Jump to content

Wikipedia:Teahouse: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Kgberg (talk | contribs)
Line 637: Line 637:
::Fixed :) I think you missed the includeonly tags while copying it over, those prevent the template from being displayed on their own page (<code>includeonly</code>, i.e. only shown where included) [[User:Sohom Datta|Sohom]] ([[User talk:Sohom Datta|talk]]) 21:56, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
::Fixed :) I think you missed the includeonly tags while copying it over, those prevent the template from being displayed on their own page (<code>includeonly</code>, i.e. only shown where included) [[User:Sohom Datta|Sohom]] ([[User talk:Sohom Datta|talk]]) 21:56, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
:::Actually, so <code><nowiki>{{CURRENTYEAR}}</nowiki></code> will give you the current year, and if you use <code><nowiki>{{{1|{{CURRENTYEAR}}}}}</nowiki></code> your template will use the supplied first parameter or the current year if non is supplied (which appears to be the behviour you want) :) [[User:Sohom Datta|Sohom]] ([[User talk:Sohom Datta|talk]]) 22:05, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
:::Actually, so <code><nowiki>{{CURRENTYEAR}}</nowiki></code> will give you the current year, and if you use <code><nowiki>{{{1|{{CURRENTYEAR}}}}}</nowiki></code> your template will use the supplied first parameter or the current year if non is supplied (which appears to be the behviour you want) :) [[User:Sohom Datta|Sohom]] ([[User talk:Sohom Datta|talk]]) 22:05, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

== adding an award/honor to professor's wiki page ==

Hello! I wish to add an award citation to Professor Ted Rappaport's website. When I attempted a trial run in my [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Kgberg/sandbox&action=edit&section=7 sandbox] the link to the citation, which in my sandbox version is the last bullet on "awards" bulleted list, pulls up a "page does not exist" textual when I hover over it, and when I click on it goes to a yet-to-be-created wikipedia placeholder page.

Question: how can I fix this so the citation is valid and goes not to the wiki page but to the actual correct external page at IEEE?&nbsp;[[User:Kgberg|Kgberg]] ([[User talk:Kgberg|talk]]) 22:39, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Revision as of 22:39, 29 October 2023

Skip to top
Skip to bottom


Hi all,

I have only just recently opened an account with Wikipedia (although I have edited before as an unregistered user). I'm a children's television historian.


I'm having some problems regarding sourcing for the Make Way for Noddy cast. In the UK, the cast never receive any credit on screen, so I've been trying to track them down for a long time now. I've finally managed to get ahold of the full cast list directly from the UK's voice director, but this it seems is not sufficient (even paired with the only instance I can find of the cast being credited onscreen in the UK, as if they're going to completely recast for a special episode or something). I find the the fact that this is not sufficient extremely disheartening, like all my efforts have been in vain.


My argument is - how do you verify any uncredited cast or crew? It's not uncommon for them to not receive on-screen credit, take old cartoons for example. All that information is obtained by people, like me, who go directly to the people who worked on it and get the information directly from the horse's mouth. It's not documented anywhere; it just comes from the source. And it's even less uncommon for voice actors to be listed without specifying who they actually voices which also would be a problem going by these guidelines. If we all stuck to these guidelines, we'd never truly know anything unless it's credited onscreen - imagine how short Daws Butler or June Foray's filmographies would be!


I think this site would be better operated in matters like these by going by a quantum of proof - ie. there's more proof than not. I mean, it's not as if I'm editing the results of a World Cup, we're talking about a children's TV show from the early 2000's - what possible motive would I have for fabricating that (unless I was adding myself to the cast or something!).


It's like if I went on Amazon and made a Kindle ebook titled "Make Way for Noddy Cast" and put my email from the voice director in quotes inside, you'd probably except it (based on what I've seen on other pages). How is this any different? Simple answer: it's not.


For full information, including links to screenshots, see my original thread with user Waxworker: User talk:Waxworker#Make Way for Noddy


Thank you,

Ed. EdwardBohan89 (talk) 15:58, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@EdwardBohan89 As you probably know, IMDb contains that sort of information (see this link) and although Wikipedia does not consider that a reliablle source, because it is user-generated, we do allow external links to these entries as part of our articles. Your only alternative is to publish your research in another outlet considered as reliable and then quote that publication here. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:19, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, EdwardBohan89, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid that the answer is that you cannot add unpublished information to a Wikipedia article. Verifiability is a core principle: we want a reader in Birmingham next week or Buffalo next month or Bangaluru next year, to be able to verify the information in an article (it doesn't have to be easy: needing to order a copy from a major library, for example, is acceptable).
The problem is not that anybody doubts your veracity: it's that Wikipedia is the encyclopaedia that anybody can edit. Suppose you insert unsourced information, and next year somebody changes that - out of a sincere belief that it was wrong, or by mistake, or out of malice to somebody, or out of vandalism. That change may or may not be noticed, and an editor look to correct it. But if there is no published source, that editor has no way of knowing which is the correct information, and nor has any future reader.
If you can get your research published by a reliable source, then it can be referenced in a Wikipedia article - though you should not add it yourself, because that would be regarded as a conflict of interest ColinFine (talk) 16:23, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@ColinFine & @Michael D. Turnbull,
Thank you both for taking the time to explain and in a more respectful manner than the last guy I might add!
My main gripe with it all is that anyone can be an expert in any field, just because someone is published, doesn't necessarily mean they're any more right from some unknown guy like me. I see it all over Wikipedia. Especially on pages for old cartoons from Warner Bros, Fleischer Studios etc. Who really knows who provided, say for example, the voice of the baby Swee'Pea in the old Popeye cartoons. Answer is: we don't know for certain - one book written by an expert says one thing, another says another, the company has long since been closed/merged and everyone who worked on it are dead. How come that's allowed to go unchallenged? And as I pointed out on the Make Way for Noddy page, how did it come to pass that Ben Small was attached to so many characters in the first place? We knew he worked on the show, but why was it never challenged before as to who he voiced? I see no source for that (and as it turns out this information IS wrong going by the voice director for the show).
I know that has to be some form of proof - but I genuinely thought I had provided enough. But hey-ho, it is what it is I guess.
I've had my findings in this matter put out on several IMDB episodes for Make Way for Noddy (I'll do the rest in due course).
Sorry for the rant, but it's just very frustrating. I'm sure you understand. As I said before, it's like having all your hard work slung back in your face, but I shouldn't keep going on at people who are just doing what Wikipedia says is "the right way of doing things", please forgive me.
Thanks again for your response. It is much appreciated.
Ed EdwardBohan89 (talk) 16:48, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@EdwardBohan89: There are times when reliable published sources disagree, and we can indicate that in an article by stating that source 1 states X and source 2 states Y. GoingBatty (talk) 18:59, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
See Wikipedia:Reliable sources and Wikipedia:No original research, those should help explain things. Happy editing! Industrial Insect (talk) 18:44, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My article was deleted without any notice. Is it common on Wkikipedia?

Hello Wikipedia guys. Thanks for watching my question. I'm a new member to Wikipedia and I posted the 3rd article few days ago. But it was deleted suddenly without any notice. Is it common on Wikipedia? I think it is undemocratic and unfair. I thought if my article was not good for Wikipedia it should be noticed and discussed. But there was not any notice and deleted suddenly. I think my article handles very common matter about " How to enjoy old lens", and neutral and verifiable. The guy deleted my article said "Wikipedia cannot handle New matters". Is it right? If it is common in Wikipedia, I cannot handle "Recent(new) topics" on Wikipedia. I think it will degrade the presence of Wikipedia.

How do you think about it?

The deleted article is on my Sandbox. https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%88%A9%E7%94%A8%E8%80%85:TomoakiKasuga/sandbox

The guy deleted my article is --柏尾菓子 The talk with him is below and I think it is meaningless to talk with him.


”オールドレンズ 楽しみ方 評価手法 井の頭レンズ研究所” を削除されたようですが、不当であると考えます。オールドレンズの楽しみ方を書いており、新しいレンズ評価手法を考えており、従来の手法とは違う方法ですから、参考データとしてサイトを参照するのは当然と考えます。これがだめなら新しい方法はWikiには載せられないという事になりませんか?


