Wikipedia:Teahouse

CiaPan, 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

My edits in Psychedelic drug. Why they have been removed if Psychedelic therapy poses risks and we know the history of it?

why did my edits in Psychedelic drug page got removed. Psychedelic therapy is not safe. And it poses some risks and we need to talk about that. There were cases where people in Psychedelic therapy have mental health worse and even psychologists are now criticising It. We know where it went in 60s and I don't want society full of esoterics who believe Mind over body. Or people that their mental health got worse after going through it. Risks should never be hidden and underestimated, we should openly talk about them Matejstein12 (talk) 11:35, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

The information you added was completely unreferenced. All information in Wikipedia must be reliably sourced. Please see WP:42. Shantavira|^{feed me} 11:38, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

Just going to add that articles about medical matters tend to be even more highly scrutinized and require even stronger sourcing as explained here that perhaps is required for other types of articles. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:31, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

but Will be there some balanced information about this therapy, because psychedelic drugs are still unpredictable. If I cannot add that, will you? Because people need to have information why yes and Why no. If there is no balanced info, it Feels like they want turn us into mystics so we can be more easily manipulated. So there should definitely be balanced information about psychedelics and therapy part Matejstein12 (talk) 15:47, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

We're very much in favour of balanced information. Per WP:42 you simply need to find significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the topic. Shantavira|^{feed me} 17:15, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

but someone really should add risks associated with psychedelic therapy. No one can't be just silent about that like if they didn't exist. If there are professional editors than they should add benefits and risks. Matejstein12 (talk) 16:34, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

No one is silent about them I promise. If you actually went to somewhere that provided psychedelic therapy, they would strongly advise it as a last resort and for people who are extremely resistant to other forms of treatment and they definitely warn them of the risks. And if someone wants psychedelics purely for therapeutic aspect of it then they should talk to a doctor about the risks first and not just take drugs on the street. 173.219.151.2 (talk) 13:23, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

@Matejstein12: Too often new editors think that "balanced information" means "equal weight to all sides". No, it doesn't. That's WP:FALSEBALANCE. We don't "balance" our article on Earth to include the views of flat-earth adherants, for example. Information in the article should be presented according to the weight given by reliable sources. As a consequence, WP:FRINGE views typically don't get presented in articles. If you want to add something to an article, you need to find a reliable source that covers it. ~Anachronist (talk) 04:04, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

but psychedelic therapy has a risks. This is supposed to talk about it, not being silent about it. There must be Open minded information about benefits and risks. So if Someone can do that, Then he or she should. Matejstein12 (talk) 16:32, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

Once you have appropriate sources, you may do so. Not before. 331dot (talk) 16:35, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

As someone who's had some incredibly powerful psychedelic experiences, both positive and (potentially) negative, I'm sympathetic to OP's concern, even though he's not a Wikilawyer.

I also believe that there are situations where important and valuable information falls through the cracks due to Wikipedia's idiosyncratic sourcing requirements. This could be an example. The statement "taking psychedelics is risky" is not even in the same universe as "the earth is flat", so I reject that analogy and reject the invocation of WP:FALSEBALANCE. Go take 1000ug of LSD and then tell me that concerns about psychological safety are "fringe". Psychedelics do, indeed, have the capacity to be very dangerous, and anyone who's experimented with them at high doses knows this for a fact, whether or not any "RS" says it - which, if they don't, is very negligent and irresponsible of them.

Over the years, I've been a trip sitter many, many times. If someone asked me for advice about tripping, and I painted a picture as rosy as the one the Wikipedia article paints, that would be recklessly irresponsible of me. It would be a shame if someone took psychedelics unwisely because of an overly-cheery Wikipedia article about the topic, and I'd be almost tempted to invoke WP:IAR if there was no mention of the dangers of psychedelics in the "psychedelic drug" article.

Passages like this one in the lede are of particular concern: " Research has been conducted, however, and studies show that psychedelics are physiologically safe and rarely lead to addiction." - physiologically safe, sure, but this makes no mention of the fact that you may be psychologically devastated for weeks, months, or years if you take these things improperly.

However, the "psychedelic therapy" subsection of the psychedelic drug page does include the following passage: "As of 2022, the body of high-quality evidence on psychedelic therapy remains relatively small and more, larger studies are needed to reliably show the effectiveness and safety of psychedelic therapy's various forms and applications."

This is, at least, an acknowledgement that there are unresolved safety concerns that necessitate further scientific study. Also, there is an entire section called "adverse effects" here.

