Wikipedia:Teahouse

Welcome to the Teahouse...                        

A friendly place to learn about editing Wikipedia.

Click here to
ask a question

jmcgnh, a Teahouse host

Question forum

Host profiles

Guest profiles

Experienced editor? Become a host!

Learn more about the Teahouse

Articles to improve

Question archive

Guest archive

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

Requested articles

Are the topics listed in the Requested Articles page all notable? Is there someone evaluating their notability after they are listed there? The reason is that I am interested in helping write some of them but it would be frustrating if someone tags it for deletion after an article is written. Thanks! Darwin Naz (talk) 00:04, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

@Darwin Naz: That's a good question and the answer isn't immediately obvious. If you go here to the history of the "music band and performers" RFC page, you can see several deletions on the grounds that three or more independent sources were not provided along with the request. If you go to the page its self you can see that it has guidelines for submissions and that the list is curated according to whether these submissions have been met or not. If you go to this link and look at the submissions for business and economics, you'll see similar curation efforts, but with slightly different terms. Each category provides its own guidelines and standards for notability, which makes sense really because notability isn't a standard measure in every category. Athletes are notable if they enter competitions. Artifacts are notable if their discovers publish information on them. Public figures are notable if they receive press coverage.

• My advise would be to ask this question on the talk page of a category which interests you and become familiar with the conditions for inclusion on that particular list. the short answer would be no, there is no guarantee that a list entry will be notable for the simple reason that as an editor, when creating an article, it is ultimately up to you to establish the notability of that subject. The conditions for inclusion on AFC lists are naturally lower than those for entry into the encyclopedia. Edaham (talk) 00:41, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Thanks Edaham for the reply. It is certainly difficult since I discovered that editors could have different interpretations of notability and it does not help that the guidelines also leave room for such multiplicity. I am taking note of your suggestion particularly about notability as not a standard measure in every category. I think that there are safe Requested Articles but there are those I am unsure of but are interesting for me to write. As some would probably agree here, writing is a bit tedious and interest is crucial in completing an article. Discussing it in the Talk page sounds good. I just expected that contributing an entry in this list would be, well, a less roundabout process. Again, thanks! Darwin Naz (talk) 01:05, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

@Darwin Naz: Leaving it up to editors to interpret guidelines is actually a core component of the values on which Wikipedia is based. Some policies have varying flexibility. What does that mean? It is an inflexible policy that notability must be established. Everyone follows that one and it isn't likely to be changed. It is a flexible policy with regard to what constitutes notability. If disputed, establishment of notability can be based on consensus. The flexibility, or multiplicity as you put it, sometimes results in debates on talk pages, which are protracted and difficult to resolve. These debates however are a part of how successful crowd sourced projects work. Were notability policies inflexible (For example, a requirement that they must be mentioned in a scholarly journal), we would quickly find that they unduly exclude subjects which are not able to meet the required guidelines. For this reason the differing interpretations and ensuing debates are the lesser of two evils. Edaham (talk) 01:33, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Uploading a photo to page in creation

Hello, and thank you for the friendly help. How do I upload a photo into the draft I am creating? Thank you! Zuzuroo (talk) 19:15, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi Carole Basinger. Since your subject is a living person, the photo must be uploaded to Commons. If you took the photo yourself, you can upload it using Commons:Special:UploadWizard. If it was taken by someone else, have the photographer upload it there. —teb728 t c 19:48, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Responding to User:teb728 Must the photographer be a Wikipedia User? Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carole Basinger (talk • contribs) 19:04, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi Carole Basinger. I just noticed your follow-up question. No, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials and Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. —teb728 t c 21:36, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your help, teb728! Another photo question: My article is currently in my Sandbox, as I am still working on it. At what point should the photograph(s) be uploaded by the photographer(s)? Once it is in Draft, or before? Thanks again Zuzuroo (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 16:07, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi Carole Basinger. A free content image (which is probably the only kind you would have on a biography) can be uploaded to Commons at any time. A non-free image like say File:Guster - Parachute.jpg (which would be used like only in an album article) can be uploaded to Wikipedia only when the article in which it is used has been published to article space. —teb728 t c 21:42, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Pls approve the article asap!

Hello everyone,

I received a message that I should connect all the articles with the sources of Draft:Benjamin Schnau . I did that already on my last change.

What are you still asking for?

User Whispering is saying it would be OBVIOUS I don't do anything to make the article better which is an assumption he is doing which is offensive and rude and completely not the case.

I did what was asked for before already and now get that as a reply. Very unsatisfying.

Pls review the page its all connected.

Thanks in advance — Preceding unsigned comment added by Franklin187 (talk • contribs) 21:28, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

@Franklin187: The article is probably not going to be approved right now because:

• Many of the sources you cited are not reliable.
• I'm having trouble finding which sources are independent.
• It's unclear what sources support what article material.

I've left instructions on your user talk page that explains the simple way to write articles that will not be rejected or deleted. You just need to summarize at least three professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources that are independent of Schnau but still specifically about him. That's it. Writing unsourced material and slapping on dozens of questionable sources is a waste of your time and ours.

Also, why does it need to be approved immediately? Ian.thomson (talk) 21:34, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

I didn't say immediately I said as soon as possible which is different.

I'm having trouble finding which sources are independent What do you mean by that statement 'independent'. All these articles are independent created based on the work he did.

• It's unclear what sources support what article material.

If you check the articles and sources you see the titles and the movies he was working on which is what the article is talking about??

https://www.stern.de/panorama/gesellschaft/benjamin-schnau--ein-deutscher-und-sein-harter-weg-nach-hollywood-7860132.html http://www.manilaupmagazine.com/issues/vol3-8/mobile/index.html#p=80 https://christoph-ulrich-mayer.com/unkategorisiert/von-den-besten-lernen-speaker-made-in-hollywood-2-2/ https://www.astrid-arens.com/the-german-oscars-2018/?lang=en

All these sources for example above are independent journalistic resources. I clearly don't understand what the problem is with that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Franklin187 (talk • contribs) 21:41, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Thanks in advance for your reply. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Franklin187 (talk • contribs) 21:38, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

@Franklin187: What you need to do is provide in-line citations. There are two in the article, which are insufficient. Also, both of those sources are IMDB, which is not a reliable source. IMBD is written by its users, not professionals.

