Wikipedia:Teahouse

Tigraan, 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

Orbiting-particle system force that is pulled straight inwardly into infinity

Trying to make a connective path with others using the (talk) page, I am having trouble learning how to do this. I have limited understanding in binary two-point systemizing a talk page, my abilities are some what limited when it comes to operating a computer. I need a better way to... Two & "three-point" systemize a talk page. Is there a blog? Lmreva (talk) 17:32, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Lmreva, welcome to the Teahouse. Talk pages are not meant to be forums for discussion of article subjects - they are for discussing improvements to the articles. Also, Wikipedia's articles are based on what reliable sources have said about a subject, not on the opinions or research of Wikipedia editors. You appear to be seeking to discuss and include your own original research. This is best done on some other website - see a list of possibilities at WP:Alternative outlets. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 17:41, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

You have created Draft:Orbiting-particle system force that is pulled straight inwardly into infinity. without references. My guess is that is your original thinking. There is no potential for this to become an article. David notMD (talk) 20:13, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

I'm not sure if that draft is fever dreams, the result of too many psychoactive plant experiences, or an alien from the future come back to save us with his method for time travel, but I'm pretty sure it needs to be deleted. Heiro 20:21, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Heironymous Rowe You can disagree with a topic and/or the content, but please never disparage the creating editor. David notMD (talk) 23:26, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

How do you "systematize a talk page"? None of that draft makes sense to me. David10244 (talk) 06:24, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

Draft is now up for MfD here Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Orbiting-particle system force that is pulled straight inwardly into infinity. per Articles that cannot possibly be attributed to reliable sources, including neologisms, original theories and conclusions, and hoaxes. Heiro 17:50, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

Inner-space travel... Is infact real, to better help people understand the vectors involved, a different approach must be made to this draft... Orbiting-particle system force that is pulled straight inwardly into infinity has always been in existence... Naturalist physics and or those conventional wisdoms that deal with closed-looped mathematics are what they are, there is nothing that I can do about that. I am learning here, however, kinematics of an orbiting-particle system... Is with respect to the observers "size & time" domain... I cannot change the truth of the matter, it makes no difference to me, but it may for others. Lmreva (talk) 17:52, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

@Lmreva, Wikipedia is not, in the end, about what is real or true, but only about what reliable sources say is real or true. If you are able to publish your research in a peer-reviewed scientific journal, it can then be summarized and cited here. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:30, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

If I understand this correctly, Nikola Tesla's work concerning spliting the positive would be a reliable source, comming under the category of Kirchhoff's loop rule, as well as... Being a "non-reliable source", ( Has not been in a "certain" peer-reviewed scientific journal, of which, can only be accepted by conventional wisdoms)? If I am thinking right, I would then need to look into peer-reviews of scientific journals concerning kinematic engineering? Thank you for your help, it is greatly appreciated. Lmreva (talk) 16:43, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

@Lmreva, I think the answer to your second question is "yes". You would need to publish a paper in a peer-reviewed physics or engineering journal. As for your first question, Nikola Tesla put forth a great many theories, some of which have received widespread scientific acceptance, some not so much. The widespread acceptance is what's important here. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 17:37, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

Yes, If I am thinking Correctly... This one has some critical aspect ratio's ... "widespread acceptance,"(worldwide) in that there is more than one aspect ratio, producing two primary/complex entities of motion that exist in infinity... Being that this motion is particle-mass that moves into the future. This one has it going on... In that there are two complex motions in quantum fluid & quantum particle-flow... The "Spirit of the God of Love," and the anti-spirit of the god of love, and yet "one" cannot be without the other. Which "one" of these two enities are you allowing to operate the human-body machine? The "machine function," comes to mind... Vorticity of a vortex. That "one" differential of which exist's in size & time coordinates producing the force that pushes & bends "outwardly" into infinity is one of worldwide acceptance. However, the force that pulls-straight "inwardly" into infinity is "not" of worldwide acceptance. Also, practicality-mechanics in bio-functions are limited to molecular-size levels... "Not" understanding the function of size & time mechanics, has been a limiting factor do in part, to the crystalline past. Thank you for your info it is greatly appreciated. Lmreva (talk) 22:02, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

4. What are the main differences between Genocide, War Crimes, Crimes Against Humanity, and Ethnic Cleansing?

What are the main differences between Genocide, War Crimes, Crimes Against Humanity, and Ethnic Cleansing? 5.195.227.208 (talk) 09:26, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Might this by any chance be school homework? That aside, do you have any question about the use of Wikipedia? (That's what this page is for.) -- Hoary (talk) 09:29, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. This page is for asking questions about how to use Wikipedia, and it isn't a general question asking forum- for that you could try the Reference Desk- or you could look at the articles on those subjects(like genocide). 331dot (talk) 09:34, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Genocide is killing large amounts of a certain race. War Crimes are acts that violate international humanitarian law during war, Crimes Against Humanity are acts done to cause as much pain and suffering as possible, and Ethnic Cleansing is killing/ removing members of an ethnic/religious group that are viewed as "unwanted". Club On a Sub 20 (talk) 16:09, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

For whatever reason when I saw "Crimes Against Humanity" my brain went to Cards Against Humanity... I don't know why either. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 20:16, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

For one War Crimes is based on illegal laws, like if it wasn't agreed and was used only for destruction. (In my opinion) Evergreen tenal (talk) 19:39, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

@Club On a Sub 20 well, now they don't have to do their own homework! David10244 (talk) 10:49, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, I got a message on my talk page about that. Club On a Sub 20 (talk) 15:48, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Accepted My Draft

my was is Draft:SM Supermalls (disambiguation) in teahouse pls Accepted My Draft 112.206.193.27 (talk) 14:07, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

are you asking for us to accept your draft? its a good disambiguation, but i'm not sure the average editor can approve a draft (correct me if im wrong) -a really self-degrading name(speak of the devil)- 14:40, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

Declined for the reasons stated at the draft. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:43, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

This is not really what disambiguation pages are used for. It's more for things with the same name. If you want to add general information about the brand overall, you might want to create a list article. (See Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Lists & Help:List) UpdateWindows (talk) 19:15, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

@UpdateWindows See section immediately above this one. There already are list articles at List of SM Supermalls and List of shopping malls in the Philippines. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:01, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull ok great Tantomile (talk) 19:41, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

accept to Draft:2025 in video games

hey ill help you a draft accept you a name was 2025 in video games 122.53.44.157 (talk) 12:35, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

I think that the above utterance is somehow related to this history. Some editor less sleepy than I now am, please take over. -- Hoary (talk) 12:43, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

Hoary, I'll take over. IP editor, I believe per WP:CRYSTALBALL it is too early, when 2025 comes around the draft may be accepted, but it's too early and can be merged with List of video games in development#2025. Until then, I don't believe it will be accepted, sadly. Tails Wx 12:55, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

Might be important to note that unless the draft is worked on in the meantime, it may be deleted under WP:G13. Schminnte (talk • contribs) 14:53, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

Don't know what this edit was for. Are they trying to redirect pages related to video games to the draft? In the meantime, I've declined the draft as too early. Tails Wx 15:03, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

• • Make sure everything is sourced.Cwater1 (talk) 23:56, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Help with bigotry & xenophobia.

Hello,

Unfortunately I've come across an old Wikipedia editor that seems to speak in a very bigoted & xenophobic manner about diff groups of people. To be specific, talking about Romania he wrote "...the south where evil has always regained and poured in to other civilised regions of this country... I'd really like to see when Ferentari [i.e. a marginalized neighborhood in the capital of Romania] will become the European Capital of Culture... oh, wait, most likely never, of course!)" in an edit summary. When I confronted him about such behavior, warning that I'll report him & it's unacceptable on Wikipedia (I'm also Romanian), his reply was: (Eng translation)

Xenophobes are you (plural) and if you want Hungary [I told him he can join Viktor Orban, but not on Wikipedia], you can go there yourself (although they are more civilized than you (plural), so I don't know what to say)! I have no reason to go to Hungary. Also, what problems are you going to cause me, hehehehe?! What xenophobic remark? I am so tired of some of these disgraceful things (ro. mârlănii) and you (plural) are the Aces of that in Europe, that is certain. This is what I and millions of Romanians in this country, real Romanians, can say, nota bene (ita. "take note")! I don't have to continue anything, it's not like I'm from Bucharest (i.e. uncivilized), and as far as Romania goes, know dear lady that, even if you like it or not, it was and still is a multicultural country and I say this as an ethnic Romanian, very good Romanian speaker (much better than you, that is clear). I know the history of my country very well, unlike others! ....

And on and on they go, proceeding to insult me & make all sorts of bigoted comments like: "I know more languages than you have school years. I don't know how old you are, but I'm not going to allow you to address me in a 'per tu' manner (fr. informally), because we don't come from the same region" etc. As one of the millions of people living in the areas this man is talking about, I really ask someone on Wikipedia to give at least a warning to such individuals, for such discourse. It is unacceptable, especially from an established editor...

Thank you. Dhyana b (talk) 18:52, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Dhyana b, and welcome to the Teahouse. The place to report problems about editor behaviour is WP:ANI. But please read the notes at the top of that page carefully before you post there. ColinFine (talk) 19:08, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. Dhyana b (talk) 19:11, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

@Dhyana b Hello, welcome to the Teahouse. Besides WP:ANI mentioned by ColinFine, you can also have a try on Wikipedia:Dispute resolution if this is a content dispute. Lemonaka (talk) 20:01, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. It wasn't about their actual edits, it was about how they were commenting in the summaries & on their Talk page. Dhyana b (talk) 00:08, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

@Dhyana b: Now that you have brought this up for discussion at ANI, you should disengage and let others take over. The chances of you posting something inappropriate increase the more you respond. Your actions are also going to be evaluated per WP:ANI advice and you should now only respond when queried about them by others besides Rosenborg BK fan. You brought this to ANI to seek input from others; so, give them the opportunity to do so. Try not to WP:BLUDGEON the discussion, even unintentionally, by responding to every post Rosenborg makes. If they continue to post inappropriate stuff, the hole they're will only continue to get deeper without anyone's help. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:06, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

Now that the other user has been blocked for 48 hours, I strongly suggest that you (Dhyana b) stay away from their user talk page and don't post there anymore. Nothing good will come of you posting there at this point. If the other user continues to post inappropriate comments on their user talk page, they will be dealt with by administrators. If you feel something is so bad it needs immediate action, seek assistance from the administrator who blocked the account instead of engaging with this other user. If their behavior continues after their block expires, seek administrator assistance asap. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:17, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

Best to ignore it and report it to the appropriate notice board such as WP:ANI after reading the instructions before posting, for administrator assistance, if you are involved in a content dispute seek dispute resolution. -- StarryNightSky11 ☎ 23:03, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

OK, thank you. I didn't know I wasn't supposed to respond, I thought I needed to explain as well. I just saw these messages now, bc I was caught up in the other discussion. Will remember if this ever happens again. Dhyana b (talk) 00:06, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

@Dhyana b: Best to ignore it, usually when people say proactive things they are looking for a reaction, so don't give them one, simply report it and it'll be dealt with in due course. For disputes it's best to discuss things calmly and come to an agreed conclusion that suits everyone. -- StarryNightSky11 ☎ 03:27, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. Dhyana b (talk) 17:18, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Email not working

my email address is not working, whenever I try to confirm am told that the email was sent to my preference, what could be the problem? was blocked?or what is happening?.Then,is there any principles which governs this area of emails in the Wikipedia? Which might have gone wrong? please help.— Preceding unsigned comment added by MDmulwa (talk • contribs) 20:23, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

What e-mail provider do you use? Ruslik_Zero 20:47, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