I think a concrete improvement that can be made to the article to address OP's well-founded concerns is to include a mention of the "Adverse effects" section in the lede, rather than only presenting positive information in the lede. These adverse effects would ideally be mentioned directly after the passage that states "psychedelics are physiologically safe. Pecopteris (talk) 19:05, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

@Pecopteris, feel free to start working on such improvements at the article, or at least to start a talk page discussion about making such improvements (as opposed to carrying on such a discussion here at the Teahouse, where interested parties are less likely to take notice, and to avoid splitting discussion across multiple pages). 57.140.16.29 (talk) 19:20, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

Good point. I've started a new section at the article's talk page. I invite everyone to move the conversation to that thread. Pecopteris (talk) 19:33, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

Thoughts on this post perhaps please, thank you.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Nokia_7260 Dscarbon333 (talk) 21:05, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

You have improved the referencing since it was last declined on August. I know nothing about the topic, so cannot comment on notability. David notMD (talk) 22:13, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you my friend :). Dscarbon333 (talk) 09:57, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

@Dscarbon333 The grammar and wording of parts, e.g. beginning that arguably sort of defined the aesthetic of said line of phones. The design of the phone is also arguably.... is terrible, as another editor already commented. Please make the wording more encyclopaedic. Who made that argument: you? If so that's not allowed and if someone else, you need to cite them. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:53, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Skins (and table header rows)

I’ve been using Wikipedia for years, but only realised this month that there is a choice of skins – I mean, until I noticed someone talking about them, how would I have know they existed?!

Since then, I tried a couple of alternative skins, and could see no difference whatever in what I was seeing. Are they all very similar to each other?

Also, the most desirable feature (or me) that I saw mentioned as being in the latest skins is the fact that the header row of a table will "freeze" at the top of the screen so it’s always visible. So useful for long tables! BUT, it doesn’t work in Firefox for Windows, my preferred desktop browser; and it doesn’t seen to work in Chrome for Android, my preferred mobile browser. (I saw the Firefox issue mentioned, but not the Chrome-for-Android one; I also realise that it’s probably the fault of the browser.) Which browsers support this, which will it work in? (I’ll install an alternative browser just to use Wikipedia if it makes the tables easier to navigate!) Spel-Punc-Gram (talk) 13:15, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

@Spel-Punc-Gram The vector 2010 and (current default) vector 2022 skins are different enough that there was a furore when the latter was introduced. To freeze table header rows, you need to set this up in your preferences at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets: there's a comment there about which browsers it works with. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:42, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

I'm learning a lot in the Teahouse: I didn't know that Wikipedia had user settings 😎.

Maybe I'm being obtuse, but I couldn't see the difference when I chose the vector 2010 one. Can you describe one of the major differences, and I'll try again? Spel-Punc-Gram (talk) 01:19, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

@Spel-Punc-Gram Please see Vector 2022. One major difference is that the WP:LEAD section of articles in vector 2010 appears immediately above an inline table-of-contents, whereas in vector 2022 the TOC moves to its own separate column to the left of the article. There are numerous other differences, including the positioning (and functionality) of the search box. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:17, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

citing syndication of a book excerpt

Time Magazine syndicated a book excerpt, but I don't know which page numbers. How should I cite it? Thanks. rootsmusic (talk) 18:28, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi, @Rootsmusic. The excerpt can be found in the preview of the book on google books here: [1]. It doesn't show the page number, but I'll see what I can find online. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 20:50, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Disregard that, the excerpt seems to be from various pages throughout the book. In that case, it would be best just to cite the Time article. However, if you're only using a specific section of the article, I may be able to find the page number. My library has an ebook version of the book I was able to borrow. In the future, if you need access to various resources, Wikipedia:Resource Requests is very helpful. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 20:55, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

@Rootsmusic: Please see WP:SAYWHEREYOUREADIT. Unless you are able to get access to a copy of the Bowden/Teague book and read the passage there, you must cite the Time Web page as your source for any information or quotations you use in a WP article. I don't see any problem with using that source. Deor (talk) 12:36, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia disinfo

I was reading a certain article on Wiki, and I found that for some reason, the author had included opinions rather than facts. This was a subject that was meant to be factual but instead became muddied by political opinion.

As I progressed through reading different articles I began to see a pattern - that Wikipedia was becoming affected by political narratives.

One could probably understand why I found this ALARMING. I tried to contact someone about my concerns - I was very polite about it... But for some strange reason, I ended up being BANNED from even using Wikipedia with my account. I found that even stranger, because I am very courteous and follow proper etiquette in communication, always.