As I've already explained here and on your user talk page, all you need to do is summarize three professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources that are independent of and unaffiliated with Schau. These should be in-line citations.

If you get on that as soon as possible, the article can be approved as soon as possible. Ian.thomson (talk) 21:42, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

I have a feeling we are talking about different things here.

I'm talking about the external links you look at the reference field.

I added the journalistic sources to the reference field. Is that better? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Franklin187 (talk • contribs) 21:50, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

The draft still doesn't cite any sources. Until it does, it certainly won't be approved. Maybe you need to read Help: Referencing for beginners? Maproom (talk) 21:54, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Franklin187: My first post says I'm having trouble finding which sources are independent because you dumped the majority of references in the external links. It's unclear what sources support what article material points to the fact that you're not using enough in-line citations. Many of the sources you cited are not reliable addresses both sections.

It isn't an either/or problem, both are problems.

The work you have done so far has been a waste of your time because you did not do it right. If you just follow the instructions I left at User_talk:Franklin187#How_to_write_articles, you will have this over with as soon as possible. Ian.thomson (talk) 21:55, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Hi Franklin187. It might seem strange to you, but the only thing you should put under the heading References is {{Reflist}}. Each actual references goes immediately after the statement that it supports, and the system inserts a reference number and lists the references where you put {{Reflist}}. I hope this helps you to understand how Wikipedia does references. Dbfirs 22:02, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

@Dfirs: thanks for the info. That means I just put

right under the word 'References' and thats it? Thanks in advance.

@Dfirs: Hi, Could you pls check again now, I connected everything between sources and text of the article. Pls let me know. Thanks for the effort. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Franklin187 (talk • contribs) 23:18, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

• Franklin187 Do you work for or represent Benjamin Schnau? 331dot (talk) 23:25, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Franklin187: You've just replaced the text with external links instead of adding in-line citations to the end of the supported material. If you would just read the 8 simple steps I left on your user talk page, you'd get this over with sooner instead of wasting your time (and ours). Ian.thomson (talk) 23:28, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Franklin187 I converted the first of your references to a ref as an example of what should be done with the rest. —teb728 t c 23:35, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

@teb728 Thanks for this example, that helped a lot. I did what everyone told me. Pls let me know. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Franklin187 (talk • contribs) 00:32, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

I did what everyone told me. Except you didn't, though. Ian.thomson (talk) 00:34, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

@Ian.Thomson: I'm assuming you are talking about point 4, 5 and 6 in the link you sent me? What do these 3 points mean. Even reading them doesnt fully makes me understand what to do? If I'm assuming wrongly, I would appreciate if you would let me know what exactly you are talking about. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Franklin187 (talk • contribs) 00:45, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

• Franklin187 I will ask again; do you work for or represent Benjamin Schnau? 331dot (talk) 23:25, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

331dot: Yes I do! Why are you asking?

You will need to review and comply with the conflict of interest policy as well as the paid editing policy and formally declare that on your user page or user talk page. The latter is a Wikipedia Terms of Use requirement for paid editors. Thanks 331dot (talk) 01:00, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

No this is a misunderstanding I don't get paid for that. What are you talking about? I do this in my free time.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Franklin187 (talk • contribs)

If you are employed or hired by him to be his agent/representative/public relations person, you are a paid editor and must declare it. We have no way of knowing if you are on your free time or not. If you are just editing at his request and are not paid or employed by him, it is still a conflict of interest that you must declare. 331dot (talk) 01:40, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Guys can someone pls do me a favor and just tell me know what is still missing on this article beside that. I got this link to this article explaining the steps of how to create an article but have no idea what that means? I added in-line citations, what else is missing. I don't get it! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Franklin187 (talk • contribs) 01:50, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

There are no deadlines here; feel free to take all the time you need to learn about what you have been told and make the needed declarations. 331dot (talk) 02:05, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

If you work for Schnau you must create a User page and declare that. Even if you are not being paid to create a Wikipedia article. David notMD (talk) 04:07, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Franklin187, after you have posted the required declarations, there are still points outlined in the post on your talk page that you have not addressed. The most important ones are a) citing sources properly, b) showing the person is notable, and c) removing promotional phrasing. You have gone some way towards a) by placing some of the URLs to your sources within <ref></ref> tags, in the relevant places, but there is still a list of unidentified URLs (not connected to any part of the article) in the "References" section, and you do have to cite the sources, that is, clearly identify them so that a reader can understand what the source is, and potentially find the information even if the URL should go away. The link to the information about that (which is also in point 4 in the list on your talk page) is Wikipedia:Citing sources. As for b) it doesn't really look as if you followed the advice in point 2. on your talk page - the sources in your article are still basically the same as they were before your draft was rejected, and as far as I can see without spending too much time looking into unidentifid URLs, there is really only one (Stern) that is independent and talks about Schnau in depth, as opposed to mentioning him in passing. This is what is required. (There are also several inadequate references on the page, including but not limited to links to Netflix, YouTube, and Wikipedia itself, which do not meet the requirements for "professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources".) As regards c), the draft is not entirely promotional, but it is also not neutrally written. That is often difficult when writing about topics where there is a conflict of interest, but it is not impossible. But again, before you look into these things you have to address the conflict of interest issue. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 08:40, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

@bonadea: First of all thanks for your comments and feedback. Very valuable. I appreciate it. I addressed the conflict of interest on the user page. And would now work on the points you made in your comments. Is that ok? Thank you in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Franklin187 (talk • contribs) 21:40, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

If you don't work for him, what is the urgency in getting the draft approved? 331dot (talk) 22:33, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

Franklin187 has declared COI on User page. I cut and rearranged a lot, but still needs work, especially on referencing. And I also ask, what is with all the urgency? David notMD (talk) 12:16, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