@MDmulwa I don't understand "the email was sent to my preference". Can you copy and paste the exact message you received? That one doesn't make any sense. David10244 (talk) 08:00, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Now continuing at WP:Teahouse#Question moved from top of the page and hopefully resolved there. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:49, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Fixed your link so that it works, Michael D. Turnbull. Apologies for editing your comment. Deor (talk) 15:56, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Sandbox

I’m very new, wrote the beginnings of an article in my sandbox as recommended, and it just disappeared while I was still writing. Do a have to save periodically? Should I write the text offline and copy paste it so this doesn’t happen again? I’ve done the tutorials, but am, honestly, a little frustrated. I’m working from my iPhone, perhaps that’s an issue? I haven’t got a desktop at the moment. Thanks for any guidance! HamiltonJoyce (talk) 21:43, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

It shouldn't need saving periodically, just once you are finished typing then click the Save changes button otherwise any information not saved will be lost and have to manually typed again from scratch. It should work fine on a mobile device or desktop. -- StarryNightSky11 ☎ 21:53, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

Careful - there's no button that says "Save changes". It says "Publish changes", which is a distinction that many people stumble over ("I'm not ready to publish this yet!"). DS (talk) 15:46, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Declined

Hi- this is my third submission and the page was declined again with the same message as the second submission even though i made many changes. Can you please help me? Page is for: Ashley Nicole Moss- User: Manager1393 Manager1393 (talk) 21:45, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

Look at the reason left by a reviewer as to why the article as declined. Only once the conditions of the reason are met, will the same or different reviewer then be inclined to accept the submission. -- StarryNightSky11 ☎ 21:47, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

yes- i have. it is for the same reason as the second submission... but i have made those corrections. Manager1393 (talk) 21:52, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

She is a sports Journalist for radio and TV... all of her sources are reliable and factual. Manager1393 (talk) 21:58, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

She was just ranked by Forbes 30 under 30 for her contribution to sports journalism. All of the references can be verified... I'm not sure what else you need. Manager1393 (talk) 22:03, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

Make sure you're using Reliable independent sources, only once satisfied will a reviewer accept the submission. -- StarryNightSky11 ☎ 22:14, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

I understand... but they are all independaent reliable sources. Can you please give me an example from something that needs to be changed from her submission? Manager1393 (talk) 22:24, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

As I've mentioned the reason a reviewer declined the submission was because independent reliable sources are required, once they're added and a reviewer is satisfied with them then the article will be accepted, I don't have those rights at this time so I can only help you so much, best advice I can give is follow the reason the article was declined and eventually once sorted a reviewer should accept it. -- StarryNightSky11 ☎ 22:58, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

The draft article states that the subject is the host and co-creator for Laces Out, under Sports Illustrated. This means Laces Out, and Sports Illustrated in general, should not be used as references. They are not WP:INDEPENDENT. HerrWaus (talk) 23:34, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

so i can only use one as a source? Manager1393 (talk) 23:46, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Manager1393. I've only looked at the first three of your references in Draft:Ashley Nicole Moss: the first two are not independent, and the third mentions her in passing. Which three of your references satisfy all three of the criteria of being independent, reliable, and significant coverage? Only sources which do so contribute in any way to establishing that the subject meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability.

I also need to ask: what is your relationship with Moss? You created an account in September, with the name "Manager1393", and you have worked on nothing but your draft about her. Are you her manager? If so, you must make a formal declaration as a paid editor. ColinFine (talk) 23:36, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

Yes- I'm her manager... i am not getting a fee for creating her page.

Can I not include past work?

What do you mean by not independent? Manager1393 (talk) 23:44, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

Manager1393, since you are her manager, you must make the Paid contributions disclosure with your next edit. This is mandatory and non-negotiable. The first reference is published by her employer Sports Illustrated, and is therefore not an independent source. The second reference is an interview, that consists of her talking about herself, and is therefore not independent. Wikipedia is not interested in what people or their employers or associates say about themselves. Acceptable Wikipedia biographies summarize what published reliable sources that are entirely independent of the person and their associates say about the person. We do not include content generated by press releases, public relations campaigns or marketing efforts. Cullen328 (talk) 00:22, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Do not think about this as a "page". Think of it instead as a "neutrally written, properly referenced encyclopedia article". Cullen328 (talk) 00:25, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Again... i do not get paid so therefore I have no contributions to disclose.

And... if I can't mention Sports illustrated how will the reader know who she is? Manager1393 (talk) 00:31, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

If you have never been paid one penny by this person, then please explain why you are calling yourself her manager, Manager1393. Is this a volunteer position? Are you an intern? In any event, I highly recommend that you make a very robust and complete disclosure of your conflict of interest on your now non-existent user page, because otherwise, you are risk of being blocked. Nobody said that you cannot mention Sports Illustrated but rather that coverage of her by Sports Illustrated itself is worthless for establishing notability. Cullen328 (talk) 01:36, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello Manager1393. If Ashley Nicole Moss is a journalist there’s a good chance she knows that every media outlet has their own rules and requirements for what can and can’t be covered. When writing a Wikipedia encyclopedia article one of the rules is that if someone is writing an article about an individual they know personally the writer is considered to have a conflict of interest. There are also standards for what is a reliable independent reference source. It may be best for you to start a personal website, or create an account on a social media site. That way there will be fewer rules about what can be posted about Ashley Nicole Moss.

It might also be useful to read Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. If an article is accepted that article won’t belong to you or Ashley Nicole Moss. Anyone will be able to edit the article, and someone may decide to add referenced information that you’d prefer not to be part of the contents. Karenthewriter (talk) 05:09, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

@Manager1393 Getting paid for an article is not necessarily what WP:PAID is for. If you are being paid at all by the subject of the article, you must make the disclosure. Also, read WP:COI. Club On a Sub 20 (talk) 17:02, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

I'm not sure why I have to keep having to explain myself... I do NOT get paid for anything... I am not her actual manager- I am an intern just doing a task. Manager1393 is just my user name- that is it. I can have Ashley Nicole Moss' talent manager reach out to you if that will help. 68.74.135.187 (talk) 17:43, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

IP editor, the account above stated Yes- I'm her manager. It's a bit unclear whether you're the same person as the above or not. In any case, interns count as paid editors per Wikipedia's policies: see here. Please disclose as has repeatedly been requested. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 17:56, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

what is that you want me to disclose? Manager1393 (talk) 18:00, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

@Manager1393, you have repeatedly been given links to WP:PAID. Please read it. The specific section on how to disclose is Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure#How to disclose. This has nothing to do with the subject of the article, it is about you and your professional conflict of interest due to your employment. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:11, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

yes... i have read it. I do not have anything to disclose. And there is no conflict.. I'm only detailing and adding links about her career. How can I move past this? Manager1393 (talk) 18:17, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

@Manager1393, since you're apparently refusing to abide by Wikipedia's Terms of Use, despite extensive explanation and many requests, I'm afraid the next thing likely to happen here is a block. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:20, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Since I'm not getting anywhere. I think it would be best for me to let her manager know what has been going on and let him find another intern or volunteer to continue. Manager1393 (talk) 18:22, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Anyone else will also need to make the disclosure. Have your superiors review this discussion. 331dot (talk) 18:45, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

She is a well known professional sports journalist who can be seen on all platforms and is all over the internet. What else do I need to disclose? Manager1393 (talk) 18:05, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

I am not an employee... I am an intern. Manager1393 (talk) 18:18, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Manager1393 If you read the policy several have directed you to, you would understand that interns count as paid editors, even if you receive no money, because your compensation is the experience of the work(that you will put on your resume). With your next edit, you should make the disclosure or at least attempt it. See your user talk page. 331dot (talk) 18:43, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for explaining that. Where do I go to make that disclosure? Manager1393 (talk) 18:49, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

You should do so on your user page, User:Manager1393. 331dot (talk) 20:51, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patti_Wood

Hi there, My name is Patti Wood, I see some things on my Wikipedia page that are not accurate and there are many things that could be added. Can someone help me. I am a body language expert. 73.43.106.95 (talk) 22:27, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello. Please make formal edit requests at Talk:Patti Wood, providing published reliable sources for any corrections and additions. Cullen328 (talk) 23:23, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

Is notability shown without references 5 through 11? I don't think that the "opinions" about famous people provide anything, at least for notability. I could be wrong. David10244 (talk) 08:24, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! You may also use the Wikipedia:Edit Request Wizard to make your requests. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 02:41, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Teahouse hosts are here to advise, but not be co-authors. If you are Patti Wood you have what Wikipedia calls a conflict of interest (See WP:COI), meaning you need to propose you desired changes on the Talk page rather than edit the article directly (what Cullen328 and GoingBatty wrote). If you want to add a fact, you have to include a properly formatted referenceat the same time. What you know to be true cannot be added unless it is verified by published content that is referenced. A tip: practice making references in your Sandbox, then paste into the Talk page when done right. David notMD (talk) 12:41, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

An entry by me about me declined

I received a notice that a manager had erased a proposed entry I had submitted. No reason was given except that he or she said "Wikipedia is not a place for you to be writing your autobiography.--Bbb23." That's simply nasty and wrong. I have written my own memoir, in fact, published by the University of Rochester Press. I more than qualify according to Wikipedia's criteria for significance. I am aware that Wikipedia discourages people from writing their own entries and I understand why. But mine is very careful and specific and it responds to the fact that references to me appear already in a number of other entries. Do I need to present more support than that? Or than the numerous awards from mainstream professional organizations I have been given? I am baffled by this arbitrary decision and am not sure what to do. PaulLauter (talk) 02:43, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia isn't the place to post your resume/autobiography. It's not explicitly prohibited, but it's strongly discouraged. Even if you do have reliable sources to back up claims stated in the article, it is seen as a conflict of interest. TheManInTheBlackHat (Talk) 02:47, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

If you have a book published, this doesn't automatically qualify you as a person for validity in a Wikipedia article. I made that mistake myself in the past with writing articles on authors who had books "published" (these were all linked to self-publishing platforms), and even a book published by a stronger source like a university press can be shaky territory. If all that's notable about you is your book, then the book itself (assuming it's had any significant coverage) would be the prominent subject matter, not you. "University presses" publish numerous works every year, most of which don't get Wikipedia pages. If you really believe that you yourself deserve a Wikipedia page, you should wait for a neutral party unconnected to you to write it, because as @TheManInTheBlackHat says, it's a conflict of interest to write an article about yourself. Wikipedia will also publicly mark articles suspected of self-promotion, and this can look bad for you as a public figure, so you might want to avoid that. Without mentioning who it was exactly, I found this tag on the Talk pages of a few actors who have Wikipedia pages: {{Connected contributor}}

PetSematary182 (talk) 03:16, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

It's best to not edit articles about yourself or where you have a close connection to the subject, as this can trigger a conflict of interest, I'd recommend leaving it to other editors who don't have an involvement and can stay neutral. -- StarryNightSky11 ☎ 03:31, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

@PaulLauter I put a comment on your Talk page. I hope that hrlps. David10244 (talk) 08:39, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

PaulLauter, if the book is Our Sixties, then one review I looked at (doi:10.4000/rccs.11755) suggests that it, and you, should be written up here. This may well take time, but attempting to accelerate the creation of one or more articles isn't a good idea. -- Hoary (talk) 10:18, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

A lot of good advice now on your Talk page. Your first attempt repeated a common error - using your User page to create an article. Hence properly deleted. As noted, WP:YFA provides a path to create and then submit a draft to a reviewer. Essential to a successful draft are being able to reference what people independent of you have written about you. Listing your accomplishments is useful information, but does not establish Wikipedia notability. An Awards and honors section is good content, but those will need to be referenced, not just listed. David notMD (talk) 12:51, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