So my question is - are Wikipedia articles continuing to be allowed to be affected by political opinion or narratives? Does anyone attempt to prevent such things?

It's one thing to read about facts... It's quite another to find opinions being proffered as facts, or used to color articles in a slanted way. I used to have great respect for Wikipedia - but after my experience, I completely stopped using it.

The reason I am writing today is because I saw the donation page today, and was reminded that once upon a time I was a donor. Small contributions, but l thought it important and Wikipedia to be worth donating. I no longer feel this way because of my somewhat recent experiences - which happened around 2020/21. During all the political chaos of that time. When I saw politics creeping in to what WAS a beautiful thing, well... Broke my heart. Was just wondering if anything has changed since then. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, Ro Roalive (talk) 18:56, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Yes, this is a big problem on Wikipedia. The reasons for it are many, and complex. I think the core problem is the way sources are cited on articles about politics. Articles about politics from "reliable sources" are treated as having an objectivity analogous to scientific papers, which is not the right way to write about politics, and leads to a lot of confusion. Another problem is that there is not much diversity of political viewpoint on Wikipedia, so people assume that their opinions are "facts", because everyone around them mirrors their general worldview. Another problem is that there is far too low of a threshold for making political statements in Wikivoice.

It's good that you've noticed this problem, but unfortunately, general complaints won't change anything. The problem will take a massive amount of work to fix, and there's currently very little will to fix it. Do you have a specific list of articles that you think are affected by political narratives? Pecopteris (talk) 19:05, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, a couple of points here:

• You couldn't have known this beforehand, but block evasion is considered a serious issue on Wikipedia
• Neutrality is one of our fundamental principles and needs to be upheld in articles.
• In theory, all editors qua editors should be fixing point-of-view issues on sight and/or notifying other users of the issue.

If you provide an example of such an article, I can try to help. Sincerely, Novo Tape (She/Her)^{My Talk Page} 19:08, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

@Roalive, you are not allowed to create a new account in order to evade a block on a previous account (unless it has expired?). You should stop editing from this account and appeal the block from your original account. 57.140.16.29 (talk) 19:09, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

@Roalive, what is your original account name? I'd like to see the edits you made that led to your ban. Perhaps it's not appropriate for Roalive to reply to this comment - does anyone else know what their original account name is? Pecopteris (talk) 19:40, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia had articles related to politics before 2020. You may or may not find this article interesting:[1] Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:29, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

• OP blocked for sock puppetry. 331dot (talk) 12:35, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Question for citations with books

Hello,

Just had a quick question and hopefully I can word it so you can articulate it.

I wanted to know if citations are required for articles [Like this one] because the articles are about books (which are self-published), and to me, I think there should be reliable sources for that kind of information.

Thanks, TheAlienMan2002 (talk) 22:48, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

@TheAlienMan2002: Welcome to the Teahouse! Citations are required for every Wikipedia article. Citations are what demonstrate whether books (or any other topic) meet Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, called "notability". The specific criteria for books can be found at WP:NBOOKS. Independent published reliable sources such as book reviews would be great citations. Thanks for asking, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 01:05, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Thought so, thank you. TheAlienMan2002 (talk) 12:42, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Among other reasons, you’d need sources to satisfy WP:LISTN. Strictly, they don’t need to be in the article, but it’s on the person who wants the article to stay to prove notability, not the hypothetical drafter or deletion nominator. Mach61 (talk) 01:08, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Issue with cast

Hello, there is an issue with adding Edward Hayter in the cast of Will (TV series) ,his name always get removed by the same user even if his page exist and is notable. How can the issue stop by being removed and add him to the cast? The user now trying to delete his page while 3 users worked on his page to prove his notability and are reviewers. Veganpurplefox (talk) 23:05, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

@Veganpurplefox Did you already have a discussion with the user? TheAlienMan2002 (talk) 23:46, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

I tried to but they just keep going and going and never ends Veganpurplefox (talk) 23:47, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

I stopped responding because its out of hands now Veganpurplefox (talk) 23:48, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Okay, In my view, I would suggest going to WP:ANI TheAlienMan2002 (talk) 23:51, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Ok ill go there, thanks Veganpurplefox (talk) 23:54, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Yeah no problem, if that doesn't work, I would suggest waiting for someone else to answer this question. TheAlienMan2002 (talk) 00:11, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

OK thanks again, I also sent on the talk pages of the users who proved his notability about whats happening but have no idea when they will see Veganpurplefox (talk) 00:15, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

you suggest going THERE? ltbdl (talk) 00:24, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, Veganpurplefox, that wasn't great advice. I suggest reverting yourself at ANI before anyone responds. ANI is a place of last resort, and it's about reporting user conduct issues, not about settling content disputes. See instead the options recommended at WP:DR. Cheers, Generalrelative (talk) 00:40, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

it's got a bunch of responses already...