「新しい方法」をWikipediaに載せることはいけません。独自研究です。そういう方法があるという、信頼できる情報源による出典による、専門家などが分析した資料を用いて記事を作成してください。Wikipedia:ウィキペディアは何ではないか、Wikipedia:中立的な観点などもご参考ください。--柏尾菓子(会話) 2023年10月24日 (火) 02:51 (UTC) TomoakiKasuga (talk) 00:51, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, TomoakiKasuga, and welcome to the Teahouse! It looks like this is about the Japanese Wikipedia, a completely different website than the English Wikipedia – we cannot help you very well with issues there. However, as I assume their rules about original research are similar to ours, I will say that he is correct that the article does appear to consist largely if not entirely of original research, which is (at least here on the English Wikipedia) unfortunately not allowed. I cannot comment on the speed of the deletion as I am entirely unfamiliar with the deletion process at the Japanese Wikipedia. Tollens (talk) 01:00, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No response from Japanese Wikipedia mailing list... TomoakiKasuga (talk) 07:52, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Hi TomoakiKasuga. Each of the local Wikipedias is a separate project with its own policies and guidelines, and its own community applying and enforcing those policies and guidelines. The Teahouse is really intended for questions about English Wikipedia and it's better to ask questions about Japanese Wikipedia over on Japanese Wikipedia. You can try the Japanese Wikipedia Help Desk at ja:Wikipedia:利用案内 and see if someone there is able to answer your question. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:02, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No response from Japanese Wikipedia mailing list. It seems as Japanese Wikipedia is dead. At least it is not friendly to new comer. I won't use it more. TomoakiKasuga (talk) 07:50, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No, TomoakiKasuga, Japanese Wikipedia is not dead. It is alive and vibrant. Editors there need to follow their policies and guidelines, just as editors on the English Wikipedia need to follow our policies and guidelines. Cullen328 (talk) 08:05, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think Wikipedia needs to be friendly to members. Without it it is same as dead. No need. English Wikipedia is alive. TomoakiKasuga (talk) 00:46, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@TomoakiKasuga: You have received a response from the Japanese Wikipedia mailing list - see ja:利用者‐会話:TomoakiKasuga. GoingBatty (talk) 14:15, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It is not the mailing-list. TomoakiKasuga (talk) 00:42, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi GoingBatty, It's OK to delete with this process. But there was no process like this this time. So I was very surprised. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Template_index/Speedy_deletion TomoakiKasuga (talk) 01:18, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How can I export the reference list of a Wikipedia page to import into EndNote or Zotero?

I have a large page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Smooth_Island_(Tasmania) which I want to rewrite via Microsoft Word. I'll need to use a reference manager like EndNote or Zotero. How can I export the page, and it's reference list, to ensure the numbered inline citations don't become a complete mess once I start moving sections around in Microsoft Word?

Thanks Vitreology (talk) 01:07, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Vitreology: The reference list is built from the references inside the article's wikitext. Its not something you can export or import separately. I'm not sure how well importing the article to Word, editing, and then trying to export to wiki text will work. You may want to start with a small changes instead of a large rewrite to see how it goes before you spend a lot of time on this. RudolfRed (talk) 01:32, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Vitreology: I will second what RudolfRed recommended above about "major rewrites". Generally, it's better to be WP:CAUTIOUS is such situations and work on improving an article gradually then to try and do so in one fell swoop. Wikipedia is a collaborative editing project in which users try to improve and build upon the edits made by others. Unless an article is in absolutely horrible shape or is nothing more that a few sentences, completely disregarding the work of others who might have previously edited an article (without a really good policy based reason for doing so) is often viewed unfavorably and can lead to a quick revert per WP:BRD. By at least explaining what you'd like to do on the article's talk page, you're giving others a chance to offer feedback and perhaps point out policy or guideline issues that you might not be aware of. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:58, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Honestly, if you have a look at it, I've written 99.9999% of the content of that page. There is not anyone else to consider at this stage. Vitreology (talk) 02:26, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If that's the case, then go ahead and knock yourself out. Making changes in bits and pieces can, however, still be beneficial to others since it makes it easier to follow what you're doing instead of trying to decipher one massive rewrite. Here are some suggestions on your rewrite. You should set thumbnail images to a fixed pixed width because it forces everyone to see the image at the same size regardless of the device they're using. This could create MOS:ACCESS issues for user who are reading the article, but who aren't using the same device that you're using. It's better to scale images instead as explained in MOS:UPRIGHT. You should try and refraing from using MOS:ALLCAPS whenever possible, even in citations. You should pick one of the acceptable WP:CITESTYLE and apply it consistently throughout the article. You should also avoid WP:BAREURLs whenever possible. You should also make sure the date format is consistent (including in citations) throughout the article per MOS:DATEUNIFY. Finally, you might want to consider other ways to display the images being used in the article since MOS:SANDWICHing too many images into an article can make it difficult to read, particularly for those using smartphones or other portable devices. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:49, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Much appreciated, thank you.
I really would love to know how to cleanly extract the references from the article. I've tried many approaches and so far nothing has worked.
I'd really like to be able to export the article's reflist into either a RIS or BibTeX format. Vitreology (talk) 02:53, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Vitreology. Since the reflist does not exist until the Mediawiki software displays the page, it is unlikely there will be a solution unless somebody has specifically progammed it. A quick search does not offer anything. Sorry. ColinFine (talk) 13:50, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Vitreology, if you have the Zotero browser extension it should be possible to extract the machine-readable metadata exposed by the standard citation templates as per Wikipedia:COinS. Specifically, it looks like it will give you a list of the refs on the page when you go through the right click context menu, with the options Zotero Connector > Save to Zotero > Save to Zotero (COinS), and you can then click select all in the window that pops up. I've taken a quick look at the page in question and it seems to work there. Alpha3031 (tc) 11:28, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Vitreology: Go to the article, click "Edit source", select all the wikicode, copy it, and paste it into Word. When you move sections around in Word, be sure to move the associated references with them. When you copy from Word and paste back into the Wikipedia source editor, the Mediawiki software will take care of all the reference numbering and formatting for you. GoingBatty (talk) 14:12, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Vitreology I wouldn't recommend using Word for this sort of editing offline. Much better to use text editors like WordPad, which won't mess around with the wikicode. Word will likely convert two consecutive ' characters into a single quote character ", or worse a smartquote character, which will ruin the code, because double ' characters are used to indicate italics. I edit offline all the time, just copy/pasting the new code into my sandbox to Preview the resulting text. There is no need to save/publish the sandbox as you proceed, since you will be saving the offline version. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:39, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How to deal with following?

So an user has been following me. We got into an argument on one page which dragged on and now he has arrived on another page where I later went. What do I do if this continues? It is preventing me from editing freely. MrMkG (talk) 07:31, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In the first instance I would recommend you to try to ignore it, refrain from editing that article or responding to their comments if you can and continue your editing elsewhere. Perhaps come back to that article at a later time when they've moved on to something else. If they continue to follow you across multiple articles then I would recommend reporting at WP:ANI. Polyamorph (talk) 08:30, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Situation - the dispute exists at length on the Talk page of MrMkG. Issue is editing disputes at what Wikipedia designates as contentious topics. David notMD (talk) 10:31, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you User:Polyamorph and User:David notMD. The problem is solved. He went away on his own saying he doesn't want to discuss with me anymore. I hope he will not follow me anymore.
It is true the topic is sensitive and I am not sure how to act right now. But I am seeing a much bigger problem on that page. The very charecter of the topic has been morphed into something else. Into a view that is not even put under any consideration in the academic world. Sources given as citations are not being followed and weird claims made nilly willy. Can you people come and see? I think it needs people to edit it who can look at the topic from a distance. MrMkG (talk) 10:16, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@MrMkG What article is the problem? Are you talking about Bangladesh genocide? -- asilvering (talk) 01:23, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

I'm trying to find information about a small company, but I just can't find any good sources. Do you all have any recommended websites to get good sources for beginners? Flobeigor (talk) 08:43, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Flobeigor We require references from significant coverage about the topic of the article, and independent of it, in multiple secondary sources which are WP:RS please. See WP:42. Please also see WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources and WP:SELFPUB which has clear limitations on self published sources. Providing sufficient references, ideally one per fact referred to, that meet these tough criteria is likely to allow this planned article to remain. Lack of them or an inability to find them is likely to mean that the topic is not suitable for inclusion, certainly today.
The issue is that the company is unlikely to be notable if you can find no useful references with ease. Look for news media, but beware PR material and press releases, both of which are inappropriate.Read HELP:YFA, and do not start to draft before you have references.
Are you connected with this company in any manner? 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 09:12, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's my grandfather's one. I wanted to add it to the wikipedia But I know I can't just use ''my grandpa is the owner, so you should absolutely trust me'' Thanks, though. Flobeigor (talk) 06:06, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Flobeigor, you'll want to follow the instructions at WP:COI. I warn you also that it's pretty tough to write articles on companies, especially small ones, because the bar for notability is set very high. -- asilvering (talk) 01:24, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Test result