PaulLauter Given that you occupy an endowed chair professorship at Trinity College, you very likely meet the critera for articles about academic people. See Wikipedia:Notability (academics) for guiding information. AND, List of Trinity College (Connecticut) people includes a section listing faculty for whom articles exist. Those can be your models for a draft about you. David notMD (talk) 12:56, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Thank you much. Your comments in particular have been very helpful, though all the comments revived my quite positive feelings about WP. Paul PaulLauter (talk) 18:50, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Biology forum

Not a new user, but haven't used Wikipedia in a long time. Where's the forum when I can talk about biology? I want some redirects done. Oixyplanet (talk) 03:37, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Oixyplanet: it sounds like you might be looking for WikiProject Biology. Is that right? Schminnte (talk • contribs) 03:41, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Yes Oixyplanet (talk) 07:27, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Need help removing police report

Hello there is a police report that I need to remove so I can fully redact an address. Redmanbigman (talk) 04:45, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

@Redmanbigman Hello, welcome to the teahouse. If you want to fully redact something, contact WP:Oversight by email. If there's something emergency, please contact Wikipedia:EMERGENCY Lemonaka (talk) 11:28, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Stop changing the USA mens soccer uniform the socks are white FFFFFF

PLEASE STOP CHANGING THE COLOR OF THE USA MENS HOME SOCKS! THEY ARE WHITE! STOP CHANGING THEM, EVEN WHEN WE PLAYED IN THE WC IT WAS ALL WHITE KIT!(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_men%27s_national_soccer_team) Msantiking0309 (talk) 06:05, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Msantiking0309. I have no idea why you are motivated to holler at the top of your lungs and register sockpuppet accounts to complain about an utter triviality like the color of a soccer team's socks. But I guess that this is of vital importance to you. Well, you need to provide a reliable source that says that those team's sock colors have always been white and have never been blue. Otherwise, it is just the opinion of a random person on the internet who types in ALL CAPS. Cullen328 (talk) 06:21, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

@Msantiking0309 Hello, welcome to the teahouse. I kindly ask you stop your ALLCAPS ranting immediately, otherwise it may lead to losing of editing privilege. Lemonaka (talk) 11:30, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

@Msantiking0309 You should go ask the person who reverted your edit instead of asking here. They might give you a more detailed answer. Carpimaps (talk) 04:50, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Question moved from top of the page

Well, according to my Wikipedia account, there is a part of my preferences, in that part you will find the email options.when i open this area,I find the notice that my email is not confirmed and when I happen to confirm it,it remains the same what could be the problem?. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MDmulwa (talk • contribs) 08:17, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

@MDmulwa Have you read the help page about that? It mentions that the page Special:ConfirmEmail will give you specific information about the status of your account. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:34, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Moved a Draft:Lists of monarchs by time → Lists of monarchs by time

Move a the simple wikipedia pls move the Lists of monarchs by time 119.95.115.26 (talk) 09:05, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

en wikipedia move it 119.95.115.26 (talk) 09:06, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

No, person in the Philippines, but I might reject it. (See this message thread.) -- Hoary (talk) 09:56, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

@119.95.115.26 Hello, welcome to the teahouse. Another list of the same topic is on (mainspace), you can try to improve it. If it is protected, you can have a try of using WP:ER on the talk page. Lemonaka (talk) 11:32, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Estonian

Hello, where to start a new article in Estonian language? Wname1 (talk) 10:07, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi Wname1 The Estonian Wikipedia is here. Please create anything in the Estonian language there, not here - Thanks - Arjayay (talk) 10:21, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Wname1, is this new question of yours related to this older question of yours? -- Hoary (talk) 10:36, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Yes, Correctly. Wname1 (talk) 10:45, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Wname1, if you are thinking of creating an article in XX:Wikipedia -- whether XX is sl (for Slovene, as in this older question of yours), et (for Estonian), or anything else (other than en) -- then first ask yourself if your proficiency in language XX is adequate to look for instructions, follow instructions, ask questions, and understand answers in XX. If yes it is, then do all this in XX:Wikipedia. If no it is not, then don't attempt to create the article. If OTOH you have an academic question about XX:Wikipedia, then you might ask about it at whichever reference desk seems most appropriate. -- Hoary (talk) 23:48, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Stephen Neidle

I have been writing an article about Stephen Neidle who is an eminent Scientist in the field of DNA and RNA structural research as well as the design of anticancer drugs and antibacterial drugs. Even before I had done a full re-edit and put in the references correctly I get an editor telling me that there are not sufficient references. The article is about a person has a Who's Who Entry which is used Internationally for biographical verification (very few people unless they are very eminent have this), a web site at UCL and an edition of a Journal in his honour. I have replied about this and get no response from the editors putting forward this referencing mantra. I even gave them citations of articles which are similar to read about Bill Denny, Stephen D. Levine, Donald Crothers and Ignacio Tinoco. Still no response. Contemporary scientists in my field and I expect many others are supported by references to their work, and if the Editors look these papers are cited in Pubmed and other depositories by many other scientists supporting the work. These biographies are not like the ones for military figure, politicians, artists ... where support is from books and monographs ! I am wondering what it takes to get an article accepted into Wikipedia

Mruthsanderson (talk) 12:10, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Nevertheless, you still need to pay attention to the very good advice you have been given at  Courtesy link: Draft:Stephen Neidle. He may well be notable but you need to demonstrate that in accordance with Wikipedia:Notability (people). Shantavira|^{feed me} 12:49, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Dear Shantaviraj, Thank you for your comment but he meets these criteria. I am very familiar with the people who have accepted articles in this particular field and the Wiki notability criteria. It was not on the notability that it was declined but on 2nd referencing, which he has and on the Notability it says "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." He does in fact has strong supporting references from secondary sources which I mention above. 2A00:23C7:999E:FD01:4BE:D917:3B20:FB62 (talk) 12:57, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

ps I have added more cross referencing to other wiki articles as on nucleic acid structure and the structure of DNA and RNA quaduplexes since the Editorial comments 2A00:23C7:999E:FD01:4BE:D917:3B20:FB62 (talk) 13:01, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

I strongly recommend you remove your AfC submission until after you fix major flaws. Remove all hyperlinks. A few (for example https://iris.ucl.ac.uk/iris/browse/profile?upi=SNEID18 may be used as references. There are several sections with no references, including education, career, awards. Referneces 3-11 are to some of his journal articles; none of these contribute to establishing notability in the Wikipedia sense of the word. David notMD (talk) 13:11, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. Please have a look at the examples of other sites that I have given. There are no references associated

with education (ever), career and awards in the examples of other sites that I have listed. Here the people were educated is stated with highlighting of the institutions where they have gone, same with career and awards. Awards can be checked with the awarding bodies or their posting if deemed necessary ?! I do not find your comment "I strongly recommend you remove your AfC submission until after you fix major flaws" helpful as there are not major flaws. This is what I am taking issue with and the lack of dialogue with the editors - which one has when submitting a scientific paper for instance. 2A00:23C7:999E:FD01:4BE:D917:3B20:FB62 (talk) 14:42, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

By "other sites", do you mean other Wikipedia articles? If there are biographical articles that lack sources for information such as the person's education history, then that information should either be sourced or removed. See WP:VERIFY on this. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:07, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

First, AND IMPORTANT, always log in before editing. Having an account but also editing not logge in - appearing as an IP number - is construed as sockpuppetry. And fine with me, ignore the recommendations of a Teahouse Host who for years has been here to help people get their drafts approved. WP:BLP clearly states that verification is a requirement for facts in biographies of living people. And yeah, remove all the hyperlinks. Creating a link to an institution's webpage does not confirm that Neidle has any connection. Expect your draft to be declined again. David notMD (talk) 15:11, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Very cynical. People do not usually make up in my experience for University websites. Too easily checked by too many views Mruthsanderson (talk) 16:09, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

I looked at Bill Denny, as one of the articles you mentioned and its sourcing is adequate and certainly not "no references associated with education (ever)". You may be surprised to learn that Who's Who is not considered a reliable source for Wikipedia (see table at WP:RSPS). In addition, the use of in-text external links is not how we cite information (see WP:ELPOINTS). Those that can be converted to citations using {{cite web}} should have that done. Your draft does not just need to show that Neidle is notable (which I'm fairly sure he is) but has to do so in a way that meets Wikipedia's standards for articles, best explained at WP:YFA and WP:BLP. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:19, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Naturally I mentions the degrees as in Bill Denny's article as it does in my article for Neidle but the assumption was that this should be further supported with references (what from published University degree lists ?!) Mruthsanderson (talk) 15:34, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

You write: "This is what I am taking issue with and the lack of dialogue with the editors - which one has when submitting a scientific paper for instance". Editing Wikipedia is a very different process from submitting a scientific paper, but part of the issue appears to be that you're posting comments for the reviewers on your own user talk page. If you want those to be seen there, then you'd likely need to ensure that the reviewers are notified of your comments. See Help:Notifications. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:30, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

A website has been posted to your Talk page that provides mention of Neidle's education and career and awards. Cite that. Stop pointing to other articles you believe support there being no need to verify education, etc. "Other stuff exists" is not an accepted argument. David notMD (talk) 20:49, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

@Mruthsanderson: I cannot stress that point enough. The existence of other substandard articles on Wikipedia is not a reason to create more of them; rather, it's a reason to delete or correct those crappy articles. If you want your draft to be reviewed and accepted, you need to follow the advice of reviewers, who know what they're talking about. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:52, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Yes. It can be helpful to look at other WP-articles for guidance, but one should look at good articles. More at WP:OTHERCONTENT. This is not very obvious to new editors, but we learn the strange ways of WP as we go along. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:50, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

This UCL School of Pharmacy Neidle site was used and cited as a link, but the Editor asked me to remove these direct external links, one of which was to this site. Mruthsanderson (talk) 07:29, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Yes, there is a difference between a WP:EL and adding a url to a correctly written citation/ref. WP:TUTORIAL has guidance on how to add references correctly. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:53, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, I took out the ELs and added more internal linking to Wiki articles. I do keep the reference 10 to Who's Who (OUP) as contrary to some expression voiced this is a very accurate biographic source, used by Book and Newspaper editors, Embassies around the world, Employees, Government establishments and Civil services. Its long extended usage proves this over many 10s of years proves this. People would not use it, if it was not. It people wish to check biographical details then the UCL Pharmacy wiki link is given and then the person can get the external one. The other references are to the Science and this

is usual in this type of biography in wikipedia, I have read dozens of them Mruthsanderson (talk) 08:03, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

See [1] Who's Who (UK) is considered generally unreliable due to its poor editorial standards and history of publishing false or inaccurate information. Its content is supplied primarily by its subjects, so it should be regarded as a self-published source. Theroadislong (talk) 08:34, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Wikilinking to existing Wikipedia articles does nothing toward establishing notability. Yes, you has UCL School of Pharmacy as a hyperlink, and were asked to remove all hyperlinks, and convert those that were useful to references. Now, you have UCL School of Pharm as a Wikilink, also useless, as it is not about Neidle. Yesterday, I wrote to use UCL School Pharm biography as a reference. Do that and cite that for as much of the content it supports. Referencing researchers' journal articles is common, but contributes little toward notability. David notMD (talk) 09:01, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

@Mruthsanderson You have been asked to remove direct "external links", that is, URLs which are in the body of the article. Instead of replacing those with inter-wiki links, you need to add properly formatted references (click here). Reading that section on proper referencing should help. David10244 (talk) 06:21, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

I have done that, removing them from the body of the article as they were. They have been put into the references referred to by reference numbers in the same

way as they were in the Don Crothers article so that I have enough supporting biographical material on the subject. Before they

were in the text lines in an earlier version Mruthsanderson (talk) 08:16, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Dear David,