@331dot There is no urgency at all. Sorry if it came across like that. I just want to figure out what I still need to do to be all correct. @David notMD thank you very much for rearranging and cutting, I appreciate it. As mentioned to 331dot, there is no urgency, sorry if it came across like that. I just like to figure out stuff as soon as I can. I will rearrange the other references as you did and let you know once I'm done. Thanks for starting that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Franklin187 (talk • contribs) 21:08, 25 December 2018 (UTC) @David notMD I rearranged all the other references. Please let me know what you think. Thanks in advance

Weight in BLP

d:Q2709 and the biography of Sasha Grey state that her mass is 50kg, and that shaky info is imported by, e.g., c:Sasha Grey. There's no obvious reference and no qualifier (a wikidata "point in time" could make sense). Is this really as it should be in a BLP? It sounds stupid, but what happens if she eats more or less than usual until the end of 2018? From my POV that's nobody's business here, also see d:Wikidata:Project_chat#Wikidata:Living_people. –84.46.53.231 (talk) 13:08, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

I removed her height and weight as they are not sourced and they are not pertinent to her notability. No reason to keep them. ~ GB fan 14:23, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

I removed the invisibility edit. This information is common for people in the acting industry, and commonly included without referencing. David notMD (talk) 14:27, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

And I have added cn tags to them as they are unsourced and not verifiable. ~ GB fan 15:04, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. I think height is no moving target for folks over 18, unlike weight. –84.46.53.231 (talk) 17:13, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

In the talk page archive I found a link to a vintage 2006 photo with q=Height.^[1] –84.46.53.231 (talk) 18:05, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

Obsolete mass removed from Wikidata. –84.46.52.222 (talk) 02:42, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Image question

I found an image online and I want to add it to an article I created. I checked to see if there any copyright issues but google images indicated no copyright issues. Need help to verify before I post. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pilot03 (talk • contribs)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Pilot03, and seasons greetings. Had you provided a url to the page where the image sits, we might have been able to assist further. But unless there is an extremely clear licencing statement that the image is freely available for both non-commercial and commercial re-use, then you absolutely must not attempt to upload it for use in a Wikipedia article. Ignore the fact that Google doesn't tell you there's a problem. Be pro-active and look for a clear 'Creative Commons' licence statement. If there isn't one, the image cannot be used. Even then, there are various types of CC licence. Give us the url and we might be able to assist further. Nick Moyes (talk) 00:17, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for the quick response. Here is the URL to the image. None of the images have any copyright info. https://www.google.com/search?sa=G&hl=en&q=Undefeated&tbm=isch&tbs=simg:CAQSmAEJwRY9LrQ8mm4ajAELEKjU2AQaBghCCAAIAwwLELCMpwgaYQpfCAMSJ5cFmAV7uBCdBJIElAyVDPID-QnwLe0t7C37OvIt6S38Ot0u5DzdPBowqmrrrlJw-vi41yAATc1SLJNUmJfBUu6o_1yZPZHv_1KO0CLzkCaIZT-iuXshWf0grnIAQMCxCOrv4IGgoKCAgBEgR1ynZkDA&ved=0ahUKEwiT7_TrmbffAhVI7qwKHe0XDVcQ2A4ILCgB&cshid=1545611089305000&biw=1821&bih=808 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pilot03 (talk • contribs) 00:25, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the url, Pilot03. No, I'm afraid you cannot use that image. Just click on Google's 'usage rights' filter link, and select 'Labeled for reuse'. Had the image been licensed for commercial use under a Creative Commons licence, then the image would still have shown on the page. It's clearly not licenced that way, so you may not use it here. Sorry. May I remind you, please, to sign every talk page post with four keyboard tildes (like this: ~~~~)?  Thanks, Nick Moyes (talk) 00:37, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Nick, thank you for explaining and checking the image. Pilot03 (talk) 00:59, 24 December 2018 (UTC) Pilot03

Will this image work? http://www.sherdog.com/fighter/Ronaldo-Candido-de-Oliveira-128351 I checked using few tools and it doesn't mentioned that this image is copyrighted. Would it be acceptable to use this image and reference the original source? Pilot03 (talk) 18:07, 24 December 2018 (UTC)Pilot03 Image verification request

I don't think you can use that image, I'm afraid, Pilot03. There is a very clear copyright notice at the bottom of the page, which I presume covers all of the site's content. Cordless Larry (talk) 10:08, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for checking! Pilot03 (talk) 02:59, 26 December 2018 (UTC)Pilot03

Username change?

Hello, thank you for taking questions. Is it possible for me to change my username? If so, how can I go about this. If not, how can I legitimately set up a different account without falling foul of rules. SadKid01 (talk) 07:06, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

1. yes you can
2. probably not applicable in this instance, and not recommended
   

Please see here WP:UNC and here Wikipedia:Changing_username. Cheers Edaham (talk) 07:10, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Procedure followed and question accordingly resolved. Thanks WaynfleteRd (talk) 02:33, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Template for Contribution Counting

Is there any template available, which can count automatically user's contribution? —A H M Saqib ^Message! 09:42, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, আ হ ম সাকিব. Yes there is a way to count editors' contributions. On any user's page, look for the 'User Contrubutions' link on the left hand side of the page. That gives you a list of all their most recent edits. Now look at the very bottom of that page, and you will see a set of links one of them labelled 'Edit Count'. Click that, and you will arrive at the tool which summarises that editor's Wikipedia contributions.

Yours can be found at: https://xtools.wmflabs.org/ec/en.wikipedia.org/আ_হ_ম_সাকিব Hope this is what you wanted. Seasons greetings, Nick Moyes (talk) 10:48, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: Sorry! This is not I wanted. I know ABC of WMF Lab Tool also. Thank you for your time! —A H M Saqib ^Message! 14:16, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

@আ হ ম সাকিব:

I actually asked this same question myself. Sorry, but there is no template that automatically counts edits. Maybe you could try to make it yourself!
Thanks, CrazyMinecart88 (talk | contribs) 12:07, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

@CrazyMinecart88: Thanks for your information. —A H M Saqib ^Message! 14:16, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

