Wikipedia:Teahouse

Hoary, 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

. Oooh sorry I got you, sorry for my interruption poor and misleading statements that I applied which coused the interruption, I hope I will be forgiven for that, something went wrong somewhere, but I will try my best. MDmulwa (talk) 03:33, 18 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)

@Cachizalo Not to pile on you, but editors often ask what kind of sources can be used for certain pieces of information. Or they have written a lot of material, and then they start looking for sources afterwards. As GoingBatty says, it's really very simple: "Where did you find that information in the first place?" If it is from a reliable source, then that's your reference. If it's not from a reliable source, then don't include the information. Good luck! David10244 (talk) 04:01, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

It takes a lot for the article to be accepted. If a draft is rejected, they usually explain why. Cwater1 (talk) 20:34, 16 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)

What if the source listed in the actual article shows that it didn't even happen? The source they listed doesn't even have any data for that year. And the other source listed has a different record from a different place. Akamaikai (talk) 14:58, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Interesting! You definitely should take this up at the article's talk page. Those who are frequent contributors or have an interest in that article will get notified and can respond! SpookyTwenty (talk) 15:28, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

I mentioned it in the talk page. No response yet. I don't think many people look at that talk page considering the last time someone said anything in there before me was in December 2021.. Akamaikai (talk) 22:47, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

@Akamaikai, you could also try the talk page of WikiProject Weather. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 22:51, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

In addition to the IP user's suggestion, which is a good one, I'd say that the talk pages for articles can often go days or weeks with very little activity. My experience is that the parts of Wikipedia that involve interaction can be very quiet, with places like this the exception. SpookyTwenty (talk) 23:57, 16 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)

@Michael D. Turnbull Shouldn't the copyvio part be revdel'ed? David10244 (talk) 04:06, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Possibly, but it is only part of the draft and I'm not an admin, so I leave it to more experienced eyes who will be reading this Teahouse post to decide what to do. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:39, 16 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)

Thank you @Cullen328 for the note. Firstly, I have resolved the issue by myself. Secondly any person who is working towards a good cause needs some kind of biography which can be looked into at a later date. The position he holds is not a permanent one but his works needs to be told through the page and that is what I am trying to do. I have met this person often at events where he mentors entrepreneurs especially women. He runs an NGO for underprivileged kids. So few reasons to create this page. Nithinragavs (talk) 09:53, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

@Nithinragavs "any person who is working towards a good cause needs some kind of biography which can be looked into at a later date". Even if that is true, Wikipedia is not the place to write a biography on anyone who is working on a good cause, unless they are notable (click here). David10244 (talk) 04:21, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

@Nithinragavs Encyclopedia articles are written in a dry, dispassionate tone. Remove phrases like "As a true visionary leader, he is looked upon by many as a guide and philiospher whose presence vibrates positivity, fondly known as "Guru"". David10244 (talk) 05:28, 17 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)

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång Thank you for the suggestions. Usually in India second name is not used much to identify a person. These surnames are very common and you will find about many Mr Sharmas' within a same region, hence the first name. I am referring the tutorial for the references section. Thanks again. Nithinragavs (talk) 09:57, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

@Nithinragavs That may well be true in India, but Wikipedia's Manual of Style says to use surnames after the first mention. It's not likely that within one article the reader would get confused on who is being referred to. David10244 (talk) 04:08, 16 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)

@ColinFine: It doesn't seem those discussions went far and did much. What are the chances that the topic could be made into a wikipedia vote? Many wikipedia items get a voting system. Why not this topic? CYAce01 (talk) 16:52, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

CYAce01 Nothing on Wikipedia is decided by a vote, see WP:NOTAVOTE- decisions are made by consensus. If you were to dig pretty deep you would see this is an often discussed topic. In some ways it is preferable to have vandalism from IPs rather than from accounts. I don't wish to say why for security reasons, but people intent on vandalizing would find ways to do so even if forced to create accounts. 331dot (talk) 17:11, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

@331dot: Sorry, but "Nothing on Wikipedia is decided by a vote..." is false. For example, the Arbitration Committee does their annual election process. In fact, there's a banner at the top of the screen during the event. There's even an annual announcement on my Talk page that states "...All eligible users are allowed to vote..." Key word: vote! The proposal discussions aren't doing justice! Let's finally put this IP address topic up for vote! CYAce01 (talk) 17:51, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are not related to Wikipedia content and policies; that's to what I was referring. 331dot (talk) 18:07, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Here's the latest "vote" I found in a quick search: Wikipedia:Village pump (WMF)/Archive 3#IP editing and Masked edits. Reading it, especially the closer's statement, might be useful to anyone who wants to take this up again. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:08, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

As noted, if you want to dive in and do the extensive work required to implement the policy change you want, you will have to do the research to see what objections there are or have been to the proposal, and write your formal proposal in a way to address those objections. This won't be as easy as it sounds, as it would need to have a broad discussion involving many editors. Again, please see WP:NOTAVOTE. Discussions are not conducted through a voting system as ArbCom elections are. 331dot (talk) 18:09, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

WP:NOTAVOTE also states that a poll is not forbidden. The proposals have obviously been brought up several times, but haven't done much justice. Wouldn't a poll help speed up the process in this never-ending "consensus" cycle? Why not try? CYAce01 (talk) 18:36, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Because consensus says that policy changes are not enacted through polls, @CYAce01. If you want to change that consensus, you'll need to make a proposal at one of the Village Pumps, where you've already been directed a few times. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:42, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

No, it wouldn't help. Polls are easily gamed as one person could create multiple accounts to participate. Very little, if anything, is ever final on Wikipedia, even through consensus, as consensus can change. I'm not sure what makes you think those intent on vandalizing won't just create accounts, but I don't need to know that. You've been told how you can proceed if you have the time to do the extensive work and research required to formulate a proposal and address the concerns of prior rejections. 331dot (talk) 10:18, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

@331dot: It doesn't appear that a poll on the topic has been attempted yet, so nobody knows if it will help or not, technically. The negativity and speedy rejection toward the option, without trying first, isn't helping matters. The fact that blocked IPs has been proposed so many times, by itself, speaks volumes. CYAce01 (talk) 03:49, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

If you want to try, go ahead and try, but as I said, you should only try if you have the time to do the extensive work and research required to formulate a proposal(which would need to be a formal Request for Comment most likely) and address the concerns of prior rejections. We aren't trying to be negative but what we are trying to say is that it isn't a quick and easy matter of just asking "hey let's ban IP editing", we're just trying to be honest with you. 331dot (talk) 10:10, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

@CYAce01, as the page ColinFine linked above says, If you feel you would still like to do one of these proposals, then raise it at the village pump. However, as it also says, you should address rebuttals raised in the past if you make a proposal along these lines. So you would need to do some research into the past discussions around this topic, then make a new proposal which includes a response to past objections. Note that IP masking is coming and may change how we all interact in the future, depending on how it's implemented. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 17:20, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Proposals after proposals...and IPs still getting away with vandalism. I still think a poll could work wonders here after so many years, regardless of what the policy says (still just my 2cents, but w/e). CYAce01 (talk) 19:43, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

CYAce01 – yes, a relatively tiny proportion of IPs vandalise; so do a great many people who register accounts, because registering an account is very easy. The vast majority of IPs do not vandalise. You may notice that I am an IP: I choose not to have an account for reasons I am comfortable with. I have been editing very regularly on Wikipedia as an IP for approaching 20 years and have never vandalised. Should I be blocked because of the acts of a relative handful of vandals? Some people in private cars drive irresponsibly and injure or kill others – should we ban all non-professional drivers? {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 51.198.141.181 (talk) 21:20, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Governments do require people to register and demonstrate competency before being allowed to drive, so that might not be the best analogy for Wikipedia. GoingBatty (talk) 22:02, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

But there is a difference between competency and professionalism. 331dot (talk) 10:20, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

@CYAce01 "I still think a poll could work wonders here after so many yesrs". Then start a poll! David10244 (talk) 04:24, 16 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)

Starting an Articles for deletion is a valid path to have an article deleted. Calling for an article to be deleted on the Talk page of the article accomplishes nothing. David notMD (talk) 14:16, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