I see what you mean and I have removed the direct URLs and converted the ones which were present with full URLs in reference list. Many thanks Mruthsanderson (talk) 08:57, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Does anyone else feel that we are on the verge of a WP:NOTHERE reason to indefinitely block Mruthanderson? In addition to the stubborness exhibited here, we have the three times Declined Draft:David Dunbar (mathematician) and the recently created Draft: Paul S. Freemont that has the same flaws seen in the Neidle draft: lots of hyperlinks, sections without references, and references only to Freemont's journal articles. Competence is required. David notMD (talk) 09:10, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Why would you want to indefinitely block me ? For voicing an opinion about the reliability of Who's Who ? I know a lot of people who

find it a reliable source and now it is edited by OUP editors who have taken it over from the publisher AC Black. 2A00:23C7:999E:FD01:2537:DD3D:3DBE:4FB6 (talk) 09:20, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Competence is required. You have resisted the advice of Reviewers and Teahouse hosts. Unless you show an ability to reference all content in your drafts with reliable source references, you are wasting everyone's time. I am not an Administrator, and thus cannot apply a block, but others at Teahouse are, and I suspect will tell you the same. At the least, do not submit Freemont until fixing it, and add UCL to Neidle as a ref, before resubmitting. These academics may or may not be Wikipedia-notable, but without a competently crafted draft, none will be accepted. David notMD (talk) 09:30, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Actually I have not resisted the advice of Reviewers and Teahouse hosts. I have removed all the hyperlinks from within the text

and completely rewritten the text for Neidle and put in many connections to articles within Wikipedia. I find your approach extremely aggressive asking people to block me, not what I would expect of any host. Mruthsanderson (talk) 09:37, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Actually I have not been working further on the David Dunbar article, the Senior Wrangler since it was last rejected as I cannot source secondary references as he did not publish papers in mathematics and dedicated his life to teaching others. I have reached an impasse on this. The same does not hold for Professors Neidle and Freemont

In terms of the format of these articles - you should see that the one on Donald Crothers cites many of his original papers as do others, like that of Ignacio Tinoco where many of his original papers are cited. There is clearly nothing wrong with doing this in an article of this

nature Mruthsanderson (talk) 09:32, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Obtuseness is not a virtue. The Donald Crothers article has 7 of 17 refs to his published works. The other refs verify content about him. All you have done in your drafts is cite only published works. David notMD (talk) 10:03, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

David notMD, I suspect you got off the wrong foot with that editor. They might be inexperienced with Wikipedia sourcing requirements, and a bit stubborn, but certainly not in NOTHERE territory from what I can see here and on the draft page. I would suggest getting a good night’s sleep before replying to them any further.

Mruthsanderson, please understand that David notMD is actually helping you, in spite of the abrasive replies. Their advice about which sources are useful or not is on-point, and they did some helpful edits themselves. They invested that time because your draft stands a good chance of eventually making it through. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 16:07, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Portland International Airport section cleanup

Hello. Go to Portland International Airport (PDX) article, scroll down to Airlines and Destinations passenger section. Needs cleanup. Dont know how to fix. Thank you for your time.Theairportman33531 (talk) 13:12, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

I have fixed some corruption to that section. Is that what you meant by cleanup? There are many thousands of articles that require cleanup. Shantavira|^{feed me} 13:48, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Nancy Physters murder

No mention of Propublica article concerning the unfair distruction of Kathy Carpenter 174.52.67.238 (talk) 14:30, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Your question is unclear. If you wish to suggest a correction or update to an article, the place to do so is on that articles's talk page, together with a reliable source for your suggested change. Shantavira|^{feed me} 15:06, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

INFO: This appears to be about Murder of Nancy Pfister. Kathy Carpenter was a friend of Pfister, but at one point in the investigation she was arrested as a suspect in the murder. IP has posted a (disjointed) comment on the Talk page of the article. Any further discussion should continue there. David notMD (talk) 15:20, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Philadelphia

Please add "brotherly love" right after the name so that people realize what the name means. Betweter1935 (talk) 15:42, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Already covered in the infobox and in the text. - David Biddulph (talk) 16:01, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Discography query

Hi, I noticed that both Zubeen Garg discography and List of songs recorded by Zubeen Garg exist, which seems to be excessive, but I wasn't sure how to handle it. I don't even know which title is best (my preference is the former), with no comment on the actual state of the content. Should there be an AfD on one, or a merge discussion, or just start a talk page discussion somewhere (where?)? I'm not familar with this area really. Thanks. -Kj cheetham (talk) 18:15, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

@Kj cheetham Hello, welcome to the teahouse. You can follow the instructions on WP:MERGE to request a merge. Happy editing. Lemonaka (talk) 18:55, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

How long does generally take to "Disciple" and New Christian ?

How long does generally take to "Disciple" and New Christian ? 2600:1700:8E41:4D40:1573:B9CD:CE98:1F91 (talk) 19:42, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Do you have a question about editing Wikipedia? Cullen328 (talk) 19:55, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

"Disciple" and "New Christian" are verbs? Who knew? David10244 (talk) 06:24, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

TvTropes not being reliable source.

Why is TvTropes not a very reliable source? I means that this site teaches pop culture and media. But it is forbidden to cite from. Why is that? Examples? — 2600:1010:B12F:8241:69D6:4C47:90B4:B2DC (talk) 19:51, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello. TV Tropes consists of user contributed content without professional editorial control. Therefore, it does not qualify as a reliable source. Cullen328 (talk) 20:00, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

What about examples? Why do User contributed content lack editorial insight and often non-credible? Be specific. —2600:1010:B12F:8241:69D6:4C47:90B4:B2DC (talk) 20:30, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

See here Wikipedia:Reliable sources#User-generated content. TV Tropes is literally one of the examples given for sites to avoid. Heiro 20:34, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

What happens if I cite TvTropes as a source when adding content on editing articles? Will an another editor found out? —2600:1010:B12F:8241:69D6:4C47:90B4:B2DC (talk) 21:07, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Do not add TV Tropes as a reference now that you know that it is not reliable. Doing so would be disruptive editing. It will be removed as soon as it is discovered. Cullen328 (talk) 21:14, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

And then you would get a warning on your user talk page. Club On a Sub 20 (talk) 16:27, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Stub article

Hi, how do I determine that a article is longer a stub. What are the requirements for that purpose? Please help me out. 456legend(talk) 19:52, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello, 456legend. A stub is An article too short and incomplete to provide more than rudimentary information about a subject. Once an article has developed to the point that the information is more than rudimentary, then it is OK to upgrade it. Cullen328 (talk) 20:05, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Cullen328 Ohkay. So by this do you mean to say that to decide whether a article is a stub or not is subjective and depends upon the article to article? Also does this require discussion before upgradation?456legend(talk) 02:26, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

@456legend Yes it is subjective, your decision as a Wikipedia editor. No it does not need to be discussed, only Good Article (WP:GA) and Featured Article (WP:FA) ratings are given after a formal process. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:45, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

@Dodger67 Okay Thank you. 456legend(talk) 07:46, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Page I made was speedy deleted for copyright infringement before I had the chance to appeal it

I recently made the page Zarathustra in Manichaeism and it was speedy deleted for copyright infringement before I had the chance to appeal it, since I was asleep at the time.

Much of the page was derived from the page Manichaeism with attribution in edit history. The copyvio allegation was from this page https://sciencetheory.net/manicheism/ dated april 20 2020 and a copyvios report from the april 19 2020 revision of Manichaeism here https://copyvios.toolforge.org/?lang=en&project=wikipedia&title=Manichaeism&oldid=951846764&use_engine=0&use_links=0&turnitin=0&action=compare&url=https%3A%2F%2Fsciencetheory.net%2Fmanicheism%2F shows a 98.5% match *before* the page was created indicating my page was removed because another site plagiarized wikipedia.

Does the page still exist and if so can it be restored so I can properly appeal it? Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 20:01, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Immanuelle. The article still exists and can be restored by an administrator. Your first step should be discussing the matter with the deleting administrator, Jimfbleak. If that administrator disagrees, you can file a report at Wikipedia:Deletion review. Cullen328 (talk) 20:13, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Help with sources

I just recently posted my page for Derail Valley, a video game but It got declined for not having enough sources and reviews. The game that I am making is a Indie game so it does not have that many reviews only from steam and oculus app. As for sources I have 9 but most are primary source because I cannot find secondary or tertiary (because it is a indie game). What do I do in this situation? WinningGlory52 (talk) 22:32, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello, WinningGlory, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid that what you do in this situation is abandon this subject. No amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability, and notability in Wikipedia terms is about independent sources. If you can't find the sources, you are simply wasting your time and effort.

You might find it useful for the future to read WP:BACKWARD too. ColinFine (talk) 22:49, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

@WinningGlory52: Read WP:RS and WP:NOTABILITY to help you understand how to use reliable independent sources and if an article meets the necessary notability requirements. -- StarryNightSky11 ☎ 03:36, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Changing title of Wikipedia article

The Wikipedia article "Cyclostationary process" may be narrower than that which would best capture the essence of the topic. I propose the title "Cyclostationarity" which includes "Cyclostationary process" (a stochastic process model) as well as the increasingly popular "Cyclostationary time series" (a non-stochastic model) and also includes not only cyclostationary processes and time series, but also polycyclostationary processes and time series and almost cyclostationary processes and time series, as well as nonstationary stochastic processes that exhibit cyclostationarity (as a component of more general nonstationarity). More generally, "cyclostationarity" has come to be used by the most prolific authors on the topic to mean data models that exhibit some form of statistical cyclicity. The most comprehensive treatments of this subject are the encyclopedic book [Antonio Napolitano, Cyclostationary Processes and Time Series: Theory, Applications, and Generalizations. Academic Press, 2020, and the one-of-kind educational website hosted by University of California in perpetuity: www.cyclostationarity.com . 2601:643:301:1A20:799A:2AAF:9865:B253 (talk) 00:20, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Requested moves. It sounds like you want to rename the article and expand its scope. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:46, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Please open a discussion on the article's talk page Talk:Cyclostationary process before making major changes. It might also be worth dropping a note pointing to that discussion on relevant Projects' talk pages, eg WT:WikiProject Statistics. ColinFine (talk) 11:55, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Is copying from "Japanese Wiki Corpus" a copyright violation?

I found a website https://www.japanese-wiki-corpus.org/ which hosts its own translation of Japanese Wikipedia. All content on it is released to creative commons. Am I allowed to create articles not present on English Wikipedia by taking content from that site, while citing everything to both that site and whatever the original source is? Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 00:37, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

@Immanuelle: To comply with the Creative Commons attribution requirement, it should be enough to state where the content came from in your edit summary. Cited sources are just cited sources, the same in both places. That's just my opinion, though. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:45, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

As machine translations go, these aren't bad. They're not that good, either. How good is your Japanese, Immanuelle? Is it good enough for you to notice and remedy inaccuracies? -- Hoary (talk) 00:54, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

@Immanuelle It would be better to use the actual Japanese Wikipedia articles rather than substandard machine translations. See WP:TRANSLATE for guidance. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:58, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

@Dodger67@Hoary I was not aware that that site held machine translations. I had thought it was all manually and professionally translated. Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 08:23, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

close paraphrasing

I'm reviewing a DYK submission, which I haven't done in a while. I remember a tool which would check an article for close paraphrasing from sources. I've looked for an hour, but haven't found it. Is it still available? Mgrē@sŏn (Talk) 01:25, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Perhaps Earwig's tool? -- Hoary (talk) 04:25, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Title Case, Sentence case, or same case for transliterated place names?