How to upload your own photograph to English Wikipedia

I uploaded a photo of Cynthia Nielsen (which I own) to Wikicommons and posted it on Cynthia Nielsen's page. It was deleted. I am new to Wikipedia and am not sure how to proceed. Can someone help me to correctly upload the image? (Unfortunately, I am not super tech-savy.) Thanks in advance for any help you have time to offer. Kzolatova (talk) 16:37, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Did you actually take the photograph yourself? Dbfirs 16:43, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Yes. The photo was also used on Academia.edu, and since I own and took the picture myself, I thought it would be okay to use the same photo that had been posted there (https://udallas.academia.edu/CynthiaNielsen). I have the original photo on my computer and can upload it to show you, if that helps.Kzolatova (talk) 16:57, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

The problem is that academia.edu claims copyright. I don't know your exact contract with that organisation. Did you transfer copyright when you uploaded the photo to that site? Dbfirs 17:10, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

I don't recall any copyright agreement. I simply uploaded the image. If I can have the image removed from Academia.edu, which I believe I can, could I then re-upload it to Wikipedia Commons, and, as it were, start from scratch? By the way, thank you for the interaction and help. I appreciate it. Kzolatova (talk) 17:16, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

I'm not familiar with American copyright law, but that seems a reasonable option to me, though I'm not a lawyer. You could also take another photo. Dbfirs 17:21, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Last question, and thanks again. If I upload a different photo (that I own and that I took myself) to Wikipedia Commons--one that has not been posted on any site on the Internet--then it should be okay and I won't be breaking any rules, etc.? Kzolatova (talk) 17:24, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Yes, Wikipedia:Uploading images gives full instructions. You might like to use the wizard at Commons. Dbfirs 17:40, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

"Does not appear to be constructive...?"

Hi.

I added the discontinued Cadbury confectionery "Lucky Numbers" (https://www.google.com/search?q=lucky+numbers+chocolates&rlz=1C5CHFA_enGB556GB556&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwinkrT0grnfAhVRqHEKHYj6D3wQsAR6BAgEEAE&biw=1816&bih=914)

to the Lucky Number disambiguation list and had id deleted because it was "not constructive".

It was a major brand in its time, remembered by many "of a certain age" and I don't see why it's any less "constructive" than anything else on the list (see below) some of which are a lot more obscure!

Article copy

Lucky number may refer to: A number believed to affect one's luck Lucky number combinations, an element of Chinese numerology Contents 1 Mathematics 2 Film, TV and cartoon 3 Music 3.1 Albums 3.2 Songs Mathematics Lucky numbers generated by a particular sieve algorithm. Lucky numbers of Euler, producing prime-generating polynomials. Film, TV and cartoon Lucky Number, an animated cartoon short film featuring Donald Duck Lucky Numbers, a 2000 comedy film Lucky Number, a 2015 film Lucky Numbers (TV series), a British game show Music Albums Lucky Number: The Best of Lene Lovich, 2004 compilation album by Lene Lovich Lucky Number (album), a 2001 album by Jolin Tsai Lucky Numbers (album), a 1998 album by Frank Sinatra Songs "Lucky Number" (song), a 1979 single by Lene Lovich "Lucky Number" song by Ray Conniff, composed by Ray Conniff "Lucky Number" a song by Jolin Tsai for the 2001 album Lucky Number Disambiguation icon

My question is: What is the definition of constructive? Why, for example, is a 2001 song by Jolin Tsai more "constructive" than a product that was famous for decades, which I now see is on this "Cadbury's discontinued products" list? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.153.140.47 (talk) 18:10, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

@Geartooth: Would you mind explaining why you used a vandalism warning template for something that was patently not vandalism? Imperfectly formatted and not properly sourced? Sure. Vandalism? No. Ian.thomson (talk) 18:13, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

As an editor who created a couple "Candy Bar" related articles in the past, maybe I could offer my help to @Geartooth:? (Holy smokes! Both of those articles are #1 on Google search results!) Hamster Sandwich (talk) 19:09, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia Backlog / Articles Needing Sections

Hello! New to Wikipedia editing and practicing by going through the Wikipedia backlog.

I added new sections to the Glen Murphy page (woo hoo!).

Who removes the alerts at the top? Should I do that? (This article should be divided into sections by topic, to make it more accessible. Please help by adding section headings in accordance with Wikipedia's Manual of Style. (December 2018))

Thanks!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Slhalpert (talk • contribs) 19:11, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Seasons greetings, Slhalpert, and welcome to the Teahouse. Yes, having addressed the issue, you are perfectly entitled to remove the template yourself. Look for the following line, and delete it: {{sections|date=December 2018}} Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 19:25, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Awesome, thanks Nick_Moyes!! Someone got to it before me but now I know for next time!

My vertified corrections on LP singer are being constantely deleted

Hello, I'm trying to correct the wrong information from uncensured tabloids with vertified information sources concerning LP (Laura Pergolizzi) especially her age and past history but it is constantly being deleted. What can I do? — Preceding unsigned comment added by YD65 (talk • contribs) 20:28, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

The place for discussion is on the article's talk page. You will see that the date of birth has been discussed previously. --David Biddulph (talk) 20:49, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

LP's publicity department has done an excellent job in convincing the magazines and purging information in other sources. You might like to know that her friend Alicia Godsberg was born in 1968 also. They started playing as Lionfish in 1995. It is not unusual for Wikipedia articles to show the age put out by a publicity machine. Dbfirs 09:30, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Not sure where to go from draft

I have an article that's saved as a draft that I'd like reviewed. It's not clear to me how to go about doing that. Any advice would be welcome. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SimiCyclist (talk • contribs) 22:42, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse SimiCyclist. Your draft was blatantly promotional and copied verbatim from the Groundlings website. What you should do is find significant coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject and summarize it from an neutral point of view in your own words. —teb728 t c 23:31, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Thank for the input. In order to continue editing, does the draft have to be moved to a new article, or is there a way to edit the draft? — Preceding unsigned comment added by SimiCyclist (talk • contribs) 23:35, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

SimiCyclist. You can continue using the draft title Draft:Steve Bluestein, but the old version was deleted for being so promotional that it would need to be fundamentally rewritten. —teb728 t c 23:47, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Submissions

Hi,

I've completed two translations and I've fine-tuned the drafts. It's not clear how to submit them for review.

I added the AFC submission template to each one. Will I see some sort of acknowledgement that they are in the queue?