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User MrOllie ltbdl (talk) 03:11, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

I was told to come back here to see that more comments had been added so where do you refer me to? How can this issue stop? Veganpurplefox (talk) 09:43, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

maybe it's not an issue. ltbdl (talk) 11:38, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

It is an issue, they accuse me of owning more that 1 account and im tired of being accused of things i havent done so can someone please compare our IP addresses so they will now believe me. Im just done being patient cause when i thought this was resolved as well as a supposed COI, it still on me and no one even if i put it on my userpage believe me. And i need help so this will all stop. Veganpurplefox (talk) 14:10, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

User:Veganpurplefox, the best and most difficult step to take right now is to trust the process. MrOllie has stated an intent to open an AfD on the Edward Hayter article once he has time to review the sources. Maybe the sourcing will satisfy his sensibilities. If not, and the article goes to AfD, the community will have at least seven days to make a collective determination as to whether or not the article is appropriate for encyclopaedic inclusion. If the article is kept after AfD, it will be appropriate to relink to the Will (TV series) article. If not, then maybe a bit later in Hayter's career you'll be able to have the article undeleted and expand it with new reliable information that establishes notability.

In any case, the thing to do now is take a step back, breathe, and work on something else for awhile. Folly Mox (talk) 13:27, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

I agree with Folly Mox. I was going to leave a message on your talk page saying more or less the same thing until I read this comment. Take a deep breathe. Step back. Allow the process to work itself out. Ultimately, it's not worth losing any peace over. --ARoseWolf 13:32, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Anyway ill focus on watching Will. But that user could have check out the sources in Hayter's page inseted of believing hes not notable. And i need proof that im not the same user of Vesyray. Can someone direct me to the next step on how it is possible that someone compares our ip adress so they now will believe me i dont own more than 1 account. I just need the proff Veganpurplefox (talk) 14:15, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

User:Veganpurplefox, I'm afraid that is not possible. Wikipedia's technical logs only store information like IP addresses of named users for ninety days. Vesyray has not edited in around two hundred days as of this timestamp, so the information is gone. I'll note that only one user has stated they suspect you to have operated the Vesyray account, and no investigation has been filed. Folly Mox (talk) 06:02, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia's technical logs only store information like IP addresses of named users for ninety days.

...no? ltbdl (talk) 10:49, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

meta:CheckUser policy#CheckUser status: This information is only stored for a short period (currently 90 days), so edits made prior to that will not be shown via the CheckUser tool. Folly Mox (talk) 14:42, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

huh, never knew that ltbdl (talk) 03:49, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

Why do some new articles remain invisible to external search?

New articles get indexed by Google fairly quickly, but sometimes they remain unsearchable from outside Wikipedia without any visible problem for weeks. A case in point - Dmytro Kushneruk. How does this happen and should anything be done about this? Thx Trzb (talk) 08:21, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

@Trzb: New articles are prevented by default from being indexed by search engines for 90 days after being created in order to ensure that the article is suitable for publication before most readers are able to find it. If a new article is patrolled, it is immediately allowed to be indexed regardless of its age. See WP:INDEXING for more detailed information. Tollens (talk) 08:27, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Got it. Thank you Trzb (talk) 08:28, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

References

How do I get my references right? Rhodji (talk) 10:04, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You can learn more about referencing by reading Referencing for Beginners. 331dot (talk) 10:10, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

If you're using the Visual Editor (which may be easier for new users), check out WP:INTREFVE. Qcne (talk) 11:04, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Unnecessary images in articles

Hi there,

In what situations is an image useful to include in an article, and on what grounds is there justification for removing images from articles?

I am currently editing the Helensburgh article and have found a couple images to not be particularly purposeful. Bill Wilson AKA "CIA" (talk) 10:09, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

I agree. I suggest you read Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Images and remove the uninformative images with your rationale in the edit summary. If anyone objects, discuss it on the article talk page per WP:BRD. Shantavira|^{feed me} 10:21, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

The picture of cherry blossom could be anywhere, there's nothing in it that informs the reader about Helensburgh. Maproom (talk) 17:49, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Talk pages

I am a new user in Wikipedia. How do I add citations and how do I use talk pages? I feel overwhelmed.Thanks a lot if you could help :) Researchrush (talk) 13:33, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

@Researchrush, I would advise you to read WP:CITE and H:TALK. Hope that helps. Toadette ^{(let's chat together)} 13:38, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Researchrush, welcome to the Teahouse!