For the Armenian villages of Lori Berd (Լոռի բերդ) and Kruglaya Shishka (Կրուգլայա շիշկա), should their article titles transliterate their names according to Title Case, Sentence case, or the same case as their original alphabet form? Thanks, – Olympian ^loquere 02:25, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

You should use the title most commonly used in English by reliable sources. For example, https://armstat.am/file/doc/162.pdf uses Lori Berd. - David Biddulph (talk) 02:56, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

@David Biddulph That's strange, but it's from the 2001 census. A 2022 de jure population report records Լոռի բերդ and Կրուգլայա շիշկա as "Lori berd" and "Kruglaya shishka", respectively – see page 366 of the linked PDF. – Olympian ^loquere 03:07, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Anthony Michael Nicolletti

This is a biography about my father and his family. I was put up for adoption and reunited with my father in the 2000's. I was declined for not having reliable resources. I took notes from his own mouth. I am the resource. I need help with linking the facts in my article to other pages already in Wikipedia that document persons, places, schools, and other information. How do I do this? not finding an easy explanation how to highlight and create a link. I'd Appreciate the help to correctly publish this article and let his history be known to others and not just myself. Thanks in advance. Ninanicolletti (talk) 06:48, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Per WP policies on WP:VERIFY, WP:OR, and WP:RS, you can't do this. Wikipedia works by having information citeded to reliable sources. You can only use information published in reliable WP:SECONDARY sources, so its veracity can be checked by going to those sources. If this were not so, anyone could come on WP and write whatever nonsense they wanted and users would have no way to check the information for accuracy or truth, so it's like this for good reason. If the information you have is not published elsewhere than your own original research, you wont be able to include it. Heiro 06:58, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

EC And after looking at this Draft:Anthony Michael Nicolletti, it needs to be broken into multiple shorter paragraphs and sections and it's written as a personal essay and not like an encyclopedia article. But more troubling, it looks like it contains many sections that violate our policies on WP:BLP, and I see no indication that this subject passes notablity guidelines at WP:GNG, as a google search doesn't show anyone by this name who looks to be notable. I'm sorry but Wikipedia is not a place to publish a memorial articles on just anyone, even if they were your deceased relative. Pushing forward with this endeavor will not end well, I'd advise you stop now. Heiro 07:12, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi Ninanicolletti. Please take a look at Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything, Wikipedia:Notability, Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Reliable sources for some general information about some of the things needed for an article to be written about your father and his family. Basically, a Wikipedia article can be written about him if you can establish that he received significant coverage in secondary reliable sources that demonstrate he is Wikipedia notable. Please understand that these are all pretty basic criteria established by the Wikipedia community over the years to help assess what kind of subjects can have a Wikipedia article written about them. If your aim is to let your father's history be known to others and to honor him in some way, Wikipedia might not be the best way for you to do so. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:05, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

So if WP isnt a good place to begin the process of creating a biography entry about him - what other places is good for this? my local newspaper? a blog? a youtube video of us together during the interview? I do have this but I would need to upload it and publish it out there. Ninanicolletti (talk) 07:38, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Ninanicolletti, Wikipedia:Directory of alternative outlets might be helpful. -- Hoary (talk) 09:38, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Can IMDb be taken as a source for making filmography of an article?

Hi, While I am editing some articles, the filmography details related to that article are mostly in IMDB. Can a filmography be created based on IMDb? Induvadhone (talk) 07:14, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

See WP:IMDB Heiro 07:20, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

I need help creating an article.

Please suggest me step by step Appwrkllc (talk) 08:19, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Appwrkllc, many steps are involved. Here are the first four. (i) As your username is the name of Appwrk LLC, abandon it and adopt and use a different username. (ii) Forget about any ambition of using Wikipedia to publicize Appwrk. (iii) Read and think about some existing articles. (iv) Make minor, well-referenced improvements to existing articles. -- Hoary (talk) 09:44, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! Appwrkllc (talk) 10:14, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

It would be recommended to request a new username as yours appears to represent a business or organisation which isn't allowed here. -- StarryNightSky11 ☎ 21:38, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

It would? StarryNightSky11, the username Appwrkllc has made a grand total of four (4) edits that haven't yet been deleted. A user with such a list of contributions can simply start off with a new username and abandon the previous one, thereby saving work for others. -- Hoary (talk) 00:37, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Hoary I meant if he/she was to continue editing under that account then it would be recommended to change it. -- StarryNightSky11 ☎ 01:41, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Reviving an article

How to revive an article which has been moved to draft? Echo1Charlie (talk) 11:42, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

That would depend on which draft it is, Echo1Charlie. Please specify the draft. -- Hoary (talk) 11:50, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Draft:HLFT - 42 This one. Echo1Charlie (talk) 13:43, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Echo1Charlie. The answer is, by turning it into something which resembles an encyclopaedia article, by providing reliable sources. ColinFine (talk) 14:12, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Deal with the issues that caused it to be moved to draft, and then either resubmit it to AfC, or if you're convinced it's publication-worthy, move it to main space yourself. Remember, if you move it back prematurely, it won't get redraftified, it'll be sent to AfD, and if the problems aren't solved, it will be deleted, which is worse than being stuck in draft space! Elemimele (talk) 14:56, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

... oh, and looking at the article, you've got a lot of work to do! It will need solid references to people unconnected with the plane writing about it of their own free choice, not using reworded press-releases. I suspect this is WP:TOOSOON. Elemimele (talk) 14:59, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Hindustan Aeronautics Limited, the developer of this aircraft, has Wikilinks to dozens of its products, including several fight jets that are currently in development. Your This effort appears to be about a jet project that is too soon to warrant its own article. Consider adding a short mention to the HAL article if you can find one reference about its existence. David notMD (talk) 15:24, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Note to commenters (including myself): the OP, Echo1Charlie, has not in fact edited this article at alk, though they have worked on other articles on related topics. It was created by a different editor, Flyhigh2020, to whom we should perhaps have addressed all these comments. --ColinFine (talk) 15:45, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Thank you everyone for responding to my query. I'm planning to revive it with reliable sources. But I was confused how to revive it from draft as I didn't know the policies and procedures associated with. Thank you all for responding and clarifying my doubts. Good day.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Echo1Charlie (talk • contribs) 04:34, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Addition to a page

I submitted an addition to a Wikipedia webpage and wanted to get a status. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Trick_deck&oldid=1137604306 Reverend.Red.Raven (talk) 14:31, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

@Reverend.Red.Raven You appear to have added material as a form of WP:Promotion, which is not allowed in any article (please read that linked page). Your additions were reverted by GorillaWarfare, an experienced editor. Please do not add them back. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:42, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

I have again reverted your addition today. You are now in WP:EDITWAR territory and your account is likely to be blocked if you persist in adding this material in its current form. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:59, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Sorry. What do you suggest? It is unique and both Card-Shark.de and I came up with this idea independently. I did create version 1 of this trick in 1985 and filed for copyright in 2012. In negotiations with them because I'd like to transfer my copyright rights to them.

DECK COMPARISONS:

1985 NAME-ANY-CARD Decks: Uses 2/4 decks all cards face F2B (all face up). All 3 versions use 2 decks 108 cards (A-K + 2-Jokers x 2) or 4 decks 216 (A-K + 2-Jokers x 4). Two(2) versions use half thickness card stock, 2 decks in 1 box, and one(1) version uses standard thickness decks in two(2) boxes. Spectator's Named-Card has a Different Back than All the Other Cards in the deck.

V1: 2 boxes. face of cards, box1-deck1 = A/2,3/4,...Q/K. Even back color/design same. Odd back color/design different than Even-backed. Box2-deck2 = 2/3,4/5,.....K/A Odd back color/design same. Even back color/design different than Odd-backed.

V2: 1 box of PDD

20xx ULTIMATE BRAINWAVE Deck: Uses 2 decks all cards face F2B (all face up). Uses 2 decks half thickness card stock, 108 cards (A-K + 2-Jokers x 2) fits in 1 box. Spectator's Named-Card has a Different Colored Back than All the Other Cards in the deck.

V1: 1 box. face of cards, deck-1 A/2,2/3,3/4,... K/A

Same setup as NAC-V1 all 108 cards in 1 box

Next two(2) tricks: cards are F2F or B2B and use one(1) standard thickness deck

INVISIBLE Deck: Uses 1 deck 52-54 cards. Spectator's secretly chosen card is the only one face DOWN in the deck

BRAINWAVE Deck: Uses 1 deck 52-54 cards. Spectator's secretly chosen card is the only one face UP in the deck AND it has a different color back than the rest of the cards in the deck

None of these decks, EXCEPT my Version 4.0, can be examined or handled by the spectator. Reverend.Red.Raven (talk) 15:24, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Since you have a conflict of interest, you should not edit the article, but may place an edit request on the article's talk page. If you cite a reliable source, wholly unconnected with you, that talks about your creation, then it is possible that an uninvolved editor may decide that it is appropriate to add information (from that source, not from you) about your work). ColinFine (talk) 15:49, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

I'm not disputing anyone's description of any other card trick or trick deck. The other tricks use only one(1) deck, our trick uses 2+ decks. My trick deck was shown to Judge Greg Mathis & Max Maven and many magicians and fooled them all. They incorrectly think it's an Invisible or Brainwave deck. In 1985 all that was available to me were standard thickness card stock and I used 2 standard thickness card stock Bicycle brand decks in 2 boxes as I used in 2019 when I performed my original trick for national TV audiences. I searched for a long time for half thickness card stock companies and finally discovered two companies that produced thinner card stock. Only one allowed 2 decks in 1 box. When I created the "derivative" version 2 the Ultimate Brainwave had not yet be created/invented independently. To date I've purchased 8 decks and they sent me 2 extra boxes for my trick. I've been communicating with them, and their customer service is great, and I'd like them to carry on the magic. Reverend.Red.Raven (talk) 15:48, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

We do not add original research to articles. If your trick is extensively mentioned in reliable sources, then you can make and edit request. Club On a Sub 20 (talk) 15:52, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll take your advise. Reverend.Red.Raven (talk) 17:28, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

@Reverend.Red.Raven Your addition to Trick deck is promotional for you and your trick deck design, and cannot be added to the article as written. If there is any chance to succeed, shorten the length of the description to those of the other trick decks, no hyperlink, etc., and have it as a subsection under Trick decks rather than its own section. David notMD (talk) 15:33, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

One problem is that the trick deck descriptions have references. Has information about your deck design been published? Do you REALLY want a detailed description at Wikipedia, for everyone to see? David notMD (talk) 16:01, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

OMG YES I'm open to suggestions. I'm a computer programmer and tend to add to much.

This is a unique trick that I designed to fool other magicians. We all think of a card trick using 1 deck. After in 1985 Max Maven performed a trick for me I came up with this one.

Performance with the version 3 is great for Repeat performances.

1st time: you use Ver-2 with the single Double-Decker (DD)

2nd time you perform for that person/audience you use Ver-3. You perform the NAC showing both DD decks. Then unbeknownst to them you switch them out for 2 standard decks from Card-Shark.de and perform any trick you want, even letting them examine them.