Thanks, Chris — Preceding unsigned comment added by Riedener (talk • contribs) 23:54, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

• Draft:Schiffli_Embroidery_Machine
• Draft:Hand_Embroidery_Machine

Are both awaiting review. You can continue to improve these articles while they are awaiting review.

This can take a little time. Please be patient

• PS Please sign your posts using four tildes at the end of every talk page post. Also if you are referencing an action performed on another page, a link <---like this to the articles to which you are referring will save people some clicks.
• PPS I had a brief glance at the articles and they contain references, but lack in line citations. The reviewer will probably tell you to add them and resubmit the article. You can read up on how to do this and add inline citations before your article reaches the top of the queue. If you have any further queries related to the article content, please ping me on the talk pages of the articles and I will post any further advice there. Many thanks.

Edaham (talk) 04:04, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Riedener: Welcome to the Teahouse. If you revisit both drafts you will see a very obvious header message confirming they have both submitted. I fear both may be rejected initially as being rather essay-like and not containing any inline references. You may carry on working on them whilst theyre in the AFC queue. See WP:REFBEGIN for help on adding citations. You should remove the redlinked 'Main article' templates as these are not relevant, and consider the relationship between your draft and the current page on Embroidery machine. You will also need to add a template to each to acknowledge the source for the translation. Regards Nick Moyes (talk) 04:19, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Nick Moyes & Edaham, please note that an ILC decline is only relevant for BLP drafts, so definitely not valid in this case. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 10:27, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification Nick Edaham (talk) 02:33, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

User requesting rename

please help me, i am newbie and i am lost. where do i have to request rename? Can you please help me, give me an instructions and link . (give me feedback what to do please) — Preceding unsigned comment added by გრინვეი (talk • contribs) 07:05, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Welcome back გრინვეი. Go to Wikipedia:Changing username/Simple#გრინვეი → Lika and reply to the request that you choose a different username to change to. Apparently the name Lika is already in use. —teb728 t c 08:10, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Dear გრინვეი. Because you are very new here, and have only made less than 10 edits, just follow the advice at WP:RENAME which states: "Users who have made very few edits are encouraged to register a new account and discard the old one." So, just abandon the old account and create a completely new one. Providing you don't subsequently revert to using the old one as well, this is perfectly ok, and makes far less work for our admins to do. We have thousands of abandoned acccounts here, and you could even leave a note on the old userpage that states the new name you're now using (and vice versa), if you wish. How does that sound? Regards from the UK on this Christmas morning, Nick Moyes (talk) 10:10, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Are snapshots/screengrabs of Google search results allowed in articles?

Hi. Just now I created the page Pellet gun usage in Jammu and Kashmir. I want to add a screengrab of a blurb of an article from TIME magazine related to this topic that shows up in Google search results, currently right at the top. The point of the screengrab will be to show how the media reports on such a topic. This screengrab will be part of a larger prospective section on the page titled "Media reportage" with examples on how different terms are used when it comes to who actually uses pellet guns in Jammu and Kashmir. Are such screengrabs allowed on Wikipedia? Thanks. Regards. DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 11:57, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

DiplomatTesterMan Screengrabs can be manipulated. You're better off simply including the URL in a citation. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 15:49, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

@Timtempleton: Thanks for the reply. The problem with this specific instance is the the blurb for the TIME article says something else, something misleading, which isn't mentioned in the main article itself. Why this becomes a more important example it that it is TIME magazine, and the blurb is first thing appearing when I type "Kashmir pellet guns". This is the article "Faces in the Darkness: The Victims of ’Non-Lethal’ Weapons in Kashmir"... the blurb on Google says - "India's army injured thousands with pellet guns." This is what I want to use. Can Google search results be archived? DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 15:55, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

I think i will just leave this out. thanks DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 16:07, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

@DiplomatTesterMan: welcome to the Teahouse. What you are suggesting is a form of original research, which is not allowed. You'll need independent reliable sources discussing and analysing the media coverage - not instances of media coverage which you yourself analyse. In addition, a Google search is never a good source since what comes out on top is different for people in different parts of the world, and also depends on other searches you have made. So I'm afraid the answer is no, a Google search (whether it is a screengrab or a direct url to the search) is not a useful source. --bonadea contributions talk 15:51, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

@Bonadea: I don't think what I am is suggesting original research persay. But thanks for the reply. I think I will just leave this out. DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 15:57, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Hello User:DiplomatTesterMan; I must comment that in common usage in different parts of the world, a "pellet gun" refers to an air-powered rifle or pistol. The article you have written seems to be about a type of Shotgun with very small type pelletized ammunition... similar to "birdshot" from your description. Perhaps your addition should properly be a sub-section of the more comprehensive "Shotgun" article? Cheers, Hamster Sandwich (talk) 15:54, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

@Hamster Sandwich: My article is not about pellet guns or pellets in general (though I have mentioned briefly what it is on the page, according to sources, specifically relating to this issue being discussed). The article is about their "usage" in the specific region of Jammu and Kashmir. It is a big issue in the region, a national debate often, and has been internationalized due to the area being so called disputed between India and Pakistan. The coverage of this article is beyond the scope of being included within the shotgun article. There are more than enough reliable and notable sources to justify a standalone article in my opinion. I can add a small section if you want into the original shotgun article as you suggested. Maybe even into crowd control articles. I am also not placing this within original Kashmir conflict articles since they are already so large. I will again add a small section in the main articles once this is stabilized. Thanks for the comments and suggestions. DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 16:06, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

I created the article only just today. There is a lot of expansion left. Considering the nature of the topic, I am sure there will be a couple of interested editors other than me. Regards. DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 16:09, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

To summarize my comment from above, the term "Pellet gun" itself might be considered to be a colloquialism in context of the broader usage of the term in general, and in particular where Wikipedia articles that cover the subjects Airguns, Pellet and similar. Perhaps something like "Crowd control in Jammu and Kashmir"? Or "Riot suppression in ..." although that seems a bit POV. Like I always say, "One persons righteous protest is another persons riot to control." Regards, Hamster Sandwich (talk) 16:16, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

• Addendum: Very light shotgun pellets are more widely known as :"Peppershot" indicating the very small size of the projectiles.