As I'm new to Wikipedia, I have wrote 3 levels of articles in order to know how Wikipedia works. The first one is with very precise information: https://w.wiki/7sDF The second one is with so so good information: https://w.wiki/7sDC The 3rd one is with rough information: https://w.wiki/7uTC After uploading, the first one is OK with no comments. And the second one is OK with some comments. And the third one was deleted without any notice, and I asked why deleted to Japanese Wikipedia mailing-list. But there was no response from them. I have asked same thing here and got some responses. The problem is the 3rd article was deleted without any notice and no responses from Japanese Wikipedia mailing-list. I was very surprised by such unpleasant responses. I cannot trust such undemocratic interface for Wikipedia. So I decided not to use Wikipedia more. I think it is better to change Japanese Wikipedia managers. TomoakiKasuga (talk) 11:25, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am preparing a detailed response to this query. Please wait. Nick Moyes (talk) 11:34, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome to the Teahouse, TomoakiKasuga. Each language wiki operates under its own policies and guidelines, so we normally avoid commenting on issues beyond English Wikipedia. However, if I pretend for a moment that you had created those pages here on English Wikipedia, I would have had only minor concerns about the first two you linked to - namely that I would want to see more inline citations after each statement of fact, rather than just a list of hard-to access reference list just at the bottom. I would however have said "well done" on creating those two new articles - it's not an easy thing to do. I would hope you would have been encouraged by this.
Now, your third article would not fit within our ideas of an encyclopaedia article. It is more of a '"How to do it" article, and would hit our WP:NOTMANUAL policy. It was more of a chatty help page, better fitting a personal blog or magazine, not an encyclopaedia. It would not have survived long here, either, though I would have hoped someone would have had the courtesy to explain to you why this happened. I'm not aware of any mailing lists, but here we would expect an editor who has had article deleted to be able to approach the deleting administrator and politely seek an explanation.
I genuinely hope you are not put off by this experience and that you continue contributing to Japanese Wikipedia. I also had one of my first articles put up for deletion when I first started here - it is common that people do not always appreciate all the criteria under which Wikipedia works. In essence, it's an encyclopaedia of notable things, not an instructional aid, nor a site to promote a business, or favourite musician or pop personality. Don't let one hiccup put you off! Nick Moyes (talk) 11:43, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Nick. Thanks for kind response. If there is a message like this in Japanese Wikipedia, it's nice. But I felt there is a very bad feelings in Japanese Wikipedia, so it's very hard to contribute to it. Anyway thanks for kind response. TomoakiKasuga (talk) 12:20, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@TomoakiKasuga: You are most welcome. But I did notice that you actually received a reply on your talk page on Japanese Wikipedia to your email which did explain the circumstances. It was written by User:柏尾菓子, and you could always have responded to them on your talk page and asked questions. However, I think the message they left for you was very similar to the explanation I have outlined above, namely that your article was original research, or essay-like, so not acceptable for Japanese Wikipedia.
To be fair, many of us experienced editors are often accused of being rude or blunt here, too. We can come across as intolerant of simple errors made by new editors such as yourself. (That's why this 'Teahouse' forum was established, so as to be an extra-friendly place to seek advice).
But the reality is that on English Wikipedia we have 6.7 milllion existing articles and about 500 new ones created every single day, and hundreds more that fail to make it. On Japanese Wikipedia, you have 1.39 million articles. With so few volunteer editors on each project, we simply do not have the time to leave lengthy explanations. Instead, we rely on 'templated' messages which contain links to key policies. We sort of 'expect' new editors like yourself to take the time to read them, simply because we don't have that time ourselves to deal personally with the authors of every draft article that fails our 'notability' criteria. Inevitably those actions, be they rejection or immediate deletion of an inappropriate page, can leave people feeling mistreated.
The time we spend helping editors in the way you and I have interacted here is actually quite a rare thing - and that's what's makes the Teahouse a special place for new editors on English Wikipedia. I'm afraid I can't see an equivalent place specifically for new editors on Japanese Wikipedia (there's a language list at the top right of this page showing 31 different languages that do have one.) But this link should take you to the Japanese equivalent of our own Help Desk if you ever need help and guidance there. Happy editing and 幸運を! Nick Moyes (talk) 13:29, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Nick, It's OK to delete with this process. But there was no process like this this time. So I was very surprised. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Template_index/Speedy_deletion TomoakiKasuga (talk) 01:05, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@TomoakiKasuga, お疲れ様でした, thank you for your work on Wikipedia. I'm sorry you've had this negative experience on ja-wiki. Unfortunately (or fortunately?) the only way ja-wiki will become friendlier is if more friendly people join it (and that means you!). So, please keep at it. It looks like your first article is notable, so it shouldn't be deleted. That's really good! Most people don't write an article that meets wikipedia's guidelines on the first try. -- asilvering (talk) 01:37, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi asilvering Thanks for reply. It's good to hear my first article is good enough. It helps me to stay at Wikipedia. Thank you! :-) TomoakiKasuga (talk) 05:51, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Nick, It's OK to delete with this process. But there was no process like this this time. So I was very surprised. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Template_index/Speedy_deletion TomoakiKasuga (talk) 01:32, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What staff tools have age limits?

Okay, I'm 12, but I've been starting to correct vandalism, and am thinking about submitting a request for Rollback rights on the wiki in a few months. Are there any age requirements for user groups, and which ones would I even be able to obtain at my age? Puzzle Piece the Wikipedian (talk) 16:49, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Puzzle Piece the Wikipedian Hello, welcome to the teahouse. Usually rollback does not have any age requirements, the only hard requirements for something is related to privacy, for example, checkuser, VRT and Oversighter. However, usually sysops are preferred to be adults. -Lemonaka‎ 17:05, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
For children, especially younger children on this project, I strongly recommend you to read Wikipedia:Guidance for younger editors -Lemonaka‎ 17:06, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
OP blocked as sockpuppet, my blindness. -Lemonaka‎ 10:23, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unexplained removals

There have been unexplained removal of sentences from some Islam related articles like Rape in Pakistan, Kafir etc. especially after the 2023 Israel-Hamas conflict started. I request editors to restore sourced text wherever they are being removed.-112.133.244.13 (talk) 03:15, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I looked in the history of Rape in Pakistan. It took only a few seconds for me to understand that the removal is explained as the work of sockpuppets. If I misunderstand, feel free to bring up the matter in Talk:Rape in Pakistan. -- Hoary (talk) 04:28, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Hoary! Though not involved, I found your statement above ambiguous. Do you mean the removals were performed by sockpuppets (as your text literally means) or that it was the work of sockpuppets that was being removed?
Barbardo, as an involved editor who has been very active in this and other related articles, do you want to enlarge on what's being going on? {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 46.65.231.103 (talk) 19:14, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that was poorly written. Better: "the removals were described as deletion of additions by sockpuppets", or similar. Specifically:
However, the teahouse isn't the best place to discuss this. -- Hoary (talk) 22:59, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Hoary The above IP is a sockpuppet of 1Firang. I reverted their (now blocked) IP and 2 other accounts who I believe are sockpuppets of a proxy abusing socks of @Lau Cheng based on the editing pattern (which I had done on multiple other articles weeks ago). Though I didn't explain why I reverted the IP. I believe Barbardo was doing the same. Kiu99 (talk) 00:06, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
[1][2] Okay this is definitely the sockpuppet of 1Firang. The sneaky canvassing attempts they are making here is a thing have done before to win edit wars. Kiu99 (talk) 00:28, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The IP who posted this turned out to be the same sockpuppet as before. Barbardo (talk) 11:00, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/112.133.244.13
Just adding the IP it was a block evasion attempt Barbardo (talk) 11:08, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Problem uploading the translation

Good day,

I translated my webside from Czech to English and run into a problem uploading the translation. Wikipedia tells me I need confirmation from an Experience Editor. How should I proceed please? I am a new member.

Thank you very much in advance.

Best regards

Mária Lobotková Mária Lobotková (talk) 08:22, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and welcome. You need to submit your draft for a review using the Article Wizard. Accounts new to the English Wikipedia cannot directly create articles. Please understand that the English Wikipedia likely has different rules than the Czech Wikipedia, you will need to make sure that your topic meets our definition of notability and sourcing requirements. 331dot (talk) 08:52, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Translating non-English text to use in English Wikipedia articles,

Can anybody point me to any protocols on translating text from other languages for inclusion in articles, please?

When the article is of little importance, an effort by contributors themselves, or even by online translation, may be sufficient. But when we get to subjects of any significance, it is easy to see that through ignorance, bias or incompetence contributors could be corrupting the original material, with consequences ranging from just embarrassing to dangerous.

Should the source of all translations be logged, so that we can judge their reliability? Belle Fast (talk) 11:49, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:TRANSLATION for guidance. Since you are extended-confirmed, you can use WP:CXT, which... has benefits and has problems. Edward-Woodrowtalk 12:20, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If you use CXT, @Belle Fast, my advice is to have the draft publish to your userspace, not to mainspace (you can change this in the settings, but you have to do it for each individual article you translate - annoying). Then you can fix up the problems that CXT creates. Otherwise, you will probably get hounded by over-eager new page patrollers before you get a chance to make any fixes. -- asilvering (talk) 01:41, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The main problem with CXT, I've found, is the lack of a source mode editor, which makes it very difficult to fiddle with references, templates, or formatting. Edward-Woodrowtalk 12:18, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Belle Fast Note that many newcomers to translation don't realise that each Wikipedia language version has its own rules about notability and the ones here for the English Wikipedia are quite stringent. Make sure that the foreign-language article has adequate sourcing so you can establish that notability, either from the existing sources or by adding extra ones you have found independently, or your work may be wasted. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:11, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How to make sandbox ready for AFC?