Ver-3 requires 3 DD decks and 2 standard decks. You'll fool everyone, especially other magicians. Reverend.Red.Raven (talk) 16:04, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

PS: how can I delete the previous posts and start over. Reverend.Red.Raven (talk) 16:05, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Also, since I'm new to posting, how do I "have it as a subsection under Trick decks." Could you direct me to a help page that would teach me how to correctly add to posts. I have filed and received from the Library of Congress a copyright where I did describe in exact detail of how I set it up and performed version-1. As to the world seeing it, this topic "Trick Decks" is hard to find. I came upon it by accident. And you do show how a Svengali decks work. Reverend.Red.Raven (talk) 16:24, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

@Reverend.Red.Raven Please don't attempt to delete your previous posts on Talk Pages. As most, if we change our minds about something we strike it out (see WP:TALK for the details). Your aim to include information about your name-any-card trick is admirable but Wikipedia has rules about what and how things should be included, outlined on this page. If you check Trick_deck#Svengali_deck, you should see that there are five quoted sources for the details given. Can you provide such sources for the material you wish to add? This would allow readers to verify that what is written is correct, a central policy here. If you can quote such sources, please do so on the Talk Page of the article at Talk:Trick deck. These sources must be reliably published, so it is not sufficient that only you have access to them. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:49, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks I understand now. Reverend.Red.Raven (talk) 17:31, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll take your advise. Found the help/instructions for submitting. Reverend.Red.Raven (talk) 17:27, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

An importance nuance, given that you describe this as your trick, then as noted above by ColinFine, Wikipedia's rule about conflict of interest applies (see WP:COI). This means that on your User page you should state that you have a COI with Trick deck, and also, rather than editing the article directly, are directed to proposing your addition - with properly formatted references - on the Talk page of the article, for a non-involved editor to review and either add to the article or not. David notMD (talk) 17:29, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Copyright License

I am trying to make an article on a video game and I emailed the copyright owners of the game to ask for permission to use the logos and in game screenshots provided by them. But they do not want to post the logo because it is available for anybody to use in a commercial product. Is there a copyright license that does not give permission to use in a commercial product WinningGlory52 (talk) 14:41, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

@WinningGlory52 I have commented out your logo file from the draft as WP:NONFREE logos can only be used in accepted articles which are in mainspace. Please read WP:LOGO carefully: your file Commons:File:Derail_Valley_Logo.png will be deleted unless the owners were willing to license it as CC BY SA, which from your comment I assume they are not. Placing NC restrictions on the file means it cannot be hosted on commons. It might be hosted here on the English Wikipedia (after the draft is accepted), at a suitably low resolution, as the pages I have linked explain. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:52, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

For the moment, omit the Logo. Sort out the existing issues about the article, and if it's accepted into main space, then an image of the logo can be added there, uploaded to en-WP rather than commons, in low resolution and subject to all the requirements of non-copyrighted images. It can't be done in draft space because one of the requirements is that the image be used in at least one published article. The image must be necessary to the article, and not in sufficient resolution to be usable by a 3rd party, except as an illustration of what the logo looks like. The requirement that the image be necessary also limits what you can do with screen-shots. They have to be the bare minimum for an article that makes sense to a reader. Elemimele (talk) 14:53, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

They are willing to post it as long as it isn't used in another commercial product. Im not that aware of US copyright law but from what I'm reading on the Wikipedia:Logos its saying I can post it as not free and is of lower resolution. Is this possible? WinningGlory52 (talk) 15:01, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Only in a published article, so get the article into main space first, and worry about it when it's there. Elemimele (talk) 15:40, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello again, WinningGlory. Unless they are willing to license it under a license such as CC-BY-SA, which will allow anybody to reuse it for any purpose - and, unsurprisingly they are not so willing - it cannot be uploaded to Commons.

When you get the draft in a shape that it can be accepted as an article, you will probably be able to use the logo as non-free material, in the way Elemimele has explained, and their permission will be irrelevant. But, as Elemimele says, your best course is to forget about the logo for now (it will not affect in the slightest whether your draft is accepted or not), and work on getting the draft to meet Wikipedia's requirements.

Just looking at the list of citations, without even opening them, I can tell that the only one that even might contribute to establishing that the game meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability is the Gaming Nexus one. If that is independent of the game and its developers and platforms, has a reputation for editorial control and fact checking, and contains significant coverage of the game, then it could be a relevant source for notability; but more than one is required.

Furthermore, without looking at the text, I can predict that the most of the information which might be supported by the other citations does not belong in the article. Please have a look at BACKWARD: the content of a Wikipedia article should not be based on what you (the writer) know, or on what the manufacturer says or wants to say: almost all of the article should be based on what those independent sources say about the subject. ColinFine (talk) 16:05, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

@WinningGlory52 About the logo if you get that far, you don't have to worry about low resolution, that is fixed by bots these days. If your article is accepted, go to Wikipedia:File upload wizard, chose Upload a non-free file > This is a copyrighted, non-free work, but I believe it is Fair Use > This is a logo of an organization, company, brand, etc. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:27, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi WinningGlory52. Just going to clarify that the Wikimedia Foundation can't really stop anyone from trying to reuse the logo commercially regardless of how it's licensed or where it's uploaded. It's going to be up to the copyright holder of the logo to defend their copyright. What Wikipedia can do is host the logo under a non-free license such at {{Non-free logo}} so that it can be used on Wikipedia. However, as explained above, this can only be done as long as the way the file is being used in a way that satisfies Wikipedia's non-free content use policy. That pretty much the only way this logo can be used on Wikipedia if the copyright holder is unwilling to give their WP:CONSENT and release the logo under a free license accepted by the Wikimedia Foundation. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:31, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Yinka Ilori

I've made some significant changes and additions to a previously rejected draft article about Yinka Ilori MBE. The draft contains a mixture of newly added references as well as "auto-converted" instances of (some of) those that were used in the previous draft. I am wondering if there is a tool that can help automate clean-up WP:REF to make the wikitext more uniform? The formatting as is seems fairly messy, with ref names like: "ilori-about" and "sunshine", rather than a simply numbered list (i.e., ":01", ":02", etc.). Also, some of refs are WP:LDR, while some are not. It seems better to make all of this more orderly before re-submitting or moving the article to mainspace. (I started to do this manually, but it is tedious and error prone.) Any help would be appreciated. Thank you, Cl3phact0 (talk) 16:38, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

@Cl3phact0: I'm not aware of a Wikipedia tool, but you could copy the source code to your favorite text editor, perform a find & replace for the ref names to get them formatted the way you want, and then paste the new text back to Wikipedia. GoingBatty (talk) 16:53, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! I actually tried this but when I brought the text back into WP, there were "cite errors" that I couldn't eliminate (that's the tedious and error prone part I mentioned above). Cl3phact0 (talk) 17:02, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

My personal view is that names (words) are about a million times more useful for reference names than numbers. ColinFine (talk) 16:58, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

That makes sense. Following your logic, I'd do better to replace the ":0", ":1", etc. refs with something like an abbreviated code for the publication (i.e., "CNN", "FT", "GUARD", etc.). In either case, I have the same problem in that the refs are currently a bit of a jumble. Cl3phact0 (talk) 17:07, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

i like the citations, but im not very sure this would be accepted to Wikipedia. Dittoing the Rejector, this page is written like the "about me" page on a website, it almost sounds like an ad. i feel like large swabs of the page could be rewritten to be a bit more neutral.

though, i might just be wrong (put a message on my talk page if so) -a really self-degrading name(speak of the devil)- 17:15, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Please have a look at the before/after versions. I've re-written it substantially taking out lots of fluff, etc. Any advice on how it could be further improved would be much appreciated. Cheers, Cl3phact0 (talk) 17:20, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

The first paragraph ends by telling us what he has said about his own work. And it's not even interesting, it's just vague self-promotional blether. That doesn't belong in the article, let alone the lead. Maproom (talk) 17:34, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Some of the articles that were used a reference models: Es Devlin, Achille Castiglioni, Jasper Morrison, Samuel Ross, and Livio Castiglioni. Would your comments apply to these as well then? Cl3phact0 (talk) 17:49, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Unless the quote itself is notable, yes, those articles should be updated. - UtherSRG (talk) 17:55, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. Any advice on how to improve the Yinka Ilori draft? (Apart from getting rid of the quote, of course.) Cl3phact0 (talk) 18:05, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

PS: The Achille Castiglioni quote was printed on the wall of an exhibition of his work at the Museum of Modern Art. Would that make it "notable" in this context? Cl3phact0 (talk) 18:10, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Probably not, unless an independent commentator wrote about it, for example in a review of the exhibition. ColinFine (talk) 18:18, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

I'll try to get a better understanding of the proper use of quotes on WP and revert back. I'm a tad confused as the examples I've cited seem to be associated with the individuals and have all been quoted in reputable sources by independent commentators. Another example can be found here: Dieter Rams ("less, but better" in particular is commonly associated with the subject), though the other quote too seems relevant to gaining a better understanding of Rams. Cl3phact0 (talk) 18:39, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Took quote out of lead. Trimmed a bit. Thanks again for the help. Cheers, Cl3phact0 (talk) 19:03, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

This is confusing. An earlier draft of this article seems to have been accepted. What am I missing? Cheers, Cl3phact0 (talk) 21:55, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Cl3phact0 The older version was Speedy deleted in May 2022, for being promotional and copyright violations, leaving no editing history (part of Sd policy) David notMD (talk) 23:17, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Cl3phact0, you're missing an article that was/is flawed but informative and tolerably good -- in my opinion, but obviously not in Athaenara's opinion. Unfortunately, only administrators will be able to view it now and form their own opinions on the matter. It is of course possible that they will agree that the article richly deserved deletion and that I was/am deluded. Anyway, because it's alleged to contain "copyvios of various sources, magazine articles, etc.", undeletion isn't something that I should do unilaterally. See below. -- Hoary (talk) 01:10, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Thinks: "'Yinka Ilori'? I know that name." I accepted a draft. It did need some work doing to it; I did the work. I then pretty much forgot about it. And I discover today that it was deleted. Please see Draft_talk:Yinka_Ilori#Deletion_of_the_earlier_article. (Oh, and I've just now discovered a further odd twist to the tale.) -- Hoary (talk) 00:10, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for the follow-up. I guess the point now is really just to get the current draft into good shape for publication. I've taken much of the above advice and commentary into consideration and have made some fairly significant additional edits. Ilori is an important figure in contemporary design, so it seems odd that he's not included in this encyclopaedia. What's the best path forward? Cheers, Cl3phact0 (talk) 06:42, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

PS: What's the "twist"?

Properly declaring conflict of Interest and handling it in different branches of Wikipedia

Hey, I just registered for the first time since so far all my edits had all been fairly minor corrections and it seemed to me that as I was now asked to correct something where I had a conflict of interest was I should register and do this as openly as possible. I have a couple of questions: A) I learned that it is proper etiquette to declare a conflict of interest together with a request edit in the english wikipedia. It doesn't seem that the German version has such a system, possibly because all entries are being sighted. Does that also mean that there are different stances about the issue as such? B) I have seen several cases where there are insufficient sources given and sometimes wrong entries. My question in this regard is: I would like to tip the balance of Wikipedia as little as possible as I think it's great that this is not an advertising platform, yet it still seems good to use the resources of my job to correct some things (in the latest case wrong exhibition dates)

So, let's take the practical case of Yves Klein, German Version: There were a couple of wrong entries, all without source. When I correct them, do I add the source and thereby influence the weight of the section or do I just skip it altogether and just correct the entries and leave them with as little source as before?

Thanks everyone :) GGLibrarian (talk) 17:30, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello, GGLibrarian, and welcome to the Teahouse. Yes, different editions of Wikipedia have different policies, and few people on en-wiki can tell you anything about what is acceptable on de-wiki. You really need to ask there. Try de:WP:FVN. ColinFine (talk) 17:49, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Is really Contributor Zefr PhD of Biology?

Spirulina (dietary supplement)

Zefr said "Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Spirulina (dietary supplement), you may be blocked from editing. You cannot change content or quotes to be what you want it to say. Content on medical issues depends on WP:MEDRS sources. Zefr (talk) 17:58, 10 February 2023 (UTC)"

I had edited the value of folic acid to zero because USDA data shows ZERO. Zefr replied me above.