@Hamster Sandwich: Hey. This is a good name suggestion! "Crowd control in Jammu and Kashmir"?" Currently I had pinged users related to whether the article title is suitable or not. Thanks! I will suggest it on the talk page of the article. @Talk:Pellet gun usage in Jammu and Kashmir Thanks! DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 16:23, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Very happy to be of any assistance! Please try to remember to update the article if crowd control techniques change over a period of time there (as it may happen). By renaming the article to "Crowd control in..." it would give editors a chance to add material from the historical past that deals with the topic as well. Cheers, and happy editing! Hamster Sandwich (talk) 16:41, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Yes. The scope of the article drastically increases and allows it to be more comprehensive and thorough. I see that someone already created the page "Crowd control in Jammu and Kashmir" just now which is currently a redirect. Thanks MarkZusab. DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 16:59, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

This one is "in the books", for all intents and purposes. My thanks to the editors who contributed here. Regards, Hamster Sandwich (talk) 20:12, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Can anyone help me with my peer review?

the link is here any suggestions? thanks --I love rpgs [please ping me! ] 15:59, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Perhaps this is not the place to make this request... ―Abelmoschus Esculentus ^{talk / contribs} 06:56, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Page Was Deleted

Why was the "Derrick Lee Foward" page deleted when we have done extensive research on this individual and supplied verifiable resources? How can the page be recovered? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ForeverJustice (talk • contribs) 17:15, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

@ForeverJustice: I recommend that you review WP:G11 and WP:YFA. Regards, GAB^gab 17:19, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Page No Longer Showing In Wikipedia

The article (Derrick Lee Foward) was not promotional and a lot of facts were presented. Wikipedia sent a message that said, “We were doing great and to keep working.” We have conducted extensive research on this individual. The subject is sufficiently notable, and that notability mas verifiable through citations to reliable sources.

How can the page be recovered? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ForeverJustice (talk • contribs) 17:35, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

@ForeverJustice: Could you clarify the "we" in We have conducted extensive research on this individual...? Is the account being used by multiple users? Ian.thomson (talk) 17:41, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Clarifying the "we" in We have conducted extensive research on this individual

This is my account. I have a team of people conducting extensive research on Civil Rights Leaders. "Derrick Lee Foward" was one of those individuals.

Can you assist with recovering the page?— Preceding unsigned comment added by ForeverJustice (talk • contribs)

@ForeverJustice: I am a new editor who has had their own share of difficulties, even disputes, at least I have learned to sign my posts with tildes (Oldperson (talk) 18:32, 25 December 2018 (UTC)). You didn't sign the last one. Please acknowledge style requirrements of WPOldperson (talk) 18:32, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

@Oldperson: Go read WP:BITE. Ian.thomson (talk) 18:33, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @ForeverJustice: I can restore it as a sandbox draft in your user space so that you can use the sources in there to write a new draft. As the article was, it was hard to tell what sources support notability. I strongly recommend that you take just five sources that meet all the following points:

• not connected to nor published by Foward or the NAACP
• primarily and specifically about Derrick Lee Foward (not just the NAACP or something else)
• professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources

...And summarize, paraphrase, and cite just those five for the new draft. That will more firmly and clearly establish notability than tacking 22 references (many not primarily about Foward or not independent) at the end of a single sentence. I left some instructions on your user talk page about that. If you just post the same article all over again, it's just going to be deleted again.

Also, instead of creating new sections, you can edit an existing section by looking to the right of the title for a button that says "edit."

Ian.thomson (talk) 18:33, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

@ForeverJustice and Ian.thomson: Is this the article?Derrek_Lee I found it via google, it looks good except that there are no references (citations)Oldperson (talk) 18:53, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

@Oldperson: No, I restored the proper article, Derrick Lee Foward to User:ForeverJustice/sandbox. Ian.thomson (talk) 19:01, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

@Ian.thomson: Interesting article. Over 40 citations, all on the lead paragraph and no where else.Oldperson (talk) 19:06, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

I should have added. I would like to help with editing, but don't know where to start. The article subject appears worthy of attentionOldperson (talk) 19:09, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

@Oldperson: Find five sources that meet the three points I explained above (independent, specifically about Foward, professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources), summarize them. More detailed instructions can be found at User:Ian.thomson/Howto. Ian.thomson (talk) 19:14, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Really, three is the minimum needed. Five is just to guarantee that notability is established. Ian.thomson (talk) 19:16, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

@Ian.thomson:I see what you mean. Google alone does not yield any results. But that raises the issue is WP merely an adjunct of google? It seems like we are since we are dependent on Google for references and citations, and it seems that everything of note or value must be accessible via interne/ Google. Then there is the subject of local or regional notability, that hasn't yet or might never reach the attention of Google. Google's algorithm as you probably know, doesn't snag everything that is available,but to be repetitious there are a lot of primary sources, like old records,books that are literally archived or on shelves and are only accessible if one can travel, read and photograph them, then there comes the question of copyvio. Horns of a dilemma.Oldperson (talk) 19:32, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Oldperson: we are absolutely not dependent on Google. Research used to happen before Google, and can still do so; for example at a major library. There is no requirement that sources be available online, and for many older subjects they are not. --ColinFine (talk) 20:17, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

ColinFineThank you, good to hear that. I have a couple of references to archives in the Public Records Office, that aren't on Google, but didn't think that they were acceptable. How does one cite such a reference?Oldperson (talk) 20:27, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Oldperson. References must have been published, which items in the Public Records Office may or may not have been. See REFB for how to cite. --ColinFine (talk) 22:11, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

how to merge templates?

I'm assuming the process is different than for merging articles. The Verified Cactus 100% 18:41, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

You can go to WP:TFD or you can just do the merge if it is not controversial. Ruslik_Zero 20:43, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

need help guys

hey i edited an article giving out all references and resources . it also went live but the someone reverted it back please help — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chappacake (talk • contribs) 19:10, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

@Chappacake: The biggest problem was that you copied and pasted the text from one of your sources. Never do that! Always summarize and paraphrase, never copy. Ian.thomson (talk) 19:13, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Asking For Administrator to Create Article

Good Day Ian and Oldperson, since both of you are administrators, could you assist with restoring the page to Wikipedia and then I could just edit?