Every time i click on the link to my sandbox, it redirects to Honeycomb moray (disambiguation), is there a way to get it to not be a redirect (and make it possible for an AFC submission) Abdullah raji (talk) 12:35, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Abdullah raji you submitted it for review successfully. It was moved to Draft:Honeycomb moray (disambiguation) as the draft prefix is preferred for drafts. Someone accepted the draft, and it was finally moved to Honeycomb moray (disambiguation).
If you want to remove a redirect, you can click on the little pop up at the top of the page that says "(Redirected from XY)", then you can edit the page as normally. Sungodtemple (talkcontribs) 12:53, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Template:Improve categories" resolutions?

Hi friends, I’ve been coming across a few instances where there is a “Template:Improve categories” in an article, followed by several edits adding appropriate categories, but I haven't seen any guidance/consensus on what constitutes *enough* categories or time passed for when such a template can and should be removed, and haven't yet come across anything on talk pages reflecting on this. I'm curious, when is it the right time to remove such a Template? Would love any ideas or wisdom you might have <3 TL;DR -- when is it safe to remove a "Template:Improve categories"? Waterfelt (talk) 13:20, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Waterfelt, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm not sure I've seen any specific guidance on this either. Maybe there is some I've overlooked, but I'd suggest this is more of a subjective matter. You didn't list any examples, so it's hard to comment. Obviously, the basic ones do need to be included so that any topic can be grouped with similar articles to aid its discovery. You could look at very similar articles and see what categories they have been placed in. Reading the article right the way through to ensure all the main potential categorisation possibilities have been addressed. If you're confident they have been reasonably addressed, then by all means remove the template. If not, leave it there for another editor to stress over! Further information at WP:Categorization and WP:Categorization dos and don'ts. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 16:13, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much Nick Moyes. This is super helpful. I had an inkling this sort of subjective judgement was the case, but didn't want to just assume as a newcomer. Cheers! Waterfelt (talk) 18:39, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Where can I find toppage to message

I need to measage a person from toppage where do i find it Spideog&123 (talk) 14:39, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Spideog&123 I think you mean the Talk Page of another editor that you wish to use to leave them a message. The link to these pages is in their signature, although yours is currently a redlink because it doesn't currently have any content. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:55, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Mike. Spideog&123 (talk) 15:49, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, help me with templates. Need their fix. СтасС (talk) 15:37, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@СтасС: The template {{EIy}} does not exist. What are you trying to do with it? Perhaps an alternative can be found. RudolfRed (talk) 15:45, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you.--СтасС (talk) 15:48, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's a template in uk-wiki, uk:Шаблон:ЕІУ, which formats references to the Encyclopaedia of Ukrainian History [uk].
The article reads like machine translation, so I thought it was an unacknowledged translation from Історія Ямполя, but in fact that was only created today (and is likely an unattributed translation from the English article). ColinFine (talk) 17:03, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much.--СтасС (talk) 17:48, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding indexing of my article

Recently I have created an article Premanand Ji Maharaj, but still this article is not indexed on Google search ?? What thing is preventing this article from indexing? WikiAnchor10 (talk) 17:32, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, WikiAnchor10. In most cases, a new article is not indexed for search engines until either it has been reviewed by a New Pages Patroller, or 90 days has passed. Read Wikipedia:Controlling search engine indexing for detailed information. Cullen328 (talk) 17:39, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Premanand Ji Maharaj says that its subject is a sanyasi and a spiritual teacher, but doesn't explain what he's notable for. I assume that if I could read Hindi I could find out from the sources; but it would be good to see more explanation in the article. Maproom (talk) 08:25, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

how do I make a article

i don't know how 207.192.241.227 (talk) 18:19, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, as an IP, you are limited in what you can do. I would recommend creating an account and then following the advice at this page. Sincerely, Novo Tape (She/Her)My Talk Page 18:21, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please note that nearly everybody who tries to create a new article as the first thing they do has a frustrating and miserable time, because it takes some time to understand the rather singular requirements of Wikipedia. For this reason I always advise new editors to spend a few weeks or months learning how Wikipedia works by making improvements to some of our six million existing articles - especially adding references where they are lacking (this is the most time consuming and sometimes difficult part of editing, but it is an absolute non-negotiable requirement for creating a new article. If you try to create a new article without understanding sources, you will fail).
I remember when I started editing, eighteen years ago, I so much wanted to "make my mark" by creating a new article. Now I know that there are far far far more valuable ways to improve Wikipedia than creating new articles - I've only ever created a dozen or so. ColinFine (talk) 19:21, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unsalting

Hi, I was going to accept Draft:Elvish Yadav but the title has been salted. Can you please tell me the process for unsalting, regards Atlantic306 (talk) 19:18, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Atlantic306. WP:Protection_policy#create says . Editors wishing to re-create a salted title with appropriate content should either contact an administrator (preferably the protecting administrator), file a request at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection § Current requests for reduction in protection level, or use the deletion review process. ColinFine (talk) 19:25, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
thanks, i'll make a request, regards Atlantic306 (talk) 19:40, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted article move to draftspace

Would an admin be kind of nough to move the deleted article for Adam Guillette to draftspace? He's been in the news lately and I'd like to see what was there. Also a possible lerge candidate to Accuracy in Media. Thank you kindly. The deleting admin is "semi-retired". Thanks. FloridaArmy (talk) 20:09, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I can move it into your user space. Ruslik_Zero 20:18, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That would be great User:Ruslik0. Can you please alert me when it's moved and where? Thanks! Have a great weekend. FloridaArmy (talk) 23:30, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@FloridaArmy: I moved it to User:FloridaArmy/Adam_Guillette. Ruslik_Zero 17:32, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New page

Hi there, I just made and sent my first page for review. Please could somebody check it for me Journalist0071 (talk) 21:36, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Journalist0071 and welcome to the Teahouse.
You are asking about Draft:Navina Evans, right?
You need a source for the Awards section. Your section titles need to be fixed (the edit button is not a part of the section header). We have a policy document called MOS:LASTNAME which you have not consistently followed. There are other parts of that document that apply to where the title Dr. or post-nomial CBE should be given.
I question whether the photo you took is your "own work", given that the same photo appears at the top of a letter published by Evans on the NHS website.
Look again at each of your sources to determine if they represent secondary, independent reporting about Evans. Too much dependence on "official" sources is a problem because they cannot be used to establish notability. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 22:12, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Despite what jmcgnh says, it looks like a reasonable job for a first attempt, but I haven't looked closely. I am not a reviewer, and your draft will sit in the heap until a reviewer chooses to pick it up. That might be tomorrow, or it might be months away. ColinFine (talk) 22:17, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Journalist0071, GoingBatty perhaps suggests that provision of a reference for the "Awards" section is all that this draft needs before resubmission. If this is indeed what's meant, then I warmly disagree. The draft isn't all bad, but it's written in PR-speak. Please see Draft talk:Navina Evans#Prose. -- Hoary (talk) 00:39, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you both. it's my first draft (ever), will work on the changes Journalist0071 (talk) 13:06, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Guidance on an article for deletion

I was asked to review 1986 Lewisham London Borough Council election.

The 'This article has multiple issues.' dates back to July 2019 and June 2021. I agreed with those comments and proposed that the article should be deleted.

The editor who removed that proposal seems to be the author of the incomplete information from May 2010.

I do not understand the reason given for keeping the article: "not prodable".

As the editor responded promptly, I consider that they would have been aware of the 'multiple issues' concerns. Does the other editor have a COI by being the author?

Please can someone else consider this matter. I only came to this article because it was one that needed consideration. BlueWren0123 (talk) 02:54, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@bluewren0123: you have already asked this question here. please do not ask questions in more than one place. ltbdl (talk) 02:58, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The user make a big mistake of Julie Brown's birth year.

The user 2600:1004:B11A:5DAA:94D2:A4BF:4C7C:D061 has messed up the year of the actress Julie Brown 1958. Not 1954. The user is making a mistake. I have fixed the right year. 108.21.67.83 (talk) 03:31, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The reference shown for the birth date of Julie Brown does not mention when she was born. Would you be able to find a reliable reference that states the year of her birth? Karenthewriter (talk) 03:43, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Karenthewriter: The reference does have a date, at least for me – if you scroll up there is a "Born" field. I can alter the URL so that it loads the page at the top rather than the middle; I was also initially confused about where the date was in the cited source. Tollens (talk) 05:52, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I apologize for my mistake. I clicked on the reference link and didn't scroll up, for I thought that the little biography was all that was there. Karenthewriter (talk) 02:52, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fiction Category Question

There's Books set in ??? categories.