Also he said in the past, "This USDA-FDC link is the one from the spirulina article. FDC is the most extensive and reliable source of nutrition information for foods on Wikipedia. Zefr (talk) 19:20, 6 January 2023 (UTC)"

He did not check the original data of USDA-FDC link.

It is not right away, Zefr makes WIKI's Reliability itself. Who made Zefr for contributor? FarhadUltrasound (talk) 19:06, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

wikipedia is volunteer work, no one made them a contributor, if thats what you ment. also i cannot understand what you mean by "Zefr makes WIKI's Reliability itself"'

also, i may be an idiot so i might have gotten this wrong (leave a message on my talk page if so -a really self-degrading name(speak of the devil)- 19:22, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

According to https://fdc.nal.usda.gov/fdc-app.html#/food-details/170495/nutrients there is no folic acid. Are you sure you are not referring to folate @Zefr:? Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 20:03, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

FarhadUltrasound made 12 edits to Spirulina (dietary supplement), most having to do either with safety or Vitamin B12 issues, including that pseudovitamin B₁₂ is biologically active in humans. Zefr reverted all of those. I happen to have a PhD in Nutritional Biochemistry (MIT), and agree with Zefr's actions. A key point here is that FarhadUltrasound made changes to factual statements either without having provided supporting references, or in one example, changed a quotation within a reference. For all contributors (myself included) our credentials matter less than the ability to provide reliable source references as validation. David notMD (talk) 20:46, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

How to find information on wikipedia without using articles

You won't need to look for articles, myself I sometimes use the live channels, like the balloon incident, and live events from YouTube. Some people might say that the U.S. Military government, for example, was attacked by the ballon on February,13,2023. That's not a good example. This is where the citations come in. A citation is where you give credit to a author by explaining where, how, and when. Like, how you found the information, where you got the information, or when was the information created. Evergreen tenal (talk) 19:29, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

is this a question about editing wikipedia, and why is this written in second person?

-a really self-degrading name(speak of the devil)- 19:31, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Info contact

Come posso contattarti? Mrleroy1000 (talk) 19:46, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Mrleroy1000, welcome to the Teahouse on English Wikipedia. Are you possibly looking for Italian Wikipedia? Their help desk is here. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 19:49, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

wikipedia è un'organizzazione. non abbiamo davvero un contatto. anche questa è la Wikipedia in inglese, quindi ho dovuto tradurre questa risposta su Google.

(under the assumption this user is italian, i translated this message "wikipedia is an organization. we don't really have a contact. also this is the English Wikipedia, so i had to google translate this response." to italian, i tried i guess)

-a really self-degrading name(speak of the devil)- 19:51, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi, I don't want to talk to wikipedia or the staff, I would like to be able to communicate with you personally. How can I do? Can I leave my email here? or other contacts Mrleroy1000 (talk) 19:55, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Who do you want to contact privately? You can send them an email at Special:EmailUser. Also, you are not talking to Wikipedia or its staff right now. You are talking to Wikipedia volunteers. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 19:59, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not social media. It's function is not a meetup or place to make friends. If you are trying to discuss improving an article, you can use the talk page of that article. If you are trying to reach a particular editor about an article, you can leave a message on their talk page. However, both of these are for improving the encyclopedia, not causal chat. Slywriter (talk) 21:36, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Are syndication links allowed?

I removed another user's link to streaming services, as I considered it to be advertising. However, it got me thinking that it may just be information that's helpful to a reader. Are these kinds of links allowed on wikipedia, or no? Thanks! CivilianArthur (talk) 20:27, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

courtesy link: Special:Diff/1139178561 – dudhhr ^talk _contribs (he/they) 20:33, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

CivilianArthur, MOS:TVINTL I think addresses this as it says "syndication can be noted" and also mentions streaming services. However, there is a difference between saying 'syndicated on Crackle' in the proper section of the article vs tossed into the middle of character section with "you can watch on". Slywriter (talk) 21:27, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Re-evaluating wikiproject ratings

Hi,

I have added significantly to Free State Gold Rush (expanded by approx. 60% so far) and would like to have it re-evaluated in the quality and importance metrics by the relevant wikiprojects, namely Wikipedia:WikiProject Mining and Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa.

How would I go about requesting a re-assessment of these ratings? I would rate myself based on the established criteria, but I'd rather someone else rate for obvious reasons. EPIFANOVE^(TALK) 22:24, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

You doubled length and took if from zero to five refs, but large sections of text are still not referenced. I suggest you work on referencing more, and then raise it to C-class. David notMD (talk) 23:04, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

In passing, your signature is near-impossible to read. David notMD (talk) 23:05, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Got it, thank you very much. In relation to this, what should I focus on to raise it to GA?

P.S. changed name color EPIFANOVE^(TALK) 23:53, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for changing your signature. (Though since "EPIFANOVE" isn't "Epifanove", I warmly recommend further steps in degimmickification.) I glanced at the article. One section, "Early prospecting", consists of three substantial paragraphs. No paragraph, no sentence, no clause within this comes with a reference. Thus the reader is given no reason to believe any of it. First, focus on making the content of the article credible for the sceptical reader. -- Hoary (talk) 00:50, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Im working on that and have found 20+ references to add.

The section you are referring to (and any others with no references) are what existed before I contributed to the article, and none of it has any inline citations. Its good info that is actually found in books on the subject, but a pain in the ass to find inline citations for.

Thanks for your reply, will degimmickify, didnt know capitalisation was considered gimmicky. EPIFANOVE^(TALK) 01:31, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

References do not need to be available on line. Hence, can cite books! David notMD (talk) 02:34, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Well, EPIFANOVE -- and as you can see, Epifanove, I've just addressed a currently non-existent user. Only the first letter of a user ID is case-insensitive. -- Hoary (talk) 02:50, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Yeah I remember reading that but didn't know that changing the formatting was still considered a bad choice. Gotcha. Epifanove^(TALK) 11:13, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

When I reply using the "reply" feature, it notifies the editor I'm replying to automatically; but when I want to ping an editor myself, I need to type their name in, and if the signature doesn't match, I will very easily fail to ping them. ColinFine (talk) 11:39, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Automated/semi-automated editing

Another question:

I would like to start making semi-automated edits (anti vandalism, etc.), but can't seem to find the best tool to use on a mac. Does anyone have any relevant tips? Thank-you in advance. EPIFANOVE^(TALK) 22:27, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

WP:AWB, WP:TW, WP:RW? Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 23:11, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

You forgot one: WP:UV ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 02:58, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Help in what to include in article in order to get it approved

Hello. I need assistance in how to proceed in editing the article Draft:Sean Wheeler so that it can be approved. I have been editing it, following the instructions that several editors have suggested since I originally wrote it. On this last try, it was declined because of a lack of sources in the sections "discography", "1981", as well as for the birth date in the info box... so my questions are: 1- what kind of source is valid for the birth date in the info box? 2- the "1981" section does contain an independent source I included, which covers everything mentioned in that section... is this source not enough for that section? 3- will erasing the discography section (until finding the appropriate sources for it) help in the approval of this article? Thank you very much for your time. I appreciate all the help I can get Cachizalo (talk) 00:18, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Cachizalo, I notice that both File:Early picture of Mutual Hatred band with Sean Wheeler on vocals in early 80s.jpg and File:Mario Lalli and the Rubber Snake Charmers on Scandinavian summer tour 2022.jpg are your work. (Perhaps others are too, but I didn't look.) This suggests an unusually close relationship between yourself and your subject; or in Wikipedia-speak, a "conflict of interest". Comments? -- Hoary (talk) 00:57, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

@Cachizalo: Welcome to the Teahouse!

1. Please provide the source that shows where you read what his birth date is.
2. The source in the 1981 section doesn't seem to mention The Sciotics, Bouncing Souldiers, Dr. Strangelove, Vein Train, Junkyard Angel, or Cactus Slim and the Other Desert Cities band.
3. Removing unsourced information - or providing reliable sources - will help.

Thanks, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 03:38, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Edit Request/Possible Data Innaccuracy

On the Climate of the United States article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_of_the_United_States), there is a section on extreme temperatures. Most of the information in there seems fine, except for 2 things: the June record low of -11F at Anaktuvuk Pass in Alaska is dubious because it seems like that year that the Anaktuvuk Pass weather station was having data errors. The other issue being the August record low of -6F at Snowshoe Lake, Alaska because when I looked at the climate data, it showed the coldest temperature ever recorded at Snowshoe Lake in August was 12.

Here are some sources:

https://xmacis.rcc-acis.org/

When you're in the page, there are some more steps you have to take to get to the data:

Single Station -> Monthly Summarized Data

Options Selection -> Output: Table, Variable: Min temp, Summary, Minimum, Year range: por-por (por stands for period of record, it will automatically take data from the first year data was recorded to the last)

Station Selection -> Search -> Anaktuvuk Pass -> Select the Anaktuvuk Auto weather station -> Click Go

This will bring up the coldest temperature recorded in each month (at the very bottom is the absolute records for each month) and you can see that in 1971 the data seems very erroneous. If you go back to the Single Station dropdown and select Daily Data for a Month and put 1971-06, and you'll see that the only data from that month was for a few days at the end of the month. You can do the same for other months in 1971 and most of them will show the same: just a few data at the end of the month. Infact, sometimes they are the exact same days with the exact same number in different months (for example May 1971 has the exact same data, doesn't seem right).

You can also do the same for the Monthly Summarized Data at Snowshoe Lake weather station (same steps as Anaktuvuk pass but different station name).

The source provided in the actual Wiki page is:

https://wrcc.dri.edu/Climsum.html

If you go here, there are also some steps:

Click on Alaska, click Anaktuvuk Auto (or scroll down to Snowshoe Lake). Scroll down on the left side of the page until you see Extreme Minimum, which also shows the coldest temperature recorded in each month for each year, as it did in the other page (absolute records for each month are also at bottom), and there isn't even data from 1971 for Anaktuvuk Pass, the coldest temperature recorded June shows as 12F. Similar for Snowshoe Lake: it has data from 1971 but the lowest wasn't at -6F, the record low for August there also shows as 12F.

If someone could find some more reliable sources for the June and August record low for the United States that would be great. So far the lowest temperature I've found for June is 8F at Mount Washington in 1945. I haven't looked into August temperatures yet.

Should the article be left like that until the actual values are found or should I just put in some preliminary data and keep looking? Akamaikai (talk) 03:42, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Akamaikai, and welcome to the Teahouse. It is much better to have discussions of an article on that article's talk page, where people with an interest in the subject are more likely to see it. ColinFine (talk) 11:41, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Akamaikai Regarding "it seems like that year that the Anaktuvuk Pass weather station was having data errors"; it seeming like it was an error is insufficient, there needs to be a reliable source that definitively says there was a data error or equipment malfunction that should discredit the information. 331dot (talk) 11:44, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

My "infamous" article/page

I have written and posted an article, about someone that contributions have been many, however it has ruffled the feathers of the many gatekeepers on here.

That was not my intention, I just did not want to see someone's "important" contributions lost to obscurity. And this all confuses me about wikipedia, which I thought was about championing what is right. Preventing information from being lost to obscurity, and sharing it with others.

I provided multiple citations, if wikipedia is only going to accept certain ones from certain sources, then have to ask is that in itself a conflict of interest, and is wikipedia discriminating against certain people or topics ?

Again, im not here to ruffle feathers, but perhaps.. this at least starts a conversation.