I'd recommend the Visual Editor for new users- it is a lot easier than using markup language to edit Wikipedia. There's a really good tutorial for referencing with it at WP:INTREFVE. Qcne (talk) 14:51, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Help with My userpage

How do i get rid of the annoying space between my userboxes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Teddythedev Teddythedev (talk) 15:39, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Teddythedev fixed Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 15:44, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Why was my content removed?

Hello house, I while ago I added an external link to several pages related to obsessive–compulsive disorder. The link I added is of an evidence-based and clinical content source which is relevant to the treatment and management of obsessive–compulsive disorder, and refers to contemporary scientific literature in the field (see here: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/relationship-ocd). I was surprised to find out that the link was removed by an editor and marked as spam. I contacted the editor by email asking to learn why was it removed but received no response. After a while I raised the question on the editor's talk page but they deleted my question without replying. I'd appreciate any ideas about how to try and understand why was this source removed or how to manage to have the relevant editor replying my question. Cheers! Ran Littman (talk) 15:49, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

@ran littman: you are trying to link to articles you have written. that is indeed spam. ltbdl (talk) 15:52, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Ran, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'll give you a slightly more nuanced answer than Ltbdl. Referencing your own work is regarded as editing with a conflict of interest, and frowned on: you are strongly preferred to submit edit requests, so that uninvolved editors can judge whether the reference is appropriate.

Secondly, adding a link to several pages is always suspicious behaviour, and if it is to your own work, it is regarded as spam (even if the links are not to a commercial site). ColinFine (talk) 17:19, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Appears that all of the references you added (to your own research) were each a report on a clinical trial. Individual clinical trials do not meet the medical/health ref standards described at WP:MEDRS. Hence all reverted. David notMD (talk) 18:18, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

ColinFine David notMD: Right. Thank you for those clarifications. Ran Littman (talk) 21:18, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

concern about pages

If i were to create a page for a personal project (i.e. Ted), Where should i put it? Teddythedev (talk) 15:51, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

@Teddythedev: You wouldn't. See WP:NOT. Wikipedia is not a web host. RudolfRed (talk) 16:15, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Adding "next_year" to album infobox

Hi there, I'm trying to add a "next_year" entry to the infobox on History of Iran Narrated by Setar, but each time I do, I get an error message saying "String Module Error: Match not found". I can't figure out why this is happening. Could you please help? Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 21:03, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Revirvikodlaku. It may be a bug; but reading Template:Infobox album#Chronology, it seems to me that that parameter is only supposed to be used in a discography, to link the albums, and it doesn't make any sense for a single album in an article. ColinFine (talk) 22:24, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi @ColinFine, thanks for your response. Based on my reading of Template:Infobox album#Chronology as well as my experience with dozens of studio album pages, it is my understanding that the parameters are used with every album infobox, assuming there is a preceding and succeeding release. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 23:00, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

I've actually figured out what was causing the error: the album in question doesn't have a release year, which prevents me from adding a release year for the subsequent album in the infobox. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 23:04, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

External links requiring copying into the search bar instead of clicking

Hello! I was recently working a bit on the Flag of San Marino Wikipedia and noticed the 1st external link, titled "Law on the flag and coat of arms of San Marino" and linked to this only downloads a file if the link is copied into the space bar, and if it is simply clicked, it closes immediately upon opening with no download. Is there a protocol for this? I have checked WP:EL with no avail. Thank you! Rafaelmanman (talk) 21:26, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello Rafaelmanman. This sounds like a browser issue. It works fine for me (using Firefox). ColinFine (talk) 22:26, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Interesting, I see that now. Thanks for the quick response. Rafaelmanman (talk) 22:47, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

@ColinFine: Do you know if there is a specific template to mark link notes related to browsers or if {{link note}} is the best method? Thanks again. Rafaelmanman (talk) 22:16, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

Citation errors: ref duplicates

I am getting citation errors for a source that appears in a Bibliography section of the John Brown (abolitionist) article and is also used as a source. For the source, I am putting the source in the "Sources" section (following References). I am getting messages at the citation level.