There's TV shows set in ??? categories.

There's Films set in ??? categories.

But are there any categories for places which are the main topic, but aren't actually set there?

For example Spine Chillers' Bradford in my Dreams where the main topic is the City of Bradford. Danstarr69 (talk) 05:48, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There's Category:Books about cities; this does already include for example Category:Books about London, but it doesn't seem to have yet been much exploited. Rightly or wrongly, it's a subcategory of Category:Non-fiction books by topic; this may inhibit its use for fiction. -- Hoary (talk) 06:29, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not familiar with Bradford in my Dreams. Are you saying it is set somewhere other than Bradford? I'm struggling to understand how a film could not be set in a place if that place is its main topic. In any case I suspect there are too few examples to warrant a separate category. Shantavira|feed me 08:58, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Shantavira the title is basically the plot (well that's what it seems like anyway after skipping through it multiple times over the last year, to see whether it was filmed in Bradford).
It's basically a film about a man from London (I think), who keeps having a dream about driving to Bradford, which he talks about with some psychiatrists, which is based on Lawrence Block's book Cleveland in my Dreams.
In the future I will most likely create some books/films/TV shows about Bradford categories like the London one, when I can think of at least 5 examples, and they will most likely be films or TV shows, as that's what I focus on Danstarr69 (talk) 13:27, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can you submit someone else's article draft?

I'd like to know if that is allowed, because I just stumbled upon a draft that looked very good and worth for submitting even though it was never edited by me. EditorEpic (talk) 10:25, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @EditorEpic: you can, at least technically speaking, in the sense that nobody 'owns' any draft or article. Whether you should is a different matter: there may be a reason why the author hasn't submitted it yet, and they might be upset if you do so prematurely (in their opinion). As a courtesy, you should probably at least ask them first if it's okay to do so. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:36, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@EditorEpic: If you're referring to Draft:Quackity, I would advise against submitting it right now – it currently does not have the sources that would be required to demonstrate the subject's notability, and so would be almost certainly declined. Before any draft is submitted, it should have at least three references to reliable sources that are independent of the subject which discuss the subject of the draft. Draft:Quackity currently only has references to YouTube videos (which are unreliable because anyone can make them), news sources which are either considered unreliable (see WP:RSP#Sportskeeda and WP:RSP#Distractify) or not sufficient to establish notability (see WP:RSP#Dexerto), and sources which are automatically generated and therefore considered routine. If you're able to find additional sources that would demonstrate that the draft meets the notability guidelines, feel free to add them in and submit the draft, but it doesn't appear likely to be accepted in its current state. Tollens (talk) 10:47, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My Wikipedia page has not been published.

Hello, My name is Harmangeet SIngh and i creat a page of a actor, lyricist and poet but My Wikipedia page has not been published. Harmangeet Singh (talk) 11:05, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's right, Harmangeet Singh, Draft:Binder Pal Fateh hasn't been converted into an article. On 20 March '23, it was rejected. As Bonadea wrote at the time:
No independent sources, no sources that discuss him at any depth, no secondary sources. This source doesn't even mention him, this is a listing on a website whose aim is "providing services to the Actors and Models fraternity", the textile-industries source doesn't mention him and anyway it's just another database listing, and we can't use an autogenerated page about a song as a source.
You were asked to stop working on this. That didn't work, and therefore I'll repeat: Please stop working on this. -- Hoary (talk) 11:27, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
UPDATE: HS moved this to mainspace despite Declines and a Rejection. Now nominated for deletion. Did not declare COI. David notMD (talk) 17:43, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Draft for review.

Hello, I’ve completed a wiki draft titled “Draft:The Phone Up Studios Inc”. can someone kindly review the article. I don’t want to submit it for actual review and it disappoint me. So if someone can take a look, and let me know if you do you think that it will pass approval, or if not give kindly explain what needs to be corrected.

Thanks! Hjared (talk) 11:15, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hjared, where are the reliable sources that describe or discuss this company in depth? -- Hoary (talk) 11:29, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Meanwhile, let me quote: This not only marked the conclusion of an era but also signified a profound transformation. Through a final and momentous process of rebranding and restructuring, they emerged anew as The Phone Up Studios. The conclusion of an era? A profound transformation? A momentous process? I read this stuff, and, wondering about its authorship, I read this -- and somehow I can't take seriously what I read. But then I don't have a PhD. -- Hoary (talk) 11:39, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hjared Now Speedy deleted, so you no longer need to worry about submitting it and it being Declined. David notMD (talk) 17:47, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Image discussion

Please, what are the steps to be taken as an editor of you feel that an image on an article (infobox image) should be replaced or removed? I have already started a discussion on the article's talk page but I want some form of official contributions from other editors. Jõsé hola 11:48, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Josedimaria237: Often, if the page isn't super major, you can just be bold and change the image yourself. If you start a discussion on the talk page, few editors will probably see it, and nothing will actually get done. If someone reverts your edit, then start a discussion, following WP:BRD, and talk with that editor. If the discussion is going nowhere, then you can always go to WP:THIRDOPINION. Which article is it? Edward-Woodrowtalk 12:23, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Edward-Woodrow: it is Manuel Noriega Jõsé hola 12:33, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What I would do is to change the infobox image to the option you think is best (I see you've already removed the mugshot) and leave a note accordingly on the talk page. If anyone objects, then you have someone to discuss the issue with. If not, then pat yourself on the back and move on. I'd suggest leaving an explanation of why you think the new image is better, like I did here. Cheers, Edward-Woodrowtalk 12:41, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There don't appear to be any better images in c:Category:Manuel Noriega, Jõsé, which is no doubt why that one was used. You may have difficulty finding a suitably licensed image elsewhere. ColinFine (talk) 13:46, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I actually quite like File:Manuel Noriega.jpg, but that probably goes against every lead image guideline in the book. Edward-Woodrowtalk 17:07, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have a one question

Can I publish someone's draft into mainspace without asking, or simply click on review drafts of someone else? Is it sanctionable? Is there any policy regarding it? 103.241.226.144 (talk) 15:25, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

please please please do not do that. ltbdl (talk) 15:52, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello IP editor: I agree 100% with the above. It's not acceptable behaviour. If you feel a draft someone is working on now merits full publication, just drop by the editor's talk page and say how impressed you are, and ask them if and when they plan to move it into mainspace, or if they'd like any help with the draft. Of course, if it's a stale draft, and the editor who worked on it is no longer active on Wikipedia, that might be a different situation, as drafts are liable for deletion after 6 months of complete inactivity. The problem you could cause by taking a draft someone was working on and putting it directly into mainspace is that you render a poor quality article liable for immediate speedy deletion (or an WP:AFD discussion) if it wasn't ready. That would not have happened if the draft was submitted for review via our Articles for Creation process.
I once had a draft article taken from my sandbox and published by someone else. Even though there's no hard rule saying you can't (because we are all releasing our work under a Creative Commons licence, it's such incredibly bad form that if I saw it happening I'd consider warning and then taking sanctions against that user if they persisted.
So, please please please do not do that! Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 16:27, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have another question. The IP's question is framed as though the IP and the author of the draft are completely independent of each other. But might there be a WP:SOCK possibility here? (Or am I being too cynical in considering that?) Feline Hymnic (talk) 17:33, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Translation of a Swedish article

Hey "all you who know how this amazing thing works",

I want to publish a translation of a Swedish article: https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/F%C3%B6retagening

I have the translation ready. Where should I start?

Kind regards / Hans David.Hassle (talk) 15:49, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, David, and welcome to the Teahouse. Please see Translation, and take special note of the requirements for attributing when copying or altering material, and of the fact that the policies (specifically on notability and sourcing) for different Wikipedias may be different. ColinFine (talk) 16:08, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think Colin meant to point you to Wikipedia:Translation - Arjayay (talk) 16:11, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In my fathers page..........there is a link to general Congressional Gold Medal............I would like to like it to the page that references his actual medal. The Congressional Gold Medal for American Fighter Aces and I would like to insert a photo of the medal itself since that is his highest award. looking for help please. "jhokeefe" (talk) 16:17, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, "jhokeefe", and welcome to the Teahouse. Whilst I can see there is an article entitled Congressional Gold Medal, I cannot find one specifically for 'Congressional Gold Medal for American Fighter Aces'. If you are suggesting that we do have one, please drop a hyperlink to it in with your reply.
What you can do is link to the same article, but have different text appear on the page. E.g.: Congressional Gold Medal for American Fighter Aces. If you click 'edit source' on my reply, you will see the source code I used. You could simply copy and paste everyting including the double square brackets into the article.
If you have access to your father's medal and want to take and upload a photo of it, you can do so. In the main menu on the left side of every page you'll find a link to 'upload photo'. It's a two step process. First you upload the image to Wikimedia Commons (not to Wikipedia directly) - this includes a release allowing it to be reused by others. Then you'd insert that image from Commons into the Wikipedia article page. We can talk you through that process if that's what you want to do.
I would observe that he does not appear to be listed at List of Congressional Gold Medal recipients, so this is something else that could be done. It would be a good idea to declare your connection to your father in any edit summary you make, or, better still, making a note of it on your userpage by following these Conflict of Interest Guidelines.