Thank you for your time. Paul in toronto (talk) 05:05, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

This seems to be about the draftification of Draft:Paul Brodie (frame builder). If you're under the impression that it's the meritorious who should get articles, you're wrong. Dictators, war profiteers, quacks, other con-men and other trash get articles, if these can be firmly based on reliable sources. Frame-builders can too, if reliable sources suffice. (They certainly would suffice for Giuseppe Marinoni, for example. I'm surprised that he doesn't already have an article.) There are plenty of reliable sources for information about a great array of subjects that are of no interest to me; but as these subjects are of interest to a great number of other editors, they get written up. Well, all the best improving that draft to the point where it's good enough to be an article. (Incidentally, who called it "infamous", and where?) -- Hoary (talk) 06:53, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

I could be spending my time editing articles, instead there is great interest in my article for some reason.

Ive made a more then valid point about there being a conflict of interest regarding the sources deemed reliable, and not being open to citing other sources.

once again this debating things add infinitum, could spent more productively.

Theres thousands of articles out there, many I have stumbled upon with 1 maybe 2 citations period.

There is thousands of articles out there, with obscure citations, from sources not on the list.

There is many citations, that are no dead links. Ie the source no longer exists.

I do offer praise for the few that first took offence to this article, and later helped edit it, to improve it.

There to me, this is alot more about polictics then sharing information with the masses.

If this is what wikipedia, has become then im highly disappointed.

And yes I agree, there should be an article about mr maranoni, why there is not is a complete travesty.

These are important people, and we have a responsibility not to loose them to obscurity. Paul in toronto (talk) 08:17, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Sorry I meant Marinoni.

History is not meant to be forgotten Paul in toronto (talk) 08:20, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Paul in toronto. To be perfectly frank, your bare URL references suck. They are ugly and they fail to convey the bibliographic information that would make it far easier for a reviewer to assess this work of yours. On Wikipedia, excellent references to reliable, independent sources that devote significant coverage to the topic are like nuggets of gold. The way you have presented your references is like covering up gold (if it exists in your references) with a deep layer of horse manure. Where's your gold? Let it shine with proper referencing. Cullen328 (talk) 08:31, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Yep, lets just keep debating instead of doing editing.

if this how you feel, as I sit here wondering if you actually went through all of my citations which I assume is what you meant by urls, then assist me to show the gold in the poop as you so endearingly put it.

In the meantime im working on a different page that needs an update. Paul in toronto (talk) 08:43, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Or you could take a few extra seconds and fill out a proper citation. See here for how Wikipedia:Citation templates#Examples. Heiro 08:52, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Ok my bad. I had no idea there was a template needed for citations.

let me study a few other pages to see of I can figure it out and fix that. Unless there is some examples you can share? Paul in toronto (talk) 09:00, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Follow my link. YOu can basically copy and paste any of those citation templates (using appropriate one for sources such as a book, website, etc) and then fill in the required fields specific to the info from your source. Make sure the <ref> is at the front and the </ref> is at the end to close it. Heiro 09:03, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

For websites, this is the simplest one: <ref>{{cite web | url = | title = | last = | first = | date = | website = | publisher = | access-date = | quote = }}</ref> First and last are authors names, rest is pretty self explanatory. Heiro 09:06, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

I spent a bit of time rewriting the citations for jon favreau

walk of fame, not sure if they get your seal ( arf arf ) of approval, but you can let me know if you wish.

I couldnt get the ref to cbsnews to work, and I suspect that may not be a source wikipedia likes.

I will try to add more citations later, and go back and fix other ones.

Thank you for pointing this out to me, and helping me become a better editor., and thanks for all the tips and references.

I tip my hat to you Paul in toronto (talk) 09:58, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Paul in toronto As a former rider (not builder) I completely revised Draft:Paul Brodie (frame builder) to bring it closer to Wikipedia style. That included cutting content that was probably unable to be referenced and not relevant to his potential notability. There is a program in Wikipedia that converts 'naked URL' refs into properly formatted refs. Rather than you trying to make it work (I can't), I beseech any experienced editor here to turn the crank. David notMD (talk) 08:52, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Well, im tipping my hat to Sir David of not MD, I appreciatte the assist.

Thank you. I will look into the program and see if I can figure it out.

Is there any articles( or do we call them pages) that I can assist you on ? Paul in toronto (talk) 08:56, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

I noticed at Jon Favreau your referencing is also just URLs. Please study Help:Referencing for beginners rather than leaving stuff for others to clean up after you. David notMD (talk) 08:55, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Wow! For Brodie, someone turned on the Citation bot and all the URLs were converted. It's articles (not pages), and unless you have a PhD in nutritional biochemistry, probably little you can help me with. But thanks for the offer. David notMD (talk) 08:58, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Ive been known to dabble, but no phd as of yet.

What are your thoughts on intermittent fasting.

Can I use this citation bot to clean up my other citations ? Paul in toronto (talk) 09:03, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

help for complate My article

 Courtesy link: Draft:Tamadon Investment Bank

Hi i need help for complate for my first article "Draft:Tamadon Investment Bank". Please help me for complate my article for Publish. Thank you Fsceo (talk) 05:14, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

@Fsceo Your draft has many issues but the most serious is that a major part of it is a copyright violation as it is taken directly from the bank's own website at this URL, as is obvious from the phrase fully committed to expanding our products and clients’ reach, strengthening our capital resources, and growing our business to create value for our clients. which should never appear in any Wikipedia article. You need to start again, after reading this advice and this advice. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:42, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

How long/experience for new article

i just wanted to know how much more time/contributions does one need to do to be able write a new article. Tjohman (talk) 06:39, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello Tjohman. You are ready to try writing a Wikipedia encyclopedia article when you feel confident that you are up to the difficult task. I had been a published writer before discovering Wikipedia and, after starting my volunteer editing, it took me 3 years before attempting my first online article. I read Help:Your first article numerous times, read at least a dozen Wikipedia articles on similar subjects, spent a couple weeks hunting down reliable references, wrote my draft article, and submitted it for review. Being notified that my article had been accepted was a joyful day, for I consider writing good reliable nonfiction to be an important undertaking. Best wishes on your writing projects. Karenthewriter (talk) 07:57, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Tjohman. I made my first edit to Wikipedia on June 28, 2009 and wrote my first new article, Dirk van Erp, on July 27, 2009, 30 days later. The amount of time is far less important than the seriousness of the study. No article that I have written or significantly expanded has ever been deleted because I took the time to study and fully understand and comply with Wikipedia's core content policies before I started writing new content. Those who make that effort succeeed and those who do not do that work fail. It's that simple. Cullen328 (talk) 08:16, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

One beginner's error is to draft an article, and then try to find supporting references. Better to collect the refs (properly formatted, in your Sandbox) first, and then compose only what you have verifying refs for. David notMD (talk) 09:15, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Notable people

Hi, I want to remove few names from section of notable people from Bhatkal, which is defamatory, which creates negative image among the viewer against the town and are used as propaganda. The page is semi-protected. so, my question is:- I want to replace with the other name but, there is no wiki page for that, I have reference from news websites. Is it enough to add citation to each name. FakeInfoDetector (talk) 06:43, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

You can not remove notable people just because you do not like them. Their being there is not defamatory. Names should only be added for people who already have an existing article. If they are not notable enough for an article, then they aren't notable enough to be in the notable people section. If you have enough sources to write an article on them and they pass WP:GNG, then do that first. Afterward, you can add their names to this article. Heiro 06:48, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

I didn't mean that I want to remove the section of "Notable People" page. It creates negative image against the town which is not good to add to such people who are declared as terrorist and are used as propaganda. so, it must be removed. FakeInfoDetector (talk) 06:59, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

@Heironymous Rowe Is youtube is considered as Primary source? FakeInfoDetector (talk) 07:07, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

I knew exactly what you meant. No, do not remove them because it "makes your town look bad", that is not a valid reason to remove information from an article. You will be reverted, and if you edit war over it you will most likely get blocked. That article is already locked down with a semi-protect because of your past actions over this matter.

See WP:YOUTUBE, generally no, it is not an RS. But some instances youtube can be used. Heiro 07:32, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Remove Earlier References

I have used a sample page of another personality for the template. After completing the editing I am unable to remove the references inserted by the earlier content user. Kindly Help! Nithinragavs (talk) 06:53, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Nithinragavs. I do not see why you are having a technical issue. I think that the far more important question is why you think that a person described as the "Honorary Consul General of The Republic of Palau to India" deserves a Wikipedia biography. That is by no means a strong claim to notability. Please explain why you think this person is notable, and what is your relationship with this person? Cullen328 (talk) 07:56, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

@Nithinragavs, welcome to the Teahouse. Assuming this is about Draft:Dr Neeraj A Sharma. Did you notice that recerences actually are placed in the article text, not the reference section? Also, see WP:TUTORIAL on how to add references correctly, as of now you have several WP:EL:s in the text and that is not good enough. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:12, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

After first use of full name, all subsequent use of name should be surname (familial name) only, shich I guess is Sharma. David notMD (talk) 09:25, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

IP vandalism deterrent?

I visited some celebrity articles to check their movie appearances, but the respective film/tv lists appeared to be heavily vandalized. The table cells were a mess! Upon checking their "View history" tabs to verify, there were about 4 or 5 IP addresses randomly editing and creating edit wars with numerous registered users. I'm not sure if the vandalism is/was being reported, but something's gotta give. Wouldn't it make sense to "convert" ALL wikipedia articles so that only registered users could edit anything?!?! All the wasted time on some of these articles with their long list of random IP reversions is sad, honestly. The "indefinite page protections" don't seem to be enough. Why not just block IP edits altogether in the first place? IP users don't even have a long-standing Talk page to communicate ideas about what they're doing wrong!

Converting wikipedia to "registered user only" edit mode would be beneficial to those who help move it forward. CYAce01 (talk) 11:09, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello, CYAce01, and welcome to the Teahouse. Please see WP:Perennial proposals#Prohibit anonymous users from editing for previous discussion on this. ColinFine (talk) 11:54, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Sexualised content

Why does sexualised content get a platform here, yet so many worthy articles get rejected? What sort of precedence are you setting for our future selves? Do you understand the danger involved in the normalisation of degrading sexual content online? Get rid of it all NOW 2A00:23C6:B582:8501:A1DB:1DF6:6E49:BABC (talk) 11:27, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. Wikipedia is not censored for any reason, as this is a project to write an encyclopedia of human knowledge. If certain content offends you, you shouldn't look at it. 331dot (talk) 11:29, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Additionally, if you had named the article in question we could have checked it for vandalism. (Edit: I'm assuming Belle Delphine is the article in question.)- X201 (talk) 11:50, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Personal attacks, like calling me scum, are not permitted. I can't speak to specific content that I am not aware of, you made a general statement. 331dot (talk) 11:53, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Working on a draft for an article page, please help in reviewing the page

Hello members,

I've recently worked on a draft, which was declined (with very good insights). So I've tried to update the draft, with relevant sources and other related information. I need your inputs on the same, so that I can work on it and refine it in a better way. Please find the below draft link

Thank you for your time

Batreweydf (talk) 12:45, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Batreweydf Hello and welcome. You have submitted it for a review, so that is the way to get feedback. I will look at it and leave comments if need be. 331dot (talk) 12:49, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Batreweydf, first, the section "Business model" cites no sources. Why should the reader believe what it says? Secondly, the whole thing is written in a rather soporific corporate-speak. As an example, "Simplilearn's business model is centered around the sale of its online courses to individuals and organizations." Couldn't this be "Simplilearn sells online courses to individuals and organizations"? -- Hoary (talk) 12:55, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Need assistance with an AfD reuest

I am grateful to @Liz for pointing out that my request does not follow WP:AFD despite following the instructions to the best of my ability. I suspect that one (or more) of the auto-gen scripts erred, so I would be thankful for direction on how to fix this by hand so that my request complies with Wikipedia policy. I think this is my third AfD request, so I'm surprised that it is not compliant. With thanks, BordenC (talk) 13:02, 14 February 2023 (UTC)