight to mention on the pages of X, Y, Z, or TikTok. It might not be a significant enough development to merit a mention on Wikipedia.

It is not a good source either to prove the "notability" of X, Y, Z (it is a short mention of something that may or may not have a big significance), nor W (the source is the originator of W, so it is not independent). Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 12:46, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

creating account in Vector 2022

@GoingBatty creating new account pls 119.95.103.16 (talk) 10:42, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi IP editor. When you access, for example, the Wikipedia Main page at this URL in your browser and have no account, you should see a link called "Create account" near the top right of the page. Click on that and follow the instructions. Note that, once you have an account but are not yet logged in to it, there are three dots to the right of "Create account" which when clicked lead to additional options, including the ability to login. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:35, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/119.95.103.16 states that "This IP address is currently blocked...with an expiration time of 72 hours (anon. only, account creation blocked)". Creating a new account during this time might be seen as block evasion. GoingBatty (talk) 14:08, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

@GoingBatty My typical problem with WP:AGF. The account was blocked today at 12:05 UTC+0, so when I replied it wasn't. I have my preferences set so that I see usernames from blocked accounts struck out so as to try to WP:DENY. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:18, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull: Sorry, I should have made it more clear that I was responding to the IP, and not criticizing your kind response to the IP. GoingBatty (talk) 14:28, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Help needed to wikify my draft

Draft:Stephan Ulamec

Hello people,

Is there anyone willing to help me find sources for this page about this academic person involved in space missions?

Best regards! MANARAJu (talk) 10:50, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

MANARAJu Teahouse hosts are here to advise, but not to be co-authors or reference finders. Per the Declined, you have content in Career and Awards that is not referenced, and you have unreferenced content in the Lead that is not expanded upon nor referenced in the body of the article. David notMD (talk) 11:17, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

@MANARAJu What I think would be a good idea for you to do is to go through each statement, line by line. Ask yourself "how can I show this statement is true?" If he won an award, cite a link to prove it. If you say he was born on 27th January 1966, link to something reliable that shows this to be correct. A bio on a university website is deemed to be reliable in ways that my bio on a private website is not. The university is deemed to have checked and approved such content.

If you have one source but want to use it multiple times in an article, that is not a problem. Both our editing tools permit reuse of an existing citation elsewhere in an article.

If you can't provide a published source, then just remove that statement and work with what other sources can prove. I think you've got the outline of a reasonable article that might meet WP:NPROF, but you need to pare it down so that everything can be shown to be correct, and there's nothing left that can be challenged. If you can't, then I have to ask how you know those statement to be correct in the first place?

I have since seen that you've declared your employer, but it would be appropriate to follow guidance at WP:COI and ensure there's a clear statement linking your editing to this person. We don't ban it, but we do require clarity in declaration. In fact, for an employee who is working in public relations for a scientific organisation, it would be obligatory requirement for you to indicate which article you are editing as part of your work. I would also invite you to write the text of your userpage in English, not French, as this is the language we use on this particular version of Wikipedia. I hope this all helps a bit, and 'bon chance'! Nick Moyes (talk) 11:39, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: Did you mean to recommend WP:COI to @MANARAJu? GoingBatty (talk) 13:57, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

User:Nick Moyes Thanks, mate. MANARAJu (talk) 14:32, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

@David notMD Thanks for your guidance.

by the way it's "Bonne chance" MANARAJu (talk) 14:34, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

@David notMD Fixed it - thanks. @MANARAJu That's why I don't edit fr.wiki. But you get the sentiment, I hope. . Nick Moyes (talk) 15:23, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Yes, indeed!

MERCI ! MANARAJu (talk) 15:37, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Why not search it up on the website? It would be better though. 204.129.232.191 (talk) 18:00, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

How to turn off new user landing page?

Hello there,

Does anyone know how to turn off the new user landing page that appears whenever I go to a page that doesn't exist?

Thanks,

LOOKSQUARE (talk) 14:22, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

@LOOKSQUARE There are checkboxes at the very bottom of Special:Preferences for newcomer editors. Unchecking them may help, although I'm not sure that's the relevant feature. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:29, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

I turned them off a few days ago, but nothing changed.

LOOKSQUARE (talk) 14:34, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Do you mean the pages with the image of three flowers and text like "Start a discussion with..." when you hit a redlink to a user page or article Talk Page that doesn't exist, such as User talk:DestinyinDestiny? That text and image is added by the software and can't be switched off: its not just for new users. When I click on a potential article that doesn't exist such as junkxyz I get a page where an article could be created that has a warning message starting "Before creating an article, please read Wikipedia:Your first article". Are you seeing something else in that case? Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:20, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Celtic throne

Hi, I'd like to create a Wikipedia page for our dance show (similar to Riverdance) Celtic Throne. https://celticthrone.com We have toured the USA twice and plan on touring again this year. A wikipedia page will help provide more information to potential viewers - Riverdance has a page and we are an Irish Dance show similar in nature. I understand if I am not able to create it myself, as I am affiliated, but perhaps someone could help me or draft one for me. Thanks, WikiEdits728 (talk) 16:10, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi @WikiEdits728, welcome to the Teahouse. The most important thing is to establish whether the show is notable by Wikipedia's standards. Are there published reviews of the show by critics? Has it won any important awards? 199.208.172.35 (talk) 16:15, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi,

Here are some news clips: https://kdvr.com/news/celtic-throne-coming-to-the-newman-center/

https://www.newscenter1.tv/celtic-throne-returns-to-rapid-city-at-the-monument-on-june-13/

https://edmondlifeandleisure.com/third-us-tour-set-for-celtic-throne-troupe-edmond-based-entertainers-also-p22663-99.htm

as well as the Music for the production was composed by Brian Byrne (he is a golden-globe nominee and the same composer for the show Heartbeat of Home)

We also had a former Riverdance Lead comment “Easily the best dance show I’ve seen since the originals. An absolute must see. As an ex-Riverdance lead dancer, I know brilliant when I see it.”

— Darren Maguire

Does this Help? WikiEdits728 (talk) 16:20, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, WikiEdits728. Those are routine event announcements published to promote upcoming performances with repetitive language indicating that the coverage was generated by press releases. What is required is independent coverage. Cullen328 (talk) 16:33, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Not in the least, I'm afraid. Routine announcements do not contribute to notability. Basically, what you are explicitly doing is trying to use Wikipedia for promotion - which is forbidden anywhere on Wikipedia. Once several people, wholly unconnected with you, have chosen to write significant coverage of your show, published in reliable sources, then there could be an article about the show. Note that such an article would not be owned by you, would not be controlled by you, might contain material you did not like, and should be based almost entirely on what those independent commentators have said about it - good and bad - not on what you or your associates say or want to say. Please see There are no deadlines, and an article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. ColinFine (talk) 16:34, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks WikiEdits728 (talk) 16:59, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

@WikiEdits728 I did a quick Google of your company name and couldn't find any obviously useful sources. However, if you wish to create a draft article (not "page": we are not social media), that is allowed provided you declare your conflict of interest and probably WP:PAID status on your User Page. Once the article draft is accepted, if it is, you will not be able to edit it further except in limited circumstances. Please read WP:YFA carefully before starting and you may also find this essay helpful. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:45, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks WikiEdits728 (talk) 16:59, 31 January 2023 (UTC)