Nick Moyes (talk) 16:38, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello - would you help me please with my edits to David Shentow?

URL rot WikiUName (talk) 17:25, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Courtesy link: David Shentow ayakanaa ( t · c ) 17:48, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Be more specific about the nature of your ask. David notMD (talk) 17:51, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ein kleine Frage

Wie konnte ich es überhaupt schaffen, jemals zu versuchen, zu sehen, ob es einen Weg gibt, so weit zu gehen, wie vielleicht die Entscheidung, nach einem anderen Bearbeitungsprojekt zu suchen, das wahrscheinlich eine Chance hätte, sich schrittweise zu erhöhen, unabhängig davon, ob jemand darüber nachdenken wollte, bestimmte Maßnahmen zu ergreifen oder nicht? Spritzt im Furzgesicht (talk) 18:02, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Google Translate: How could I even manage to ever try to see if there was a way to go that far, like perhaps deciding to look for another editing project that would probably have a chance of incrementally increasing regardless , whether someone wanted to think about taking certain actions or not?
@Spritzt im Furzgesicht Welcome to English Wikipedia. I am not very sure what you are looking for. I suggest that you seek assistance on German Wikipedia: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Fragen_von_Neulingen
Cheers, -- TheLonelyPather (talk) 19:32, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) This is English Wikipedia where we interact in English, but your question makes no sense to me, even when translated. However, your username is offensive in German, and I have 'soft blocked' you for that. You may choose another username that does not violate our policies. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 19:33, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's probably just one of these, but incomprehensible German instead of incomprehensible English. We get a lot of them here. Folly Mox (talk) 21:51, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Folly Mox Ah, good to know soffit, fix it, bene, kumquat belike goodness becomes it, fastnet always befuddleda mention but kraut declines oft feelings. Deep joy. (As Stanley Unwin might have said). Nick Moyes (talk) 00:28, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Uploading images on Wikimedia Commons

Hello, what are the steps and guidelines regarding uploading images on Wikimedia Commons? I don't seem to understand the licensing in plain terms. Jõsé hola 20:27, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you are uploading your own image, Commons recommends Attribution Share-Alike 4.0 International which means that anyone can use it for any purpose as long as they attribute you (credit you as the source) and keep it as the same licence. If you want to upload someone else's image, I need more details in order to answer your question or you can see WP:Copyright questions. ✶Mitch199811 20:54, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Josedimaria237 I've probably addressed at least some part of your question at our discussion already going on here. Nick Moyes (talk) 20:55, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Elinor Otto Edits

I made corrections & added more accurate info to Elinor's page. Another user keeps reversing my edits? How do I get ACCURATE INFO on her page that will stay? My source IS ELINOR OTTO who is 104 today & been my roommate for almost 5 years. She is my grandmother's sister & my Great Aunt. Elinor is AMAZING & notices inaccuracies. Thank you Rosietheriveter1919 (talk) 21:18, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Note to Teahouse hosts: please see also User talk:Willondon#Elinor Otto and User talk:Rosietheriveter1919#October 2023.) Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 21:33, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No citations for lead section template?

I was looking for a template similar to {{{unreferenced}}} for the lead section but I can't find one. Does it exist? Article is The Beach Boys, btw. phrogge 'sup? edits 21:39, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

{{Not verified in body}}? Lead sections are not required to have citations as long as the material from the body of the article that is being sumnarised in the lead is properly cited where it appears in the body. Folly Mox (talk) 21:48, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Creating articles

What is the system for creating a new Wikipedia article? I am looking to make an article on Bird Middle School. How would I get started? 2600:4040:53F1:7200:A8B0:51C2:342:8DCD (talk) 22:22, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bird Middle School has been a redirect for almost a decade, uncontested. In the face of such long-standing status quo, you'd need multiple sources about the school that each pass all the criteria listed in at WP:ORGCRIT. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 23:21, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted edits

Hey folks,

Thanks for all your time and work here helping out editors! I have what I think is a simple question. Looking at my activity statistics[3], I notice that the number of deleted edits has shot up from about 5 to 17 in the recent past. This very likely has to do with my work on the new page patrol, in which I am participating for the first time to help with the backlog.

Yet, although some folks have disagreed with my editorial judgments, as is the normal course of things, no one has notified me that I've done anything so wrong that must be permanently stricken from the record!

I assume the complete lack of warning or threat of sanctions means that whatever the issue is, it has nothing specifically to do with my contributions, but I'm mystified as to what I might have done that could possibly require this level of administrative intervention.

If, however, I am doing something wrong, I would like to know what it is so that I might avoid repeating the mistake. Apparently, however, I do not have the necessary privileges to even see which of my own edits have been deleted. This leaves me somewhat baffled.

I'd be grateful for any information/contextualization you might be able to provide without (obviously!) revealing any specifics I do not have the administrative privileges to access myself.

Cheers, Patrick J. Welsh (talk) 23:06, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Just means you edited a page that's since been deleted, right? Not that your edit has been deleted. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 23:24, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, okay! I've definitely made minor improvements to pages I have also suggested probably do not meet notability criteria for inclusion.
Having one's contributions logged as permanently deleted feels like a demerit, but your explanation makes perfect sense. I will set this concern aside until such a time as I might be alerted of possible policy violations or the like.
Thanks again for hanging out at the Teahouse to support new – or, as may be the case here, simply neurotic – editors.
Cheers, Patrick J. Welsh (talk) 00:21, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
PatrickJWelsh, there is no negative connotation whatsoever about deleted edits. Any editor who regularly tags bad content for speedy deletion or properly nominates articles at AfD will steadily accumulate deleted edits. That's a good thing, not a bad thing. Cullen328 (talk) 00:29, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
User:Rotideypoc41352, that's correct: "deleted edits" refers to edits made to pages that have been deleted, not edits that have been subject to revision deletion or suppression. Folly Mox (talk) 08:28, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@PatrickJWelsh: if it's any consolation, a quarter of my edits (=20K of them!) are showing as deleted. Comes with the territory, esp. when hanging around in some of the 'problem neighbourhoods' around here. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:20, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

HI ! I added on the Health Promotion entry a few url's of website pages from the organizations that state what's being written in the sentences and have being erased. The organizations related to what was stated in the sentences are the Public Health Agency of Canada, the World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Network of Health Promoting Hospitals and Health Services (HPH). What is being done incorrect? PedroAntonioDelValleLopez (talk) 23:23, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

PedroAntonioDelValleLopez, it looks like you are overrelying on primary sources. Secondary sources are preferred on Wikipedia. Cullen328 (talk) 00:34, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
So, even for information that are statements related to the mission / objectives of those organizations available at their websites it is needed to identify a secondary source that repeats something that is informative? PedroAntonioDelValleLopez (talk) 14:47, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@PedroAntonioDelValleLopez No, better to WP:Avoid mission statements for the reasons given in that essay. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:19, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
But these are not private institutions, WHO and HPH are recognized health organizations. PedroAntonioDelValleLopez (talk) 18:07, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@PedroAntonioDelValleLopez It might be better to take this discussion to Talk:Health promotion and WP:PING a few of the editors who are reverting you. I think that they probably object to using primary sources like these: it is pretty obvious that WHO promotes health and the question is whether we have a secondary reference that meets our special criteria for medicine-related article sources. Mike Turnbull (talk) 18:20, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, PedroAntonioDeiValleLopez. Why do you think that might make a difference? Wikipedia's requirements on sourcing apply across the board. There are three components to acceptability of a source: reliability is only one of them. Another is independence: Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources. ColinFine (talk) 18:21, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Article Review

Hello Teahouse, it nice to be back again. I have drafted an article Bala Sanusi Turaki on my page, your review and advice would be immensely appreciate. Brogonee (talk) 01:57, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Brogonee: Welcome to the Teahouse! THIRTEEN references in a row for a two-sentence draft is citation overkill. GoingBatty (talk) 04:45, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all references that make no mention of Turaki. Also, at one point the draft was much longer (sections for Education, Career, Awards, Memberships....) What happened? David notMD (talk) 09:20, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello David notMD, GoingBatty, you are absolutely correct. The article got declined due to citation overkill. However, i deleted most sections because of verifiability issues and limited knowledge. This verifiability issue is duely because of poor citations which i feel is appropriate to back-up with relevant citations. However, there are some details about him not made publicly available online. Brogonee (talk) 09:56, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Brogonee: The reliable published sources you use in the draft do not have to be online (e.g. books, newspapers) GoingBatty (talk) 20:09, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What is the POS(Point of Sale ) Software?