If you don't like what you see, don't visit the article. If you are curious about something though, you can visit another website if you wish not to see anything distrubing or learn how to hide certain images. Anything on Wikipedia is fair game and legal. Cwater1 (talk) 20:24, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Wait, if you didn't like what the person had to say, why did you read it? Herostratus (talk) 01:20, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Deleting does not do any good. It will likely be reverted back. The is the door if you do not want to see something in the article. Cwater1 (talk) 17:52, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Nail Cicada

Draft:Nail_Cicada is a good redirect. OptimizeAllTheThings (talk) 14:57, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

@OptimizeAllTheThingsHello, welcome to the teahouse, how can I help you? Lemonaka (talk) 15:18, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

@OptimizeAllTheThings Welcome to the Teahouse! What makes this a good redirect? I don't see "Cicada" mentioned on the Neil Cicierega article. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 15:18, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

@OptimizeAllTheThings For creating a redirect, you may follow Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation/Redirects_and_categories, but this is a poor direct, so I will discourage you from creating it. Lemonaka (talk) 15:20, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

It's easy to make that mistake:

Neil Cicierega

Nail Cicada OptimizeAllTheThings (talk) 09:39, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

You need to change three letters and remove three others to change from the "Neil Cicierega" to "Nail Cicada". If we wanted to create every redirect that is at most six letter change from the target, we would need more than 300 000 000 redirects for every page. For comparison, the number of articles in English Wikipedia is about 50 times less than that number.

The guideline to create redirects from misspellings is at WP:RTYPO. It says among other things if a single redirect contains multiple typos, it may be considered an unlikely search term and deleted. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 10:35, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Neil Sedaka? David10244 (talk) 08:04, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Draft submission?

Hello, I have come across a draft that looks read to be published. How do I submit the draft now? I don't find any submission template on the page. Here Draft:First Y. S. Rajasekhara Reddy ministry 456legend(talk) 02:54, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

To me, 456legend, it doesn't look anywhere near ready to be published. All we learn is who was in it. What was/is this ministry noted for? What did it achieve? What did it fail to achieve? What (if anything) did it just timidly ignore? But I do read in it that it was the immediate successor to the second N. Chandrababu Naidu ministry, whose article burbles on at considerable length about who was who in that ministry, but keeps shtum about what, if anything, the ministry did. -- Hoary (talk) 04:58, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

However, 456legend, I should answer your question. Just add {{subst:AfC draft|456legend}} to the top of the draft. This will provide you with a submit option. When you take this option is for you to decide. -- Hoary (talk) 05:05, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Hoary Okay, I got it. I will consider these points and only submit it after that. But yes I wanted to know how am I supposed to add a submission template. Thanks for that along with the suggestion.456legend(talk) 05:43, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Hoary Hi, I have another doubt can you please clarify it? The doubt is, Am I supposed to insert the name of the person who created the draft page or is it fine to put my name in the submission template as saod by you in the earlier answer/reply. Just checking bc I haven't created the page but only contributed.456legend(talk) 03:15, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

456legend, sorry for not having responded earlier, but I've been away from my computer for a couple of days. I think it would have been OK not to put any name in the template, whereupon the name would have defaulted to yours. But I see that what was a draft is now an article, so congratulations on that. (Though I do still wonder what these successive ministries actually do.) -- Hoary (talk) 04:15, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Hoary Oh I see, I will ensure not to put any username from the next. And yes I am trying to fetch sources of the important works of the ministries done during the tenure and working on the creation of chief ministership articles. 456legend(talk) 06:23, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

User/talk page blanking

One thing I see a bit too much of is people blanking their own pages (or at least mass-deleting things) to "hide" warnings or "keep those idiots out of my turf". From what I know, that's something the rules say "isn't exactly sigma male behavior", but exactly how bad of an idea is it?

I ask this because I know of a few examples (which I won't drop) of known vandals having warning-ridden talk pages, and then blanking them once an admin hears about an instance. The cases I've seen have almost always ended with them blocked for unrelated reasons, though, which is kind of funny. cogsan (talk) 17:58, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

@Cog-san: Hello Cogsan! This is allowed per WP:NOTWALLOFSHAME as the warnings are still viewable in the revision history of the talk page. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 18:02, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Anyone can blank their talk page per WP:NOTWALLOFSHAME, but failure to listen may be a WP:IDHT. Tails Wx 18:02, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

It seems that's what most of those cases were, even if they ended up not being the cause of blocking.

So from what I understood, it really doesn't matter if the pages are blanked because some people know what the edit history function is for.

Thanks. cogsan (talk) 18:11, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi, welcome to the teahouse. The only thing cannot be blanked is rejected unblock request. However, I suggest archive the notice instead if you really don't like them show on talk page, which will be a better way than searching in history. Lemonaka (talk) 18:53, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

I've seen at least one case of someone trying to do that, and THAT got reverted and ended with them losing talk page edit rights. cogsan (talk) 19:02, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

I made it clear. Lemonaka (talk) 19:04, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Blanking a talk page is not good faith even if it's yours. Cwater1 (talk) 02:11, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

You're welcome to your personal opinion, Cwater1, but I suggest that you either keep it to yourself or argue for it on Wikipedia talk:User pages. -- Hoary (talk) 06:35, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Draftify, or add unsourced BLP banner?

A new article, Eider Mendoza Larrañaga, skipped AFC and was created in mainspace today. It has zero sourcing and is a WP:BLP violation. Should I send it to drafts, or add an unsourced BLP banner? Eider is a real person, and is in (political) office, with lots of search results that should allow for the article to be sourced without much trouble. I also think the article (on my initial glance) shows promise and looks to be well written, so I don't feel that gutting it for unsourced claims is appropriate, and it is not worthy of a del nom. Please advise. Thanks, Zinnober9 (talk) 23:12, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

@Zinnober9 I have prod it. Lemonaka (talk) 07:27, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

@Lemonaka @Zinnober9. There are over 20 sources at the corresponding article in the Basque language eu:Eider Mendoza, so the task is to find someone who knows that language and is motivated to include some of them. I don't know why G943 didn't do so when they created the English version. Also, Gandalf Grisa has worked on the Basque version as well as ours and presumably has the skills to transfer the sources. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:02, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

I would have tagged it as unsourced and left the creating editor a comment, but the PROD notice on the creating editor's talk page has the same effect. David notMD (talk) 11:04, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

is it possible for me to make a page about my favorite youtubers?

I am simply curios if it is allowed Klaushouse2222 (talk) 00:58, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

No. WP is not a WP:WEBHOST. Please try Wikipedia:Directory of alternative outlets and see if y9ou can find a more appropriate venue. Heiro 01:02, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi Klaushouse2222. Please take a look at Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything and Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not for some general information, but bascially it will come down to whether your favorite YouTubers meet Wikipedia:Notability. If they do, then articles about them can most likely be created; if not, then perhaps it's either too soon or will never be possible to try and do so. If you just want to create a fan page for these people, try one of these sites. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:05, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

The youtuber I specifically was wondering about was Drew Durnil, a gaming and historical meme review channel with 1.31M subscribers. Klaushouse2222 (talk) 01:11, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

The number of subscribers a YouTuber has doesn't automatically make them Wikipedia notable. Try asking about this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Internet culture since one of the members of that WikiProject might be able to better assess whether Durnil meet a relevant Wikipedia notability guideline. For people, this is generally Wikipedia:Notability (people), but there may be a sub-guideline specific to YouTubers. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:20, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

@Marchjuly, kind of, WP:NYOUTUBE. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:44, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Question about the use of disturbing images

Hi all, I've been clicking around and editing the small articles in need of copy editing. I came up on this one on Wilfred Johnson, and I was surprised to see a pretty gnarly image of his murder scene, depicting his dead body. I read the 'FAQ' page on the use of disturbing images, which was largely ambiguous. I was curious if there are any guidelines or rules of thumb that more experienced editors have when it comes to this. I'm not sure, in this specific articles case, the image is certainly relevant, but I'm not sure it's 'educational.'

Thanks for your help!! MerlinCat2 (talk) 05:33, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello, MerlinCat2. I do not believe that this gory but non-specific image adds anything of genuine value to the article except for shock value. Wikipedia is not censored but shocking images should be used only when they clearly add to understanding of the topic. The editing guideline most applicable to this image, in my opinion, can be found at WP:GRATUITOUS. Cullen328 (talk) 05:50, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

I removed it. 👍 Carpimaps (talk) 12:29, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

You want money? Really?