I tried adding ref={{sfnref|Hinton|1894}} to the source, but am still getting error messages:

• {{cite book}}: CS1 maint: ref duplicates default (link) in the Sources section
• sfn error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFHinton1894 (help) for each citation in the References section.

Can you help me figure out what to do? Thanks so much!–CaroleHenson (talk) 21:33, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

User:CaroleHenson, User:DuncanHill removed one instance of the duplicated source, which resolved the second issue. I removed the |ref= parameter duplicating the default value, which resolved the first issue. Was there a reason the source needed to be listed in both "Bibliography" and "Sources" subheadings? If you need it to be in both sections, one should hold the parameter |ref=none, so the {{sfnp}} links know where to jump. Folly Mox (talk) 01:48, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks so much for your feedback, Folly Mox. I have not known of |ref=none - great tip!

Regarding the Bibliography, which has duplicate sources that are used in the Reference and Sources in the article, my take is the duplication is not needed. I have thought of making a separate Bibliography page for John Brown. Another option is to removed the Bibliography and put sources not used in the article's citations in Further reading... and just have sources used once in the article.

I'll open that up for discussion on the talk page.–CaroleHenson (talk) 03:48, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

Can you list all the tags like boldface?

Put a list for tags like Boldface Subsections? HomeyComix (talk) 23:37, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

@HomeyComix: Check out Help:Wikitext, I think it has what you're looking for RudolfRed (talk) 23:40, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Which out of the two are more reliable?

https://web.archive.org/web/20230929191650/https://www.resso.com/artist/Jenna-Rose-6578489496432547848 or https://web.archive.org/web/20230930003554/https://deadorkicking.com/jenna-rose-swerdlow-dead-or-alive/ ? Thatsoddd (talk) 01:09, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

@Thatsoddd: Questions about reliable sources should be posted at WP:RSN RudolfRed (talk) 01:25, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

Help formatting source

Hello! I was wondering if someone could help me as I don't know how to properly format a source on this article. Reference number 1 is linked to an intext citation in the infobox but I don't know how to fix it from being just a bare link in the references section.

Thanks TenToe (talk) 12:47, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

@TenToe The correct template for sources like that is {{cite web}}. See the linked template page for the parameters it takes, which includes the author, date published and website. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:51, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

WP:Visual Editor makes adding citations intuitive. I suggest you try it. Ca ^{talk to me!} 15:11, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

Translation question/Moving a draft

Hello teahouse-heads. I come here today to ask a question relating to translation. I am currently working on a draft (Draft:Fuskichelcher) and one of the users helping me to improve the page suggested (this) as a source. I am unfortunately unable to use either of my usual tricks to translate this article, as google autotranslate did not activate, it appears to have copy-paste blocking, and I cannot extract the text with inspect element. Is there a way to avoid manual translation here? Also, I have been suggested moving the draft to "Verwurelter" as the more common name, but have not yet found the page that explains how to do so. Could a user please point me there? Nobody expects the UnexpectedSmoreInquisition (talk)! 14:29, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

@UnexpectedSmoreInquisition Google books won't let me inspect the first of the two snippets which mention Verwurelter but the second part is too short to make a decent source. Basically it just says (in French) on p.198 "it's sugar and choux pastry cooked in the deep fryer". Don't worry about the moving of the draft: the accepting reviewer can move it to the correct place. If you move it now, there is a danger that redirects will be left all over the place. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:51, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your answers. Nobody expects the UnexpectedSmoreInquisition (talk)! 02:47, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

User:UnexpectedSmoreInquisition, take a screenshot of the page you're tryna autotranslate, then use google lens to extract the text from the screenshot. The extracted text can be pasted into a translation inputbox. (Google lens is built into the photos app that came standard on my Android device; unknown how to activate it if your setup differs.) Folly Mox (talk) 22:28, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

As an aside, you won't be able to cite that source in an article. It's self-published through lulu.com. Folly Mox (talk) 22:30, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

I just remembered I installed that (google translate camera/app), but as you and Mike mentioned, the source is apparently invalid. Will use that more in this situation if/when it comes up again. Cheers! Nobody expects the UnexpectedSmoreInquisition (talk)! 02:47, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

How can I start editing?

I want to give information about sepsis as a result of insufficient eficacy of commonly used antiseptics in root canals N2nisse (talk) 16:13, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, N2nisse, and welcome to the Teahouse.

In principle, you can simply start editing an article: if somebody disagrees with your edit, they will revert it, and then you can have a discussion on the article's talk page. See WP:BRD.