What is Point of Sale Software? Walton Pai Pai POS (talk) 11:02, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Walton Pai Pai POS: You may be interested in the article Point of sale. Tollens (talk) 11:17, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Adding disrespectful in userpage

i think this user is adding misleading in infobox. Can it be removed from userpage. User_talk:QuadriSyedSahab#About_ethenicty 103.241.226.144 (talk) 11:08, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Everyone is given quite a wide degree of latitude in customizing their userpage as they see fit – he can describe his own ethnicity however he wants. Tollens (talk) 11:12, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's not about ethnicity, it's about music. 103.241.226.144 (talk) 11:14, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ah. See Islam and music – he is perfectly entitled to that opinion as well. Tollens (talk) 11:16, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
NOTE: I have warned this IP that her personal beliefs and feelings are irrelevant to Wikipedia and that she may not WP:HARASS other users because of them. Nick Moyes (talk) 12:03, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How to archive my talkpage?

How can i archive my talkpage, there is much unnecessary content. -- Syed A. Hussain Quadri (talk) 12:51, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi QuadriSyedSahab. There are different ways to archive a talk page, You can found out more about them at Help:Archive. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:57, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Marchjuly Thanks -- Syed A. Hussain Quadri (talk) 12:58, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@QuadriSyedSahab Help:Archiving (plain and simple) works pretty well. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:26, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How to do so?

How to add borders and spaces between userbox, awards, etc in my userpage? I added service awards and unified login box but it is masked by other userbox and awards. TheProEditor11 (talk) 13:34, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @TheProEditor11, I've fixed your userpage and does it look okay now? 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁=☁=✈) 13:42, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it is looking Okay now but can you please tell me how did you do that? TheProEditor11 (talk) 13:44, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There are other ways how to do it, but I did it by adding {{clear}}, under the sections you want to split. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁=☁=✈) 13:52, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Okay and Thanks! TheProEditor11 (talk) 13:59, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Using photographs

13:34, 29 October 2023 (UTC)GirlOK (talk)Recently created two articles. I have photographs for both . One is from a textbook -the National Library of Scotland cannot locate the copyright to the photo (I estimate taken around the 1920s) . The other photo is from a local government publication in 1932-if I want to use them what can i do? GirlOK (talk) 13:34, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@GirlOK: The first image sounds like it is in non-free content territory. Knowing the articles, it is unlikely you will find a free image. That being the case, you can upload the non-free image via Wikipedia:File upload wizard, following the "Upload a non-Free file" path, and choosing the option "This is a copyrighted, non-free work, but I believe it is Fair Use." I anticipate that will give you a Fair Use template to fill in - you can see an example of that template (albeit for a portrait, not a photo) on File:Mary Paley Marshall by AS or SA.png. The local government image can be uploaded to Commons using the {{OGL3}} licence template. Talk to me on your talk page if you want further help on either; I'll add that page to my watchlist. --Tagishsimon (talk) 14:26, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Example for a photo at File:Fatima Ali.jpg. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 15:59, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Image

For what purpose is this image [4] on Erik Estrada's page? It seems as though it was placed there for personal promotion by the person in the photo with Estrada. Is WP a place for sharing like Facebook? Can anyone put personal photos of themselves with celebrities without reason? This does not appear to have any cause for inclusion. Maineartists (talk) 14:35, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the best I can come up with in its defense is "there's room for it.", so it doesn't give me knee-jerk annoyance. It doesn't have a year, so there's no "Estrada in YYYY", which would be something, and there is nothing obvious in the article about fundraising. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:23, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Maineartists This was posted by User:Marine 69-71 at Commons in 2009. Marine has posted more than 2,400 of his own photographs to Commons, and is still active. The image is of himself with Estrada. Personally, I agree that the image adds nothing of value to the Estrada article, so you could delete it with no harm. David notMD (talk) 16:06, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wow. 2,400 images? are they all similar in nature? Maineartists (talk) 16:29, 29 October 2023 (UTC) [reply]
Hi, Gråbergs Gråa Sång. I chuckled when I read: "there's room for it." I've seen other images on (celebrity) BLP pages where "regular" people have placed their personal selfies with celebrities that have absolutely no connection with anything within the article or particular section other than to simply show them with the BLP; which should be left to social media, not WP. I've also seen personally autographed ephemera on BLP pages that are highly questionable for inclusion. However, I'll wait for others to weigh about this particular image here; but I'm thinking this one needs to go. There is just no merit. Maineartists (talk) 16:04, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I will add that in instances when I had added photographs of celebrities standing side-by-side with my wife, I cropped out my wife. (talk) 16:09, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, David notMD. Yes, I agree. I have also seen this. And in these instances, there is a plausible reason for the photo to be included: i.e. support of article content "[BLP name] at the 2004 Emmy Awards in Los Angeles, California". This image has no caption nor reason even it was cropped. I will remove based on this discussion's reasoning. Maineartists (talk) 16:29, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Maineartists I think that the justification for that particular photo could be that it includes Estrada's autograph, which is not otherwise present. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:14, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Mike Turnbull Hm. Maybe. But is a celebrity's autographed publicity photo or selfie reason enough to include an image at WP? If so, that would open the flood gates for millions of autograph seekers to plaster every celebrity page with their own personal collections. Not sure that's what WP is really about. Maineartists (talk) 16:29, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
.... indeed, I'm pretty sure it's not. Many "good" articles do include signatures (although not usually in selfies!). See Abraham Lincoln, for example. My only reason for mentioning the possibility was because that's what I think Marine_69-71 might say. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:05, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ah yes. You are correct re: signatures. I have seen many in infoboxes. Signatures aside, however, I wonder what the make-up of the 2400 image uploads consist of for this particular editor. Maineartists (talk) 19:26, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox Character help

Hello,

I just wanted to ask how to add a link to "last appearance" for a userbox template (like Miss Trunchbull's page) just to add context for readers. I would also like a reply specific to VisualEditor, please. Firesword9140 (talk) 15:28, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Firesword9140 I'm not convinced that this particular infobox needs a link for "last appearance", as the WP:LEAD gives several possibilities. Technically, in the visual editor you need to click on the infobox and then hit the "edit" button on the small template box which appears. This creates a larger box with individual lines for each component of the infobox, which can be altered to add a WP:WIKILINK and then "apply changes". Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:08, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Michael D. Turnbull Thank you for the help with the explanation about WP:LEAD and how to add a wikilink. Could you also go more in depth how "last appearance" would not need a link. Thanks again! Firesword9140 (talk) 16:26, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Firesword9140 The WP:INFOBOX should just summarize the article, which at present has many dates mentioned but this is a moving target. Googling "matilda the musical", for example, tells me that it is currently running in London until at least 2024, so a pedant might suppose that the infobox should be updated every day to reflect the "last" i.e. latest notable performance. (It isn't a big issue for me and one you could discuss on the Talk Page of the article if you wished). Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:57, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New Draft for Samuel Holt

Hi re:- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Samuel_Holt_(weaver) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skihound24 (talkcontribs) 16:27, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have once again had my Draft submission rejected for the following reasons - "This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources".

I have now just added 3 new amendments to the references 1, 8 & 9 which now include links to online versions of the books i have referenced. (not sure why i did not do this 3 months ago!).

Could someone please have a quick look and see if i have enough reliable sources before i resubmit.

Regards

Mike Skihound24 (talk) 16:25, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Skihound24: The subject is probably notable; the first reference has non-trivial coverage. The article still has all sort of issues. You should not use inline external links, fullstop. Not use findagrave to reference anything. Not use wikipedia articles or commons images as references (refs 3 & 6). Not use emboldening as you have with the patent numbers. Not overlink - a single link to a page is generally sufficient. (And you have an issue that there does not seem to be a great page to link Terry Towels to, although you provide three or four links to a DAB page.) All that aside, it's a very good article, nice writing, good story. Right now, it's only ref 1 which demonstrates notability. Refs 8 & 9 are useful, but don't really add to notability. But were the other issues dealt with, I'd be inclined to promote it. --Tagishsimon (talk) 16:37, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Tagishsimon, Many thanks for the very quick reply i am most grateful. I have been over the article and think i have done all of the edits as you have suggested. I will resubmit and keep looking for some more notable references.
Thanks Skihound24 (talk) 20:22, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Publishing an Article