Wikipedia is asking for money from its readers in big, whiny ads on the top of pages. Still, Wikipedia just spent money on changing the layout to something much less readable, doing away with lists of contents and language links and other useful tools. How dare you? Don't ask for money when you just spent loads of it destroying the experience of Wikipedia, which used to be pretty nice. You should be ashamed of yourself. Shame! Shame! 2A00:801:707:A76F:0:0:3DD7:1803 (talk) 05:43, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Shame on you for entirely misrepresenting and misunderstanding the situation. Two can play the shame game. The volunteer editors who help out at the Teahouse have nothing to do with such controversial software upgrades, and nothing to do with fundraising. All of that is handled by the professionals at the Wikimedia Foundation, and volunteer editors have been struggling for many years to get the WMF to pay attention to our concerns. You just punched the wrong people. Cullen328 (talk) 05:56, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Plus, if you just spent five minutes registering an account, you would have much more privacy, and you could customize your user experience so that you could view Wikipedia using the old skin (which I prefer and use), and also never see a fundraising banner ever again. All you need to do is click a few buttons in "Preferences". Cullen328 (talk) 06:04, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. Please avoid using personal attacks, this is against WP:CIV. No, nobody got or will get money except Wikimedia Foundation, we are volunteers. If you disagree with Foundation's behaviour, such as changing the layout to something much less readable, doing away with lists of contents and language links and other useful tools, please spoil your anger to them, not to us. Lemonaka (talk) 07:26, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! Wikipedia doesn't have ads, but it still needs money. The Wikimedia foundation has to pay for URLs somehow. the banner method is less intrusive than ads on other similar websites. would you rather have a banner pop up once every 40 minute, or have an ad float around while you scroll? and Vector (2022) is an ongoing debate. If you want to debate Vector(2022), consider registering an account and joining the debate! -Bad At This, The Kneecap Destroyer ^{(yell at me)} 13:23, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Welcome and thank you for your question about donations! To hide the fundraising banners, you can create an account and uncheck Preferences → Banners → Fundraising. The Wikimedia Foundation does not track the identity of IP addresses, so it doesn't know your age, income level or whether you donated in the past.
None of the Wikipedia volunteer editors here who add and improve content in articles receive any financial benefit. We all simply contribute our time because we care about building a great encyclopedia for you and innumerable others around the world to use.
If you cannot afford it, no one wants you to donate. Wikipedia is not at risk of shutting down, and the Wikimedia Foundation, which hosts the Wikipedia platform and is asking for these donations, is richer than ever.
You are welcome to communicate directly with the donor-relations team by emailing donate@wikimedia.org. Thank you!

and

Are you asking about a sudden change to Wikipedia's appearance? It is because the default skin has changed from the Vector legacy (2010) skin to the new Vector (2022) skin. If you would like to change back to the old one, you can, as a registered user, click on the in the top-right corner and choose Preferences. Once there, go to Preferences → Appearance → Skins → Vector legacy (2010).
If you would like to leave feedback, you can do so at Wikipedia talk:Vector 2022. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:48, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Deletion of page

Hi, i haven’t done this before but my page recently got deleted. I want to know if there is any possible way I can get a copy of it? I was really proud of it and I want to see it. - love, Alistar. Alistarrz (talk) 07:31, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

@AlistarrzHello, welcome to the teahouse. For return a copy of deleted page, please read Wikipedia:REFUND Lemonaka (talk) 07:39, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi Alistarrz. WP:REFUND wpouldn't apply if the page you're asking about is User:Alistarrz since that page was deleted per speedy deletion criterion U5. If that's the page you would like get a copy of, your best bet is to contact Wikipedia administrator Fastily at User talk:Fastily since they are the administrator who deleted the page. You can ask Fastily if they can send you a copy via email. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:21, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

@Alistarrz Whilst MarchJuly was right in what they said, your deleted user page was so way off what Wikipedia is about that it's unlikely that Fastily (a fellow administrator) will be willing to email you the contents of what it contained. This is a project to build an encyclopaedia, not a free-to-use platform for you to share information about your boyfriend - no matter how cute Jeremiah may be. If you aren't genuinely interested in improving a serious encyclopaedia, then I feel you would be better off making a personal blog on some other free platform. Nick Moyes (talk) 10:27, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Why?

Why don’t you have any information on Rhodesian ridgebacks but have the dogs name up but don’t know anything about them, they used to hunt lions in Africa long ago CourtnieCottrell (talk) 08:24, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. There is an article at Rhodesian Ridgeback. - David Biddulph (talk) 08:30, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

play sandbox

@Tails Wx play a sandbox 112.206.251.176 (talk) 08:52, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! the teahouse is a question forum for new editors, what is your question? also remember wikipedia is not social media! -Bad At This, The Kneecap Destroyer ^{(yell at me)} 14:37, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Wonder what's going on with people randomly pinging me. Anyways, they're trying to invite me to "play" at the sandbox ;) Tails Wx 18:47, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Always reverted

I was trying to add MRT (Singapore) station codes for future stations but everyone keeps reverting it. Nico27901925 (talk) 09:48, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Hiya Nico! Welcome to the Teahouse! You may want to read WP:TOOSOON to understand why subway stops planned for the 2030s are not acceptable. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:48, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Josh B Hammer - Infobox Birthday

I was looking at Josh B. Hammer page and see that his infobox says he's 33, even though he just turned 34. I would have thought it would update automatically but it hasn't done so. Any idea why and how to fix it? MaskedSinger (talk) 11:06, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

I did a WP:PURGE, and that seems to have fixed the problem. —Wasell^(T) 🌻🇺🇦 11:17, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Oh I see. Thank you!! MaskedSinger (talk) 11:18, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Clerkenwell crime syndicate

Can someone have a look at Clerkenwell crime syndicate a single purpose account editor has made mass deletions of articles without any comments, these articles were reliable, verifiable, independent hence they have been added back. Regards --Devokewater 11:59, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello, @Devokewater. Welcome to the Teahouse. Yes, these large scale, unexplained blanking of cited content is concerning. You could have activated WP:TWINKLE via your preferences which allows you to leave standard templated warning messages yourself. These could have been escalated if they continued. However, I have dropped the editor a notice asking them to start using Edit Summaries and have also taken the unusual step of leaving a high level warning to them that repeated unexplained content removal is liable to result in an editing block. Please continue to monitor the relevant articles and report them to WP:AIV if further warnings are not heeded. Reporting should occur after a 4th level warning has been given and only once the damaging activity continues with one or more subsequent edits. i.e. avoid a 'warn and immediately report' situation. Hope this helps, Nick Moyes (talk) 14:22, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

@Devokewater Just to update you: I have toned down my warning to this editor as it would seem at that they have been trying to work on this article for some months. So, trying to WP:AGF I have asked them to ensure greater clarity in their edits in future to avoid being warned for vandalism. Please keep an eye on the page and communicate with/warn them if you are still concerned about any inappropriate or confusing editing behaviour. Nick Moyes (talk) 14:56, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks @Nick Moyes wasn't quite sure if this was vandalism or a genuine edit. Regards Devokewater 17:12, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Extent of COI editing

Just to be sure I haven't misread things. Using as an example a very clearly fictional writer named Mark Rex Woodman. If this guy were to edit his own page, while at least managing to keep the encyclopedic tone, then which of those scenarios would be okay?

Editing his name and profession, because he knows for a fact that his name is not "Fart Sex Woodman (nice >:])", and he's not an "AO3 degenerate", as his article currently says.

Adding info about some deed of his (like donating 300 bucks to Boy Next Door foundation) that hasn't been fully reported by reliable sources (like not discussing the value or when he donated).

Adding info that was made public at around the same time he made the edit, or a while after (like saying he bought the rights to understanding understanding the concept of love right before the interview where he announces it is released).

Adding info about his family, like his 2 year old babychild Regina Rex Smolitzer, that was made public and reported by reliable sources.

Talking about details that someone could get wrong on his talk page, "just in case", but only requesting edits on the case someone misreads info on reliable sources.

In order, I think they'd be...

Okay because removing vandalism is an uncontroversial edit;

Probably not worth mentioning if the news haven't bothered with it, and thus not okay;

Not okay because he did it too early, and most likely wouldn't be okay if he waited either, because of the COI issues;

Okay, but it'd only be worth mentioning Regina by name (or any traits she might have, like respiratory issues) if she herself was notable enough, otherwise who cares;

And lastly, ultimately okay, but kind of annoying.