However, in general, anything you add must be supported by reliable published sources, not simply from your own experience; and in medical areas the requirement is stronger: see WP:MEDRS.

So, in short, if you are intending to add information from a published source that meets MEDRS, then please go ahead and add it. (But if you think your addition might be controversial, even if it is supported by such a source, then it would be advisable to discuss it on the article's talk page first).

If you are intending to add information from your own experience or observation, or your own ideas, then I'm afraid that would count as original research, and not be accepted anywhere in Wikipedia.

In the middle ground, if you have information from a published source, but that doesn't meet the strict requirements of MEDRS, you could open a discussion on the Talk page of the relevant article, anbd see if somebody else can find a suitable citation for it. ColinFine (talk) 16:35, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

Barnstars

Is there a specific place where one can request barnstars be designed? Thanks. BeanieFan11 (talk) 16:38, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

BeanieFan11, welcome to Wikipedia! You can request them on this page. Best, — Frostly (talk) 21:30, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

Music

Hello, I'm here on the wiki's aspiring to add some music to this place. Just wondering once this music is made, if I'm supposed to upload it here first? and if so where do I make these posts? 2A02:C7E:5C31:F000:BCA7:3B40:1E54:B6C (talk) 18:18, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi there and welcome - you don't. Please see WP:NOTFB and WP:NOTFILESTORAGE. However, good luck on your music making, and feel free to contribute by adding on to articles! NotAGenious (talk) 18:25, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

main page

I do miss that the RANDOM ARTICLE is no longer present on the page. But behind the menu dropdown, it would be really nice to put it back on the main page 24.182.59.25 (talk) 18:26, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

The random article link SHOULD be present in the navigation toolbar on the left, but thanks to the (redacted by self) Vector2022 skin, it's hidden behind some bloody drop-down for non-editors. It's particularly inane that it isn't even on the main page. I will start a discussion that this be corrected. Edward-Woodrow • talk 18:33, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Talk:Main_Page § Random_page_link? Edward-Woodrow • talk 18:59, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. IP editor, you can have it show indefinitely on the left-hand side if you click on the in the top-left corner, then click on Move to sidebar. You may need to create an account to keep it that way, though. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:09, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

facts

Why can people remove facts that you add to a page? Artapples (talk) 19:32, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

Anyone can edit articles and remove statements if they feel that it is unnecessary. Cwater1 (talk) 20:19, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

Your edit here [2] added unsourced content which I reverted, we are not interested in "facts" unless they are supported by a reliable source. Theroadislong (talk) 20:25, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

Report redriect page

There is a redirect page named 2023 United States federal government shitdown. I feel that it is possible vandalism. There is a redirect page for 2023 United States federal government shutdown which there is no vandalism on that part. Cwater1 (talk) 20:21, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

The letters I and U are next to each other on keyboards, so I don't think that this is necessarily vandalism, but a plausible redirect. 331dot (talk) 20:58, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

Makes sense Cwater1 (talk) 21:21, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

Plausible? Gosh.

...runs off to make oen to Public space in case someone forgets to type a 'l'. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:40, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

It was likely a mistake that the letter I was typed instead of the letter u. Cwater1 (talk) 02:14, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

So a plausible redirect would be anything with a single letter mistyped with the key next to it? That would mean about 80 plausible redirects for the above article. Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:56, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

Hey, what's going on?

There's a problem here.

‍ ‍ Relativity ‍ ‍ 22:16, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

I was able to get here by typing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Teahouse directly into my browser. ‍ ‍ Relativity ‍ ‍ 22:17, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

What's also weird is that the error comes up so far when I test "Maroon 5" but not "Apple", "Human" or "Benedict Arnold". ‍ ‍ Relativity ‍ ‍ 22:21, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

It happens and clears up later. It's normal. Small maintenance outage. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:37, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

This was also posted at the technical village pump and my comments in that thread also apply here. Graham87 (talk) 06:54, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

Hindi or Urdu Wikinews

Why isn't there a Hindi or Urdu version of Wikinews? 2601:644:907E:A450:1074:8FDC:B93F:8C23 (talk) 00:41, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

There is no reason to have either on this English-Language Wikipedia. Whether or not there are equivalents on the [Hindi] and [Urdu ] Wikipedias, those projects are separate and independent from en-Wikipedia, so it is a matter for them. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.212.130.182 (talk) 01:28, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

But Wikinews is separate from Wikipedia and there is an English Wikinews, https://en.wikinews.org . 2601:644:907E:A450:DA8:1E6D:3E0C:EB (talk) 01:47, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