Hello, How can I publish my article today? Lammoy (talk) 16:26, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Lammoy: Draft:John Dewey and his contribution to Inquiry-Based Learning as an Instructional Design Approach is not an article. It is a list of sources. So it will not be promoted. It seems a little unlikely to me that there will ever be an article on this subject; it sounds more like an essay, and WP is not a venue for essays. --Tagishsimon (talk) 16:39, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I posted a complete article on the topic yesterday, along with sources/references. So, I am unclear about it not being able to publish. Lammoy (talk) 17:13, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You did not I'm afraid, as above Draft:John Dewey and his contribution to Inquiry-Based Learning as an Instructional Design Approach is just a list of sources. Theroadislong (talk) 17:16, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Lammoy: No, the text is there; it was hidden. Now unhidden. Still feels like an essay to me, though. Let me have a think about it. --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:18, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think my first question would be, given that you say "Researchers over the years have had a lot to say about the work of John Dewey’s inquiry-based learning." ... can you supply references for any of them? The list of publications at the bottom of the page do not strike me as obviously speaking to "John Dewey’s inquiry-based learning" so much as "inquiry-based learning". Presuming that "John Dewey’s inquiry-based learning" is a thing, the article would need better referencing - inline references, paragraph/assertion by paragraph/assertion, as you will see on most articles. I'm sure somewhere there must be a WP page on artiles versus essays, but I can't put my hands on it now. --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:22, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Probably WP:NOTESSAY. --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:25, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, do you know where I can find the information? that way I could fix it and resubmit Lammoy (talk) 17:43, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Lammoy We have an extensive article on John Dewey, with several linked articles which cover his work. What you wrote about him, rather than his contributions, is already available and does not need to be repeated. Maybe your draft would be better split over the relevant sub-topics. Note that you should carefully cite to your sources anything you do add: see WP:REFB. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:44, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much but based on the nature of my assignment this will not help me. Lammoy (talk) 17:49, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What assignment? Wikipedia doesn't exist to help student assignments, only its readers. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:51, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I know, thank you. Just interested in getting the article published here Lammoy (talk) 17:52, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If it helps, it looks like a very good essay. But we lack citations pointing to the concept of "John Dewey’s inquiry-based learning" as a self-standing subject :( --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:59, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please direct whomever gave you this assignment to Wikipedia:Education_program. If your grade depends on getting a new article published like this you have been given an unfair and possibly impossible assignment, and they should ensure that both this and any future assignments comply with both Wikipedia's content policies and our best practices for these sorts of assignments. MrOllie (talk) 18:00, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Auto generating of ISBNs no longer works for me

Until recently, whenever I've wanted to cite a book, I would bring up the relevant dialogue from the Ref Toolbar, type the ISBN in the appropriate box, and then click the little magnifying glass to its right. The Wiki software would then cleverly fill in many of the other fields.

But this doesn't seem to work any more. I have tried the following:

- In the Source Editor, clicking on Cite -> Templates -> Site Book, then proceeding as above. When I click the magnifying glass, nothing happens.

- In the Visual Editor, click Cite -> Automatic, and fill in the ISBN, and click Generate. Result is a message: "We couldn't make a citation for you."

- I've tried using both the 10- and 13-digit versions of the ISBN; and tried typing it both with and without dashes, spaces, etc. None of this helps.

Am I doing something wrong, or is the feature no longer working?

Thanks in advance for your help. Mike Marchmont (talk) 17:21, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Mike Marchmont: I just tried with 978-3-16-148410-0 and it worked fine (source editor, Cite Book). What ISBNs are you trying with? --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:27, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of names on a list

Hello, Locomotive 150 here. I’ve been doing some work on the Deadliest Catch page and have come across a problem. I’m attempting to improve the list of vessels that have appeared on the show. One of these vessels was USCGC Munro (WHEC-724). However, in the latest season, USCGC Munro (WMSL-755) was shown. My question is what should I do when I have 2 vessels with the same name? Locomotive 150 (talk) 18:34, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Locomotive 150: I don't understand your question. Can't you just link to the articles for each, like you have done here? Please clarify what problem you are trying to solve. RudolfRed (talk) 19:13, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Citations: title transcription, approximate date

When a source has a title totally in upper case or lower case, or some words in upper case and others in lower case, is it OK to capitalize first letters (apart from the normal exceptions) or is WP's style to transcribe the title exactly how it appears?

When the source is a poster/flyer announcing an event the date may be placed in the middle of page for emphasis. Should the transcription mention it in the exact order it appears in the source or is it OK to put it at the end of the event's description?

When a publication date doesn't appear but may be obvious from another source to within a day or two how is that indicated in the citation using VirtualEditor and source editor? Mcljlm (talk) 18:58, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How can we show two ISBNs in the book infobox? 76.14.122.5 (talk) 20:34, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

From the instructions at {{Infobox_book}} it doesn't look like you can. Use the ISBN of the first edition if you have it. RudolfRed (talk) 20:42, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikitia scraping non-accepted drafts

I know this isn't really a wikipedia problem, but I'm curious how it happens. I was just looking for sources to recommend to Skihound24 for their draft on Samuel Holt [ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Samuel_Holt_(weaver)] and came across the same article, word-perfect copied to Wikitia ("And Encyclopaedia by Verified Editors"), I can't provide a link because Wikitia is on the global blacklist and rather unhelpfully, like Voldemort, cannot be referred to by name even in a talk-page such as here. The Wikitia article (no doubt by a verified editor) admits in very small print at the end that it's been taken from Wikipedia, and adds "The list of its authors can be seen in its historical. Articles taken from Draft Namespace on Wikipedia could be accessed on Wikipedia's Draft Namespace." a statement that was clearly written by a Verified Editor.

This bothers me on so many levels. (1) Our draft-space is not supposed to be Google-searchable, with a view to protecting it from being scraped by random search engines. Does this mean that Wikitia are deliberately scraping our draft space? (2) An unaccepted draft is liable to deletion, but the material is still Wikipedia's, and is released on the understanding that authorship must be credited. Wikitia's credit to the authors immediately vanishes the moment Wikipedia deletes a draft, and this is unfair on the original author. Given all the cash that WMF have, it would be sort-of nice if they could occasionally object to behaviour like this. Elemimele (talk) 21:11, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Elemimele: All text in Wikipedia is freely licensed and may be reused for any purpose, as long as attribution is given. There is nothing wrong with a website copying drafts, as long as they say where it came from. This is just one of many Wikipedia mirrors or forks. Another example is Deletionpedia, when it was active it held copies of articles deleted from Wikipedia. RudolfRed (talk) 21:16, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Do y'all think Cross-site leaks has a chance at a GA ?

Hey, I recently (read "a while ago finished") reworked the Cross-site leaks article to a significant extent adding a bunch of context regarding the history of the attack and currently available defences. Do you y'all think the article has a chance of passing a Good article review in it's current state ? If not is there how should I should improve on so that it can pass a Good article review ? (My theoretical plan is to work towards making the article a Good article and hopefully a FA eventually once the DYK process is over).

I generally tend to know my way around the more technical areas of Wikimedia, but I'm pretty much a noob when it comes to article content writing, which is why I'm asking at the Teahouse (hope you guys don't mind ) Sohom (talk) 21:21, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sohom Datta, taking a very quick glance, I'm not seeing obvious major deficiencies. Some sort of illustration would be nice, if anything relevant exists. You may get some challenges about source quality for e.g. Medium. Editors at relevant CS wikiprojects might be better to consult. And ultimately, the way to find out whether it can pass a GAN is to start a GAN. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}}talk 21:56, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, I am looking at adding a illustration, I need to ping the authors of the one of the papers, or might need to make my own one. I will ask around at the Computer science project and then put it up for GAN then. Sohom (talk) 22:12, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How to fix this template page? put in a placeholder for {{{1}}}?

I just made Template:Year in Texas by copying from Template:Year in the United States though it's still wonky because I'm not knowledgeable with technical aspects of template. How do I make it so that the page Template:Year in Texas shows the template with current year, instead of giving all those errors from {{{1}}} being missing? It works on pages that use it, e.g. User:Michael7604/2023 in Texas. Michael7604 (talk) 21:44, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Michael7604: I'm not sure, but I think it is due to the template Year in United States is pulling the displayed example from the doc page and not putting the template directly on the page like you are doing at Year in Texas. RudolfRed (talk) 21:52, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed :) I think you missed the includeonly tags while copying it over, those prevent the template from being displayed on their own page (includeonly, i.e. only shown where included) Sohom (talk) 21:56, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, so {{CURRENTYEAR}} will give you the current year, and if you use {{{1|{{CURRENTYEAR}}}}} your template will use the supplied first parameter or the current year if non is supplied (which appears to be the behviour you want) :) Sohom (talk) 22:05, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

adding an award/honor to professor's wiki page

Hello! I wish to add an award citation to Professor Ted Rappaport's website. When I attempted a trial run in my sandbox the link to the citation, which in my sandbox version is the last bullet on "awards" bulleted list, pulls up a "page does not exist" textual when I hover over it, and when I click on it goes to a yet-to-be-created wikipedia placeholder page.

Question: how can I fix this so the citation is valid and goes not to the wiki page but to the actual correct external page at IEEE? Kgberg (talk) 22:39, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]