How much of that is wrong, how much is right and how much depends on context? cogsan (talk) 14:48, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

@Cog-san Welcome to the Teahouse. The guidance is at WP:ASFAQ. Please read that carefully and if you have more questions, just ask them here. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:18, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

The only OK thing for that person to do would be to remove vandalism or blatantly false (unsubstantiated) content. All else should be done per an WP:EDITREQUEST, and they still ought to place a WP:COI notice on their userpage. 'Facts' known to the person, but not verifiable by anyone else need to stay well away from Wikipedia, as should WP:TRIVIA. Hope this helps. Nick Moyes (talk) 15:32, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, that sounds about right. Thanks. cogsan (talk) 15:56, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

@Cog-san was that a silvagunner reference? Club On a Sub 20 (talk) 15:50, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

It was two of them. cogsan (talk) 15:57, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

adding court case

I am trying to add a court case into some reseach that I completed on cyberbullying Lpsherman1219 (talk) 15:59, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

The referencing at Draft:Cybullying is a mess. There are three reference lists, and several error messages in among them. Where there's a link included, it never links to a relevant document. I suggest that you clean up the existing referencing before adding further references. (Also, the entire draft seems to be about US findings, though it doesn't say so.) Maproom (talk) 16:32, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

As noted at the draft, Cyberbullying exists. David notMD (talk) 18:43, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

which is sad Cwater1 (talk) 20:30, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

how do i add notes or footnotes or whatever?

I'm a bit new to using source editor and since footnotes don't work on visual editor I don't really know how to do them properly on source editor (or wikitext or however it's called). SignedInteger (talk) 16:41, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

@SignedInteger: Welcome to the Teahouse. I think the guidance you're looking for is at Help:Footnotes. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:51, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

thank you! SignedInteger (talk) 17:52, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Trademark name infringement

Hello, I have a question regarding a trademark name. If the name is used on a Wikipedia article can the name of that article be removed if someone trademarks the name. Wikipedia is known to pop out in all search engines as the first article hindering the brand of that trademark. For example an artist trademarks their name for good and services. A Wikipedia article with that same name keeps popping up in search. Can it be edited? 107.115.227.65 (talk) 17:54, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi IP user. We follow our style guide at MOS:TM. Wikipedia does not treat trademarks in the same way as other publications (for example it does not use the ™ symbol). The only indication a word is a trademark (if it is used in a context where that is true) will be an initial capital. Article names are not altered just because someone has trademarked some word within it. Mike Turnbull (talk) 18:10, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Not without a good reason other that it being trademarked. If the name is there as a result of being properly cited and being relevant to the article, one would expect the name to be there. If SEO is an issue, I suggest that you deal with it through tinkering with that website and other SEO activities. We are not here to help promote one's good and services. – robertsky (talk) 18:14, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Having said that, it is reasonable for the Wikipedia article for the person to have a link to their official website, per WP:ELYES. So even if the person using the search engine ends up at the Wikipedia article, it will be easy for them to go to the official website as their next stop. GoingBatty (talk) 20:25, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

"can the name of that article be removed if someone trademarks the name"... Wikipedia can use a name in an article, and in an article title, even if the name is trademarked. David10244 (talk) 08:40, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Use of External Link vs. Reference

Appreciate explicit guidance on when it is appropriate to use an external link instead of a reference. My impression is that the links are to places that the reader might use to accomplish something practical vs. a citation that simply backs up information in the text?

Thank you! LBDon (talk) 17:56, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

@LBDon Please read the guidance at WP:EL. In general, external links are not used in the body text of an article, so are not in themselves citations. Some external links can go in a special section at the foot of an article. Mike Turnbull (talk) 18:02, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I had read this, and actually was referring to the external links at the end of the page, not to inline links to external sources.

While having read the following: "Some acceptable external links include those that contain further research that is accurate and on-topic, information that could not be added to the article for reasons such as copyright or amount of detail, or other meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article for reasons unrelated to its accuracy." I am still unclear, and if more clarity is available I would be greatful.

I do not understand the difference between a citation (which may, indeed, also "contain further research that is accurate and on-topic" with what is pointed to by an external link at the bottom of the page. I don't believe that citations are off topic and inaccurate.

Is there a functional difference between the two? LBDon (talk) 18:42, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Inline citations are placed within the article text, and generate a superscript number which links to an entry in the "References" section. The "External links" section will normally contain not many entries, and provide information which doesn't support any specific part of the article text. - David Biddulph (talk) 18:48, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Michael, another way I might ask the question is: When would I use an external link at the bottom and NOT use a citation? When would I use a citation and NOT use an external link at the bottom? Any answer to those questions would really nail it:) LBDon (talk) 18:47, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

@LBDon A citation is used to reference the source of information that is stated in the article. An external link is a convenience link to "further information" that is not already included in the article. The most common external link is the subject's own website. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 20:36, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

@LBDon External links are always optional and many articles don't have any. On the other hand, citations are mandatory, since everything in an article has to be capable of being verified, a core policy here. There are edge cases. For example, Wikipedia consensus is that the Internet Movie Database is not a reliable source, so should never be used as a citation (although many creep in!). However, virtually all actors and films have entries there, so a large number of these articles link to IMDB in the external links section. If you have specific cases in mind, ask again here at the Teahouse, or on my Talk Page. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:43, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Help

I am asking for a help, please someone save my created Laalkuthi page from getting deleted. This page has enough reliable sources that pass WP:GNG. So save the Laalkuthi page. Nilpriyo 12:22, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

@Nilpriyo I think you meant Laalkuthi, which is subject to a deletion discussion at WP:Articles for deletion/Laalkuthi and where anyone interested can comment. Also, please alter your signature, as the "Talk" part goes to a DAB page, not your actual Talk Page. Mike Turnbull (talk) 18:28, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi, and welcome to the Teahouse, and i hope you enjoy your time here! im pretty sure the Teahouse isnt the right place to ask to save a AFD page, i recommend reading Help! my article got nominated for deletion, addressing some of the deletion concerns (which were "reads like an advertisement" and "its only TRP stuff") or if it comes to it, accept that sometimes articles get deleted (im sorry if it comes to that). i wish you well in your attempt to save your article. -Bad At This, The Kneecap Destroyer ^{(yell at me)} 18:39, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Apologies for what I may have done wrong. But WP:Articles for deletion/Laalkuthi save the page by keeping vote.Nilpriyo 12:38, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Nilpriyo AfD is not a vote. At the end of a period of time and Administrator reviews the article and all the commentary at AfD and makes a decision. David notMD (talk) 18:47, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

please do not respond to your own AFD, as far as i know, thats against the rules. -Bad At This, The Kneecap Destroyer ^{(yell at me)} 19:00, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Im really bad at this, an editor is free to contribute to an AfD discussion on an article they have created. What they need to be careful of is excessive comments that could be considered disruptive. Slywriter (talk) 19:19, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Draft username

Hi, when inserting a draft submission template on a draft article, should I put the name of the creator of the draft page in the draft article submission template username column?? And am I allowed to submit the draft for review when I am a contributor to the article or is it that the person whose name is mentioned in the template username is solely allowed/responsible for the submission of the draft article? 456legend(talk) 18:25, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

@456legend: Hello and welcome! For the username, it's best to put the username of the person who is shepherding the draft through the editing process. Even if its not the person who created the draft, it's more useful to know "who is going to be responding to questions or taking care of problems". The original creator is not necessarily the same as that person. That being said, we expect people to collaborate, and that includes drafts. No one person is responsible for anything at Wikipedia, and that includes draft articles. If there are multiple people collaborating on a draft, they can all work on it whenever they want. It's important to have at least one person who is taking responsibility, but it can be any number of people. --Jayron32 18:32, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Jayron32 Thank you very much for the detailed explanation. Recently I have been working on improving in a draft that has already been created by someone else and many other contributed on the article but it had got deserted and I have taken up the work in expanding it, so can I add my name to the username after the I completely finish the draft?456legend(talk) 18:39, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Yes, exactly that. The username is just "who is the reviewer going to be communicating with". It doesn't limit other people from helping, it just gives the reviewer a single point of contact for communication. --Jayron32 18:51, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

okay thank you very much456legend(talk) 23:23, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Citing an appendix to a news source