See meta:Requests for new languages/Wikinews Hindi and meta:Requests for new languages/Wikinews Urdu. GoingBatty (talk) 02:16, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

That is weird, there are comments from 2008 for both of them, but Wikinews still doesn't exist in those languages? 2601:644:907E:A450:2186:C9C7:8C75:CC5E (talk) 02:52, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

There probably isn't enough interest in creating one. It will need many dedicated editors to start. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 02:54, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

English Wikinews is almost moribund, while English Wikipedia is thriving and doing a far better job covering the news in an encyclopedic way. Wikipedia is a top ten website worldwide with billions of monthly pageviews, and Wikinews is ranked #62,672. Why would anybody work to replicate a failed project in Hindi or Urdu? Cullen328 (talk) 03:56, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

Adding/Verifying subscription only articles

Some services require paid subscription. If a webpage is used as a reference in wiki article it's not possible to verify it. How can I deal with? Should I pay for the article? Aredoros87 (talk) 11:47, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

@Aredoros87 It is perfectly acceptable to use sources that are behind a paywall (see WP:PAYWALL). That's no different than using a book source where the reader would have to purchase or borrow the book to verify the information. We have a resource exchange where you can request access to a source you think may be useful so you can read it. Many editors are members of The Wikipedia Library which gives access to otherwise paywalled material: see that link for the requirements to join. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:22, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

Work or Help Board

Is there a place where you can post work to do where contributors who are looking for work can check out if they have time and are looking for ways to help out? This would be in main space. Thanks. Semper Fi! FieldMarine (talk) 12:26, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

@FieldMarine We already have a task centre with multiple subsets of suggestions. I guess that for some of them (e.g. foreign-language articles needing translation to English) you could add a suggestion but most are based on tags found on articles. Note that "main space" is the area where all our articles exist. The work suggestions would be in talk space or wp: space. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:14, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks Mike. The task center looks like a great place to go. Is it possible to add Overpopulated cats to the Categorization task on the task center? In other words, if a cat is tagged as overpopulated, that would be a good one to direct people to that are looking to help out. Perhaps there is a container for all overpopulated cats? Semper Fi! FieldMarine (talk) 13:25, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

As the owner of two moggies, I had to think hard about that! The task centre doesn't seem to be structured in a way that would readily accommodate that sort of suggestion. If you wanted to ask people to work on certain overpopulated categories you would, presumably, post at the local Project Talk Page: see WP:CATP for Project and how editors use its Talk Pages to interact there. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:01, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

How to?

How can I take part in a contest of Articles for deletion? What should I tap on to write my opinion? TheProEditor11 (talk) 13:58, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

@TheProEditor11 Full instructions at WP:AFD. The visual editor won't easily work in the deletion discussion, so you'll need to use the source editor to contribute, by clicking on "edit source" within the relevant section. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:04, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

Can you please help me by writing me steps here please!? TheProEditor11 (talk) 14:07, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

Which deletion discussion do you wish to participate in: please link to it (or the article itself) and then I'll comment on your Talk Page with more detail. There is no point in my repeating here at the Teahouse the whole of the WP:AFD link I've already supplied. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:18, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

Mac Taylor - I am trying to participate in the deletion discussion of this article. TheProEditor11 (talk) 14:30, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

OK, I'll comment on your Talk Page. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:59, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

Getting famous

I want to get famous on Wikipedia but don’t know how to. Any advice ? The Anti-patroll (talk) 15:13, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi, The Anti-patroll, welcome to the Teahouse! I do have some advice for you: don't. Intentionally trying to get fame or notice on Wikipedia isn't what we're here for. Instead, just contribute to the encyclopedia in the best way you can, whether that's through anti-vandalism, copy-editing, or writing articles. Contribute to the project and you will probably get noticed sooner or later, but if you're setting out to get noticed, you will likely only attract the wrong kind of attention. Wikipedia is not an MMORPG, after all. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 15:19, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

How about Il tell you I’m Willy on wheels The Anto-patroll (talk) 15:28, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

I would recommend creating a social media presence that revolves around your Wikipedia activities. Becoming an administrator would probably help, too. Buckrune (talk) 15:29, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

Wrong title

Why article Irani Cup 2023-24 is not titled as Irani Cup 2023 or 2023 Irani Cup? It is just a one of match. I suggest all the article of Irani Cup season should be name in this format "Year tournament name" - eg Irani Cup 2023. Tesla car owner (talk) 15:14, 1 October 2023 (UTC)