The Special Collections and Archives division at Wright State University Libraries were assisting with this project. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ForeverJustice (talk • contribs) 19:20, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Oldperson is not an administrator. However, Ian already restored the page in question to your sandbox: User:ForeverJustice/sandbox MarkZusab (talk) 19:23, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @ForeverJustice: I already restored the page at User:ForeverJustice/sandbox. There are instructions on User talk:ForeverJustice detailing what needs to be done to get a stable article that won't be deleted again. Ian.thomson (talk) 19:25, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Asking For Administrator to Restore Article to Wikipedia Page

I appreciate you placing the article in my sandbox.

Can you create the page on Wikipedia and then I can edit from there? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ForeverJustice (talk • contribs) 19:27, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

@ForeverJustice: When leaving a new message, look to the right of an existing section title and click the "edit" button. Stop making a new section for every message.

You can work on it in the sandbox. Anything in article space is held to standards that the draft doesn't conclusively meet right yet. Ian.thomson (talk) 19:29, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Are you talking about like this? If so, I have read and tried to understand how to get the article ready for ready space but apparently I'm still doing it wrong. That is why I am asking for your assistance to get the article published the right way

@Ian.thomson: Are you talking about like this? If so, I have read and tried to understand how to get the article ready for ready space but apparently I'm still doing it wrong. That is why I am asking for your assistance to get the article published the right way — Preceding unsigned comment added by ForeverJustice (talk • contribs) 10:46, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

ForeverJustice, you need to cite sources for the statements in the article; or at least, for some of the more significant or controversial ones. At present, most of them are not attributed to any source, but that statement that Foward was preceded in office Baines is cited to 36 sources, many of which do not mention Baines. Maproom (talk) 20:12, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

The sources are all in the 1st paragraph and in the Reference Section as I don't know how to make the 1,2,3,4 etc.. to go behind the statement without the entire Ref showing.ForeverJustice (talk) 20:22, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

User:Maproom The sources are all in the 1st paragraph and in the Reference Section as I don't know how to make the 1,2,3,4 etc.. go behind the statement without the entire "Ref" showing.ForeverJustice (talk) 20:26, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

@Maproom The sources are all in the 1st paragraph and in the Reference Section as I don't know how to make the 1,2,3,4 etc.. go behind the statement without the entire "Ref" showing. ForeverJustice (talk) 20:45, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

@ Maproom The sources are all in the 1st paragraph and in the Reference Section as I don't know how to make the 1,2,3,4 etc.. go behind the statement without the entire "Ref" showing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ForeverJustice (talk • contribs) 20:47, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

@User:Ian.thomson: The sources are all in the 1st paragraph and in the Reference Section as I don't know how to make the 1,2,3,4 etc.. go behind the statement without the entire "Ref" showing — Preceding unsigned comment added by ForeverJustice (talk • contribs) 20:53, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

ForeverJustice: see WP:REFB for how to do references. --ColinFine (talk) 22:12, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

FJ - You have already seen all this in comments above, but to recap: best to work on this in your Sandbox. It is not ready for prime time yet. Flipping it to Wikipedia prematurely could result in a deletion action. Your references are not in correct format. Per instructions, you add the ref information at end of sentences, between the < > and </ > and the program leaves a superscripted number in the text and puts the ref info in the ref section. And PLEASE sign every comment here by typing four of ~ at end. David notMD (talk) 03:08, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Good Day DavidnotMD, please check out the article now as I believe the references are formatted correctly now. ForeverJustice (talk) 07:08, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

@ForeverJustice: All of the newsbank links are expired. —teb728 t c 07:30, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Making a page

Hello, I am trying to publish a page for the Sudanese protests which happened this month. I sent a draft but I haven't received any notifications for it. Can somebody help me please — Preceding unsigned comment added by MadeThisFor2018 (talk • contribs) 20:31, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:2018_Sudanese_Protests I found the draft. Can someone help me publish it. I will edit later because I am very busy and I do hope someone helps out — Preceding unsigned comment added by MadeThisFor2018 (talk • contribs) 20:34, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

There is a backlog for such requests. So, please, be patient as this can take several months. Ruslik_Zero 20:41, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

@MadeThisFor2018: It's never a good idea to submit a draft article for review if you aren't willing or able to work on it yourself. If, as here, it's a developing news story, its quite likely that someone else will create a page on it themselves, leaving reviewers little choice but to turn down your draft. That said, this sounds like a significant topic, so I have added three references from internationally-respected news outlets, and have left a request for interested editors at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Sudan. Hope this helps a bit. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 10:56, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Hello

I did created a account but it blocked according to the same account named as Benjaminzyg (my main account) I wish it was unlocked, I already did emailed them but they refuse to respond. My account was locked by Therenotime (retired wikipedian) if there any tips that will help me, let me know in my talk page. 2001:8003:DC70:7300:E487:5918:4E67:8E29 (talk) 03:17, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi IP 2001:8003:DC70:7300:E487:5918:4E67:8E29|2001:8003:DC70:7300:E487:5918:4E67:8E29. There is an account named User:Benjaminzyg, but it has been indefinitely blocked per Wikipedia:Sockpuppetry#Inappropriate uses of alternative accounts and Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jenulot/Archive. If you are the same person as this Benjaminzyg (and User:Jenulot), then you will need to make an unblock request for User:Jenulot via Wikipedia:Unblock Ticket Request System since talk page access has been removed for the Jenulot account. Before you make such a request though, I strongly suggest you carefully read through Wikipedia:Appealing a block because you're going to have to convince the person reviewing your request that (1) you understand why the Jenulot account has been blocked and (2) you have no intention of repeating the same mistakes ever again. You should also understand that it is really the person behind the account who has been blocked, not the account itself per se; so, every time you edit Wikipedia by creating a new account or even by using an IP address, you are considered to be evading the block, which these additional account will also be blocked as well. So, your best bet here is to try and get your main account unblocked using the UTRS system mentioned above. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:37, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Thank you so much, I will try my best to get myself unblocked. 2001:8003:DC70:7300:2849:DC6E:8D31:3DD3 (talk) 05:30, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