I want to cite an appendix that was included with a newspaper, but how would I go about this? The original newspaper is called Nordlys, and the appendix is called Bilag Nordlys. They also have separate page counts (out of a total of 100 pages, the appendix comprises 40). Right now I have the following: Rein, Marit (25 January 2007). "Giftige rockere satser høyt" [Toxic Rockers Aim High]. Nordlys (in Norwegian Bokmål). Vol. 106, no. 16. p. 28. The problem is that both have a page 28, so how do I go about citing this? ArcticSeeress (talk) 18:36, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

If the appendix is called "Bilag Nordlys" I would have thought that you would change |work=Nordlys to |work=Bilag Nordlys. - David Biddulph (talk) 18:41, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

I contemplated doing that, but then the volume and issue don't match up with the work the appendix is attached to. For reference, bilag is the Norwegian word for appendix, so I'm not sure the editors/publishers even consider it to be a separate work from the newspaper itself. ArcticSeeress (talk) 19:03, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Wikihow summarizes 3 styles and "Appendix of Nordlys" would seem to be how all three handle. Slywriter (talk) 19:15, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

I suppose that would work, but then "Appendix to" would be italicised, which I'd rather avoid. Is there a way to supress the formatting of specific text within a citation template? ArcticSeeress (talk) 19:41, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

@ArcticSeeress: Is it page 28 of the appendix? If so, maybe use the |at= parameter instead of |page=:

{{cite news |last=Rein |first=Marit |date=25 January 2007 |work=Nordlys |volume=106 |issue=16 |at=Appendix, p. 28 |title=Giftige rockere satser høyt |trans-title=Toxic Rockers Aim High |language=Norwegian Bokmål}}

Rein, Marit (25 January 2007). "Giftige rockere satser høyt" [Toxic Rockers Aim High]. Nordlys (in Norwegian Bokmål). Vol. 106, no. 16. Appendix, p. 28.

Hope this helps! GoingBatty (talk) 20:32, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

That's perfect! Thanks for the help, folks. ArcticSeeress (talk) 20:38, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

New Page

Hi good day,

Our company would like to dedicate a page, or 2 depending on what is allowed that highlights and explains what is the difference between financial emigration, ceasing ones tax residency, and how it impacts ones life.

Please advise on the steps thereon,

Thank you 209.203.58.118 (talk) 18:45, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi, please disclose your company in your userpage in accordance with WP:PAID, also read the Paid Editing Essay to make sure nothing you write violates NPOV

Hope this helps, and welcome to the teahouse!

-Bad At This, The Kneecap Destroyer ^{(yell at me)} 18:51, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Are you considering an article about the company, or about these two topics with no mention of the company? Also there is no "our" or "we" in Wikipedia. Each account and non-account IP must represent only one person. Lastly, be aware that Tax residence exists. David notMD (talk) 18:55, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, IP editor. Because this is an encyclopaedia of notable topics, and not a 'how to do it manual', my first question would be to ask what existing articles you have identified here, and what information gap your proposal would fill? Then I'd ask what reliable, published sources you would base such an article on (but not your company's own website or other promotional site or service). If you genuinely think there is a gap, then the best way to start an article is to dedicate some time (weeks not hours) to learning how to edit Wikipedia and what its protocols are before ever attempting the hardest task anyone can do here: namely, creating an article from scratch. Then I'd point you to Help:Your first article and suggest you begin creating a draft which can be submitted for review and feedback when you think it's ready.

Creating a free account is a sensible move, too. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 18:56, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

In addition to all of the above, your company would need to fulfill WP:N for organizations, which are pretty stringent requirements. LegalSmeagolian (talk) 19:47, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

No, LegalSmeagolian: they havet said that they want to create an article about a general topic that their company has an interest in, not about their company, so their company's notability doesn't arise. They will however need to be careful about COI, and making sure that they give appropriate weight to all published sources on the matter, especially the ones that take a different position from their company. ColinFine (talk) 13:43, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Why do references keep moving to the table?

I'm not unintentionally making it go inside the table myself, am I?

Vostani Serbije (I'm trying to add Modern Serbian to the page, but I run into a multitude of problems when trying. After plugging all the leaks, this one is too strong for me to patch it myself. In my analogy, the leaks are the issues and confusion that came with editing the page, and the patching is me overcoming the issues. I can't figure out how to fix this issue. A little bit of help please? Kxeon (talk) 20:09, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

@Kxeon: Welcome to the Teahouse!  Fixed the table in this edit. When the References are listed in the table, it's a sign that you didn't properly end the table. See Help:Wikitable for more info. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 20:36, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! Kxeon (talk) 21:45, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Duchy of Burgandy

My name is Enio de Carvalho Dias and my wife is Ana Celia Carvalho,"Gonzalez" . we met back in 1974 in New York City, and got married on March 22nd 1975. both myself and my wife are the direct descendant of Wlhelm Van der Haegen and his wife Margareth of Savoy, Duchyburgandy (talk) 20:45, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello @Duchyburgandy, welcome to the Teahouse. Is there anything you'd need help with? If you're looking to write an autobiography, keep in mind that they are heavily discouraged, as well as our conflict of interest policy. Silikonz💬 21:42, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Every one of us is the direct descendent of many people. Unsurprisingly, reliable sources are rarely interested. But ... is "Burgandy" related to Burgundy? 126.157.80.79 (talk) 09:45, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Where to find articles needing grammar fixes or needing links to other pages?

Hi! I am new to Wikipedia and want to help edit. However, I cannot find articles that have the issues I am good at fixing. I have tried the recommended suggestions, though every one of them seem to not have the issues I am good at fixing. Is there a way I can search for articles such as these to fix them? Cinnacat (talk) 22:16, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Try here and here AdmiralAckbar1977 (talk) 22:22, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! Cinnacat (talk) 22:28, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

@Cinnacat: Welcome to the Teahouse. The community portal has some standard maintenance tasks under the "Help out" heading. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:22, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Alright, thank you! Cinnacat (talk) 22:27, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

@Cinnacat: Thank you for your eagerness to improve Wikipedia! To find articles needing grammar fixes, try doing searches for poor grammar such as "They is" insource:/ They is / and carefully review each article to see if it truly needs to be changed.

To find articles needing links to other pages, you can look at Category:All dead-end pages, which I review almost every day I'm onwiki. GoingBatty (talk) 04:58, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! I will start working to fix these articles right now! Cinnacat (talk) 02:07, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Editing my personal Wikipedia Page. (MaterialScientist denied changes.

Hello , How do I make changes (updates ) to my page without the bot reversing and locking me out of being able to edit my page. Cameradirector (talk) 23:06, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

(Courtsy link) Welcome to the teahouse Cameradirector! what page are you referring to? do you mean your Userpage? or a page about the real you? if its about the real you its a COI and you cant edit the page, you could leave a message in the talk page though! update: i checked your edit, and it qualifys as page blanking, large quantities of information have been removed for no discernable reason. if you want, you could include in explanation in your edit summery -Bad At This, The Kneecap Destroyer ^{(yell at me)} 23:29, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Cameradirector: Greetings, and welcome to the Teahouse. Assuming that you are John Stuart Scott, this is not "your personal page", but rather an encyclopedia article about you. As such we need to base the information therein primarily on reliable sources which are independent of the subject. In light of this, we strongly discourage the subjects of articles from directly editing these articles for conflict of interest reasons. Instead, it is preferred that you submit edit requests to the article's talk page, where they can be evaluated by experienced editors. --Finngall ^talk 23:40, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Cameradirector. When you write my personal Wikipedia Page, that indicates that you have a misunderstanding about this website. Wikipedia does not have "personal pages". Instead, it has neutrally written encyclopedia articles that summarize what reliable independent published sources say about the topic. Because you have a clear conflict of interest, you should confine yourself to making well-referenced , formal edit request at Talk: John Stuart Scott. Please read about article ownership. Cullen328 (talk) 23:53, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

I removed date and place of birth because there is no ref to confirm that information David notMD (talk) 02:58, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

There is no evidence in the article John Stuart Scott that would suggest you are notable, unless better sources can be found the article should probably be taken to WP:AFD. Theroadislong (talk) 12:13, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Early life

Officialdonzil (talk) 01:48, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

@Officialdonzil: Welcome to the Teahouse! Do you have a question about using Wikipedia? GoingBatty (talk) 05:07, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Sourcing Issue

I submitted a draft of an article on a pharmaceutical executive Craig Tooman. I used citations from pharma and finance industry sources, some of which may have gotten their sourcing from press releases. The article was rejected as reading as too promotional and for questionable sources. In retrospect, I get the promotional criticism and I'm working on striping that down. What I don't get is the sourcing criticism. Major media organizations regurgitate press releases on a daily basis: earnings statements, hirings, firings, etc. Nobody says, "Tsk, tsk, New York Times, you are just quoting from a press release." Yet that seems to be the standard here. And if I cited a Times article that was, in fact, a rewrite of a press release, I doubt editors would question it. I'm new here, and maybe I'm missing something (very possible!). But this seems like a strange, inconsistent bias. ClydeIsKool (talk) 03:40, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

You are mistaken. Wikipedia editors do not automatically assume that a piece in a usually reliable source is independent of the subject: pieces based on press releases are usually identifiable from their style, and their close resemblance to other pieces in different sources. In any case, a given source piece may be reliable or unreliable, depending on what in Wikipedia it's being used for.

As for earnings statements, appointments and the like, such minor and uncontroversial details can even be referenced to the subject's own Website, but while websites and press releases are acceptable to corroborate those specific details, they can never be used to support the Notability of the subject, which is a very different thing.

Note that the above is general advice, I have not and will not look at your specific draft. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 51.198.55.125 (talk) 04:09, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

@ClydeIsKool: Welcome to the Teahouse! For those references that are press releases, you may use {{cite press release}} instead of {{cite web}}. The notability criteria for people can be found at WP:NBIO. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 05:11, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

new format for main page

Why isn't there a "search" field on the main page? 174.67.208.167 (talk) 05:52, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. The search field should be at the top of the screen with a . —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:55, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Wiki specialist needed

Hi

I am looking for a Wiki specialist to write / edit and publish an article on Sandton, Gauteng, South Africa and Claremont, Cape Town South Africa. DeeJooste (talk) 08:08, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi, DeeJooste, I think you may want to see Wikipedia:Requested articles and post your request at an appropriate sub-page there, e.g. at Wikipedia:Requested articles/Social sciences/Geography, cities, regions and named places. --CiaPan (talk) 08:36, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

@DeeJooste: Wait, aren't Sandton / Sandown, Gauteng and Claremont, Cape Town the articles you need...? --CiaPan (talk) 08:39, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi

Yes, they are there already. I am not great with wiki, there are edits on those pages that need to be done. DeeJooste (talk) 08:42, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

@DeeJooste: OK, so probably the best way to request any fix or expansion to those articles is by submitting an appropriate request at their respective Talk: pages (see Help:Talk pages for more info) – Talk:Sandton, Talk:Sandown, Gauteng or Talk:Claremont, Cape Town. Those may be watched by editors involved in creating those articles, or just interested in the subject, so this may be a relatively fast way to reach them.

You can find some hints on requesting edits at Wikipedia:Edit requests. That is a routine designed for editors who can't or shouldn't edit Wikipedia articles themselves, anyway the hints given there may help you to prepare a good, clear request. Good luck! --CiaPan (talk) 09:11, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

The Talk pages of those articles get few viewers, so posting requests there is unlikely to get a fast response, or any response. David notMD (talk) 09:42, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Formal edit requests using the appropriate template will get attention from editors, no matter how obscure the page is. Poorly formulated edit requests may end up getting ignored. So, follow the rules, be cogent, be relevant, write clearly and neutrally, and always provide references to reliable sources. Cullen328 (talk) 10:02, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

You could also ask at WT:WikiProject South Africa, as people there are more likely to have interest and knowledge on the subject. Don't raise the same issue in two different places though: if you make a request on the article's talk page, you can put an item on the WikiProject's talk page asking people to look at that request. --ColinFine (talk) 13:53, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Draft declined and I do not agree

Hello, Bieneba (talk) 09:31, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

I perfectly agree with the decline, considering you seem to push pseudoscience. LilianaUwU ^{(talk / contributions)} 09:34, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

What do you mean by pseudoscience?

The research is there and valid. Can you please elaborate Bieneba (talk) 09:36, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

I can tell you from experience that no autistic person wants physical contact. Nothing can change that. LilianaUwU ^{(talk / contributions)} 09:37, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

I'm autistic myself and this is true because of the sensory impairment. The qigong massage technieque works in respect to that boundary and with daily gentle actions this boundaries softens and touch is possible. Even so that the sensory impairment can be reversed and healed. For this daily treatment is necessary for at least 1-2 years. Healing the tactile/sensory impairment makes that selfregulation improves as well. This is honestly a very simple though effective technique which is very child friendly. Ask me more about it or read about it on the web Bieneba (talk) 13:33, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Could someone help me with these arguments please? Am I stating this correctly and is there a chance it will be accepted?

Thanks so much for your help.

I do not agree with the copyright infringement for this link: https://www.qsti.org/published-studies/

This page lists the research done and it should also be listed on the Wikipedia article. The list will always be the same and can be found on other websites too.

Can this be corrected please?

Also the copyright infringement for this link is not valid. https://www.qsti.org/qst-autism-parent-resources/

The text is the official description of the questionnaires used in research done by Dr. L. Silva. I will ask the QSTI (Qigong Sensory training Institute) for approval to use these descriptions as I feel they should stay the way they are. These descriptions were also copied by https://www.acupuncturewithzen.com/qigong-sensory-autism-qsti/

I rephrased the text that was an issue but cannot change the list with research articles as the official article titles need to be in the list. Do I resubmit for review? or do I wait on a reply from you?

Thank you

Bieneba (talk) 09:34, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Regardless of any copyright issues the the draft Draft:Qigong Sensory Training - QST is blatant advertising. Theroadislong (talk) 09:41, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

ok thank you for your return . Any advise on how to address this and do better? Bieneba (talk) 13:39, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Please see WP:NOTADVERT. Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:47, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deleted. David notMD (talk) 09:51, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Copyright infrigements are not permitted on Wikipedia. Cullen328 (talk) 09:55, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

And - I can't stress this enough - neither is pseudoscience. LilianaUwU ^{(talk / contributions)} 09:57, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Actually, LilianaUwU, Wikipedia neutrally written articles about notable pseudoscientific topics are permitted on Wikipedia, as long as the sources are reliable and the prose makes it clear that it is a pseudoscientific topic. We have articles on every well known pseudoscientific topic from the Loch Ness monster to Big Foot and Piltdown Man and Cold fusion and Astrology and Homeopathy and Dowsing and Ancient astronauts and countless other crank, pseudoscientific topics. These articles require monitoring to prevent kooks and cranks from messing with them, but they belong in the encyclopedia. Cullen328 (talk) 10:20, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Oh yeah, Cullen328, I'm aware that there are pseudoscientific topics that are covered, and that wasn't my point, I was referring to people pushing pseudoscience rather than the topic itself in general. Perhaps I should've been clearer. I have to admit, though, that this is a case where it directly involves me - as an autistic person, reading something about "normalizing physical contact" rubs me the wrong way (no pun intended). LilianaUwU ^{(talk / contributions)} 10:26, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Yes I get that. Our sensitivity can make touch really hard. But science evolves and so does our knowledge of the human body. This is a method that has been proven to work positively on healing the tactile and sensory impairment in autosm. It does not heal autism dough, but having sensory challenges improved or or taken away is a very bug deal and a huge positive to many autistic children. I also feel that even if you are sensitive to the topic I would like invite you to dig deeper and investigate the topic. Bieneba (talk) 13:38, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Not proven. See Qigong for an example of a non-advertising, non-copyright infringement article that incorporates discussion of claimed health benefits and quality of research. As for autism, at PubMed (National Library of Medicine, there is this article:

Ruan H, Eungpinichpong W, Wu H, Shen M, Zhang A. Medicine Insufficient Evidence for the Efficacy of Massage as Intervention for Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Systematic Review. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2022 Sep 24;2022:5328320. doi: 10.1155/2022/5328320. PMID: 36193150; PMCID: PMC9526643. The conclusion: Therefore, there is insufficient evidence to conclude that massage is effective for ASD. Future studies should include large sample sizes, incorporate double-blind designs, employ appropriate outcome measures, and allow for long observation and follow-up periods. Furthermore, consensus must be reached on standardized treatments and additional therapies in order to provide better quality evidence for the treatment of ASD.

Per Wikipedia policy, reviews such as this are required to meet sci lit requirements explained at WP:MEDRS. David notMD (talk) 14:10, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

When a draft is rejected, it says why. You can ask how to improve. Cwater1 (talk) 02:13, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

+ numbers versus - numbers on a contribution

Hello there! Could someone please tell me if a red minus number in the contributions is a bad thing? I have made some very minor edits as a newcomer, but some have a red minus with a number. I don't wish to make any mistakes and am trying to do things correctly. I understand it has to do with beta, but I'm not sure if it's a positive or negative contribution.

Thank you Bijou1995 (talk) 12:53, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi Bijou1995, it is simply the "Page byte size change" roughly the number of characters added (green), or deleted (red) - best wishes - Arjayay (talk) 13:14, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Thank you so much. Bijou1995 (talk) 13:16, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Need assistance Polis University Tirana

Dear Sir/Madam I am the Rector of Polis University Tirana Albania we have a serious problem with the content of English Wikipedia about our University. It does not represent our level of institution development. We wrote you via out IT but so far no respond. We are in the process of international accreditation and ranking so we would like to kindly have your assistance to solve the issue. My colleague responsible of IT Altin Sula is ready to provide you detailed info. Please make possible for us to start this process of communication and assistance. We will be very horned to have you assistance. sincerely

Prof. Dr. Besnik Aliaj Rektor, Universiteti POLIS Web: www.universitetipolis.edu.al 213.207.45.70 (talk) 13:41, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! I see you have already received answers to your similar post at Wikipedia:Help desk#Need to get in contact. Please do not post the same request on the Help desk and here at the Teahouse. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 14:50, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Polis University article is in big trouble. It has been nominated for deletion, which will occur on 24 February unless contested. Recently, content added by User: U POLIS and User:U POLIS2023 was removed because names of institutions cannot be used as User names, and also because the names were identified as coming from the same account - a forbidden practice called 'sockpuppetry'. Those accounts are blocked from editing. Whichever of you (Besnik or Sula) were responsible for those accounts should cease editing. David notMD (talk) 15:08, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Here is a possible solution: Whichever of you not responsible for U POLIS and U POLIS2023 should start a new account with a made up User name or something like Besnik at UPolis or Altin at UPolis. A required next step is to declare on the User page that you are an employee of U Polis and have been asked to edit this article. See WP:PAID for policy for paid. Next step is to Edit the article to remove the Proposed deletion content at the top, AND to start a discussion on the Talk page, explaining your connection to the University and your intent to add referenced content. Step after that is NOT to edit the article directly. As you are a paid editor, you are limited to proposing added content in a discussion on the Talk page, so that a non-involved editor can either implement the proposed change or deny it. All proposed content must have references. See Help:Referencing for beginners for how to create references. I suggest drafting refs in your own Sandbox, and then copying into the Talk discussion only when properly formatted. Good luck in your endeavors. David notMD (talk) 15:15, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Edit requests for how to request that someone review your edit requests. A tip: better to break the edit requests into separately submitted sections rather than a huge block of content and refs that may dismay a reviewer, or cause the whole thing to be rejected because parts were not valid. David notMD (talk) 15:43, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! 81.26.200.104 (talk) 06:50, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

editing my clubs entry, and then having it undone by Wikipedia

Editing my club entry (Duns RFC) and then having it undone by Wikipedia Sumo1878 SCO (talk) 13:43, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. Please see the explanatory messages on your talk page. Shantavira|^{feed me} 14:12, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

HR8799

The "Location of 8799" dark-hued star chart, embedded within the article, displays an ERROR in the name of one of the stars belonging to constellation PEGASUS. Shown is "Schest" - a spelling mistake.

Corrected, it should display as "Scheat". This is an M2.5II-IIIe red giant star that also goes by the name "Beta Pegasi" [Beta Pegasus??]. It seems to have gotten its name from "Giovanni Riccioli" who provided a more expanded original name for it. 2607:FEA8:4D5F:EC1:219B:3143:C612:F669 (talk) 14:24, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! I don't see "Schest" on the HR 8799 article, or in any other article on the English Wikipedia. If you're unable to fix an error yourself, the best place to discuss it is the article's talk page (e.g. Talk:HR 8799). Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 14:55, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

@GoingBatty, the term is actually in this image, which is used in the article referred to. The image itself would need to be fixed. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 15:00, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Pinging Tomruen who made the image. The poster is right about Scheat. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:13, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for the explanation. Sorry for not understanding your initial post. GoingBatty (talk) 15:45, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Corrected. Thanks! Tom Ruen (talk) 18:07, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Article notability/deletion

Hi, I'm relatively new to Wikipedia, and I wanted to start writing some smaller articles. I was wondering what specifically were the notability requirements for rivers, and the point where it becomes notable, so I could determine whether or not one of my drafts should be worked on or not. I wrote a draft, and it was deleted (which definitely makes sense), so I was wondering if/should I should edit. Thanks. PanzerJagerWolf (talk) 15:07, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi @PanzerJagerWolf, welcome to the Teahouse. Your article was declined, not deleted, because you failed to show that the river was notable. We do have a notability guideline for such things: WP:NGEO. The key is going to be finding sources about the river which meet our criteria - reliable, independent, published secondary sources with significant coverage of the subject. A database entry is not going to be sufficient. You could look at some of our good or featured articles on rivers to see what sources they use - Columbia River, for instance. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 15:24, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice. I think I'll try looking at some more sources. PanzerJagerWolf (talk) 16:08, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

@PanzerJagerWolf Welcome to the Teahouse. The guidance is at WP:NGEO and, of course, many rivers do already have articles, so check the categories at Category:Rivers and its sub-categories. Writing articles to acceptable standards can be tough for a beginner but one useful essay on this is this one as well as the help pages such as WP:YFA. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:24, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

@PanzerJagerWolf Hi and welcome to the Teahouse! i hope you enjoy your time here, and on Wikipedia! if im correct, general notablity guidelines are on the page WP:Notability, but also remember, Wikipedia is not a directory and just because something exists, does not make it notable! -Bad At This, The Kneecap Destroyer ^{(yell at me)} 15:25, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Wiki-project revival

I recently joined the wiki-project Prussia which is marked as inactive, in a bid to revive the project started to wright new articles and asked all the 7 members if they wanted to help me revive the project, none of them answered. Is it ok now for me to take charge and create task forces, recruit new members, and become the leader. I didn't want to read all the policies and go through the bureaucracy so I'm asking here Crainsaw (talk) 15:58, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

@Crainsaw There is important guidance at WP:PROJGUIDE. I don't think that Wikipedia editing really involves the concept of "leader" but very active editors in a given area will of course become familiar to others interested. I can understand your reluctance to read all the policies but given that you seem happy to take on a bunch of other tasks, I would advise you to read carefully at minimum the page I've linked. Good luck. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:26, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Possible correction

Hello. I was reading the article "History of law enforcement in the United Kingdom" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_law_enforcement_in_the_United_Kingdom) and I noticed something in the last sentence of the first paragraph. It says "ninetieth [90th] century" when I believe it should say "nineteenth [19th] century". I could have read or understood this wrong, but it doesn't make sense to me, given the obvious fact that we have yet to reach the 90th century. Abloefefnoab (talk) 16:30, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

@Abloefefnoab, thanks for pointing this out, another editor fixed it. You could have done so yourself, see WP:TUTORIAL for more on that. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:08, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Editing query concerning future events

I am very new to wikipedia and have recently been updating pages relevant to Sir Anthony Seldon's appointment as head of Epsom College (an independent school in surrey). However, I would like to ask for clarification about how to write certain info, as Seldon is due to start at epsom college in march, and continue until september 2024. Should I retain my current sentence, in the future tense, ("He is due to begin his duties on 1 March 2023, and step aside for a permanent head in September 2024.") or as though it has already happened ("he began his duties on 1 March 2023, and stepped aside for a permanent head in September 2024.") I have seen both examples in different areas of wikipedia, and would love some clarification from the community.

Thanks in advance for any help

Link to page:Anthony Seldon Rupdatroop (talk) 18:35, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi - welcome to the teahouse! MOS:CURRENT recommends that you phrase your statements in a way that will not become outdated. Perhaps you could phrase it as "In February 2023, he announced the appointment to head of Epsom college, beginning in March 2023." SpookyTwenty (talk) 19:12, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks- will go for this option. Thanks for your help! Rupdatroop (talk) 19:36, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

@Rupdatroop You should certainly not use the second form of expression, as WP:NOTCRYSTAL. Mike Turnbull (talk) 19:15, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

@Rupdatroop: Review what your reliable published source states, and then write it in your own words for the article without changing the facts. If your source is the February announcement, then SpookyTwenty's suggestion could be reasonable. You would need a source published after 1 March 2023 to state when he actually began his duties. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 19:21, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

thanks - I think I will go for SpookyTwenty's suggestion as my principal source is the email sent to parents by the school. Thanks for the help! Rupdatroop (talk) 19:36, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

@Rupdatroop An email is not a good source, since it is difficut to verify. I note that the article already contains a much better BBC souce for the same information (which is currently duplicated in the text). Mike Turnbull (talk) 20:07, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the recommendation - I hesitated to use the BBC article as I wasn't aware that It contained information about dates. I will update the citation with the article. Rupdatroop (talk) 21:29, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

user wizerd

I created my user wizerd , How i published it? RezaulIslamShamim (talk) 19:39, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Wikipedia:Help desk § Create Profile - relevant help desk post 199.208.172.35 (talk) 19:45, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

WRONG PLACE (yes, I shouted) Twice you have created article-like content at User:RezaulIslamShamim and twice it has been Speedy deleted, as your User page is not a place for a biography or autobiography. You have created it for a third time, today. I ask that an Administrator tag it for Speedy deletion. Before that happens, you should move the content to a draft. WP:YFA explains how to create a draft in the proper place and submit it for review. That said, your content has no references, and so cannot be accepted as an article. All facts about a living person must be verified by references. David notMD (talk) 20:14, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Strangely, another editor, User:মোঃ তৌকির হাসান (নিকসন), posted an identical version of this potential article to their user page (since removed), and uploaded the picture which is being used. Both @RezaulIslamShamim and মোঃ তৌকির হাসান (নিকসন) may want to review our conflict of interest guideline: WP:COI. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 20:25, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

@David notMD: Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion states that "Anyone can request speedy deletion by adding one of the speedy deletion templates, but only administrators may actually delete." GoingBatty (talk) 20:41, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

I sit corrected. (Fuzzy on why the saying is "I stand corrected.") David notMD (talk) 21:10, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

seems stand has a mental component too! SpookyTwenty (talk) 21:54, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

I have blocked User:মোঃ তৌকির হাসান (নিকসন) as it seems to be the same person, who later created User:RezaulIslamShamim. And the page that was there has been moved to Draft:Rezaul Islam Shamim for improvement, because it was not appropriate for a user page and is not ready for publication as an article, and draft space is the only venue Wikipedia has for a person to write an article about himself. ~Anachronist (talk) 02:22, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Fixing the code for Line 1 (Athens Suburban Railway)

Greetings, I'm trying to fix the code for so it links to Line 1 (Athens Suburban Railway) can anyone help? sorry to be a pain about this? ✠ Emperor of Byzantium ✠ (talk) 20:24, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

@The Emperor of Byzantium: If you don't receive a response here, I suggest you ask at the template talk page: Template talk:Rail-interchange. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 20:42, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks @GoingBatty will do, and thanks for the quick response and positive encouragement ✠ Emperor of Byzantium ✠ (talk) 23:12, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Email

Does it determine the Wikipedia principal which says (30 days and 500 edits) for sister to be able to access the service of emails?. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MDmulwa (talk • contribs) 22:04, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Does it determine the Wikipedia principal which says (30 days and 500 edits) for a Wikipedia user to be able to access email services? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MDmulwa (talk • contribs) 22:19, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi @MDmulwa, welcome to the Teahouse. Please post new questions at the bottom of the page. I'm afraid I don't understand what you're asking - is it related to your last questions here? (This one and this one?) 199.208.172.35 (talk) 22:17, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

As far as I know, WP:XC is not required to send email from Wikipedia. But, not all users allow contact by email. RudolfRed (talk) 23:20, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

What is the teahouse??????

no description included Cicadacola! (talk) 23:54, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Hey Cicadacola! At the top of the page, it states A friendly place where you can ask questions to get help with using and editing Wikipedia. This means you can ask questions about how to use, or edit, Wikipedia, and general questions about Wikipedia as well. We don't forget the tea, of course. ;) Tails Wx 23:59, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Please help me

why my website does not summit please don't block it for me cuz I've tried many account if I anyone actually say that I've blocked it was automatic I don't know what is wrong with it Officialdonzil (talk) 23:59, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. Wikipedia is not like social media, this is not a place for people to tell the world about themselves, where mere existence allows for inclusion. This is an encyclopedia with criteria for inclusion, which we call notability, such as the definition of a notable musician. If you meet at least one aspect of that criteria, an article about you may be possible, but you shouldn't be the one to write it, see the autobiography policy. If you just want to tell the world about yourself, you should use social media. 331dot (talk) 00:15, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

If you are asking why your submission at Draft:Zil.xdonzil.x was declined, the reasons were given on the draft itself, and on your user talk page. The words in blue in the feedback are wikilinks to further information about the problems. Resubmitting the draft without addressing the problems might be regarded as tendentious editing. If you are saying that you have previous accounts which are blocked, you should not be editing as this is sockpuppetry; you need to submit an unblock request on the blocked account. - David Biddulph (talk) 00:16, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

The entire content of Draft:Zil.xdonzil.x is "zil.xdonzil.x was born 11 February 2001 zil.xdonzil.x he was a singer rapping" That is not a valid article. Of greater importance, As David pointed out, you state that you have had other accounts. If true, then this one and others should be indefinitely blocked as sockpuppets, and you are forbidden to create a draft until you get your original account unblocked. David notMD (talk) 03:45, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

A few articles from Simple English Wikipedia

Generally I see simple english to english wikipedia as being acceptable in one way but not the other, that is to say simple english wikipedia articles are acceptable on Enlgish wikipedia but not the other way around. I found a few about related topics which all appear to be present on only simple english wikipedia which is a rarity. So I mostly imported them verbatim (giving credit to the original authors). Are there any major issues with them?

Ancient Moirang

Moirang Kangleirol

List of rulers of Moirang

Ancient Kangleipak

Ancient Meitei language Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 03:44, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

For the Moirang Kangleirol article,

1. I would move the images as that is not normally where they are (it might not conflict with MoS though).
2. Fill in bare URLs.
3. Legends section needs citations.
4. Wording might need change.

I only skimmed through the article, so there may be more issues. ✶Mitch199811✶ 03:58, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

It seems someone translated this article Stonehenge of Manipur from simple english wikipedia so likely same authors involved with them

Ancient Kangleipak feels particularly bad on simple english wikipedia so I decided against continuing with it. Had too many references to self published sources and a questionable tone. Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 04:16, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Immanuelle, I looked at just one of these, simple:Ancient Meitei language. Its body text consists of just two sentences. In en:Wikipedia (this Wikipedia), Ancient Meitei language redirects to Meitei language. Why should it not continue to do so? If you have more to say about Ancient Meitai, this could be said within the existing article Meitei language, until/unless the latter grows to an indigestible length. Meanwhile, parts of the article Meitei language obviously need work. An example: The culture involved with the Meitei language is rooted deeply with pride and tradition based on having respect to the community elders. I don't know what's meant by "the culture involved with [any particular language]", or by a culture being "rooted deeply with [whatever]. I can guess, but my guess could well be wrong: this isn't good enough. (Or is this instead lucid English, and my lack of comprehension is just my problem?) -- Hoary (talk) 06:50, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Should the notice about reliable sources be removed?

Hello, I have added many reliable citations to address the reliable sources notice on this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairy_Queen_(locomotive)

Should this now be removed? Can someone please check. I feel there are sufficient reliable sources. Thank you. ANLgrad (talk) 04:44, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

hi @ANLgrad. Thanks for your work! That does look like me to be a big improvement. The main concern that I can see remaining is the Pitara Kids Network source - not exactly a Reliable Source. But if you remove that source, I think you should be good to go ahead and remove the notice. Tomorrow and tomorrow (talk) 04:53, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Moved Draft:Move/mcdo to Mcdo

@Tails Wx move it pls 112.206.207.16 (talk) 06:53, 18 February 2023 (UTC)