How do I make create a new article / page ? Trying to make one for a friend's colleague

How do I create a new article / page ? Trying to make one for my friend's colleague . — Preceding unsigned comment added by A 8102 (talk • contribs) 05:07, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Hello A 8102 and welcome to the Teahouse. Please read WP:YFA and WP:N. Make sure (s)he is notable and you don't have any conflict of interests. ―Abelmoschus Esculentus ^{talk / contribs} 05:11, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Changing a page

hi there. I am the employer of the University of science and culture international affairs division. I want to change the whole page according to the new policy and information of the USC. how can I do that ?? best regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by University of sceince and culture (talk • contribs) 05:43, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi University of sceince and culture. The first thing you're probably going to need to do is change your username because the one you're using now is not allowed per Wikipedia:Username policy#Promotional names. Then, the next thing you're going to need to do is carefully read through Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide and follow the guidelines listed there. Since you're an employee of the USC, you are considered by Wikipedia to have a Wikipedia:Conflict of interest with respect to anything written about it. Wikipedia doesn't expressly forbide conflict of interest editing, but it does highly discourage it because it can lead to some serious problems. So, please familiarize yourself with the aforementioned guide and only edit according to it. It's very important that you also follow Wikipedia:Paid contribution disclosure if it applies to you because your account can be blocked if you don't. I will add some more information to your user talk page about all of these things for reference. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:04, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

I have blocked this account for violating our user name policy and given them advice about paid editing and conflict of interest on their talk page. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:07, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Withdrawing a GA nomination

Hi, I’m just curious but how do you withdraw a GA nomination? For instance, I believe the GA nomination for Boyle County High School should be withdrawn as I don’t think it meets the criteria for a GA article. —KYschools1 (talk) 07:48, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Hello, KYschools1, welcome to the Teahouse. It appears that you initially nominated this page yourself (diff). If you re-read the nominating instructions at WP:GAI, you'll see that if the review process hasn't already started (which clearly this one hasn't), then, as nominator, you simply delete the GA Review template on the article's talk page. I'd suggest you put an article up for WP:PEERREVIEW first, in future. This requires far less volunteer commitment and will simply give you a number of easy pointers to address if you think you really want to commit to taking that article forward to GA, or indeed to simply improve it. Had had someone other than yourself nominated it for GA review, my advice would have been to have contacted the nominator and discussed your concerns on their Talk Page and agree amongst yourselves whether it's appropriate to continue, or to remove the GA nomination. Does this help? Nick Moyes (talk) 10:27, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

I nominated it and it wasn’t reviewed yet. I just removed the template from the article. I will put it for peer review soon as I see some concerns in the article. —KYschools1 (talk) 20:16, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

I want to upload an article on a service we provide for language editing. Please help

I want to upload an article on a service we provide for language editing. This is a service very useful for everyone who wants to publish in various languages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bhawnachauhan24 (talk • contribs) 09:27, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

@Bhawnachauhan24: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Unfortunately, I had to delete your draft as promotional and a copyright violation. Wikipedia is not for advertising your company or its services, even if they are relevant to Wikipedia. Companies only merit articles here if they have significant coverage in independent reliable sources that show that it meets the notability guidelines for companies written at WP:ORG. As you are here as a company representative, you will need to review and comply with the conflict of interest policy and the paid editing policy; the latter is required by Wikipedia's Terms of Use. Even if your company merits an article, you should not be the one to write it. 331dot (talk) 09:34, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

when will a draft article be live on wikipedia ?

ive created a page which is currently in draft . When does it become live?

many thanks for your help — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C4:F58C:500:5938:6849:84B1:ED46 (talk) 11:44, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

This is the only edit by that IP address. Please link the page. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:54, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

It doesn't "become live" until somebody moves it to main article space. There are two ways that can happen:

1. Any account with autoconfirmed status can move it directly. They should not do so unless they are confident it is of good enough quality to be a live article.
2. Anybody may submit it for review: when a reviewing editor accepts it, they will move it to main space. If it was created using the article wizard or articles for creation process, then there should be a big button saying something like "Submit this article for review". If not, submit it by editing it and adding {{subst:submit}} (with the double curly brackets) at the top. --ColinFine (talk) 12:34, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Suggestion to article

Hello, could someone help and provide me some suggestions to improve the article recently issued, to ensure that is correctly referenced, copyright compliant and well comprehensible? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tullio_Bassi

regards A.B. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Baxialby (talk • contribs) 14:28, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Insert the refs in the text after the sentence(s) being supported by the citation and the ref itself appears in the References list. And sign your commends by typing four of ~ at the end. David notMD (talk) 19:50, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello, Baxialby, welcome to the Teahouse, and seasons greetings. Thank you for inviting feedback. I'm afraid there is quite a lot wrong with it at the moment. Most seriously, you have cooy/pasted a lot of content straight from Bassi's website. This is completely against our policies, and you MUST remove them all immediately, please see here. You should only add content from sources that are independent of the subject, and it must be written in your own words. The other problems are highlighted in templates that other editors have already added to the page. In summary, these other issues you might wish to address include the following:

• The lede paragraphs do not readily communicate how well he meets our notable people criteria.
• There is too much non-encyclopaedic trivia which should go.
• It is unclear which references support which statements. See referencing for beginners for guidance. It is preferable to put them inline, right after the statements they support.
• Most importantly, you must show how he mets our notability criteria. I am unable to follow the references to make that assessment.

I hope this feedback is of some use. I'm sure other editors could make further comments for you. Nick Moyes (talk) 20:28, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

@Baxialby: Thank you for addressing the copyright violation issue so quickly. I've also had a go at tidying up the article, as well, and adding a few templates where statements are unsupported. I still feel the article (which I note was recently rejected at WP:AFC) fails to demonstrate our notability guidelines for people. I visited Italian Wikipedia where I see there is no page for him (why is that?), nor for any of the so-called 'notable' orchestral musicians for whom you have credited him with making their instruments - nor are they to be found here on en.wiki. What you really need to supply us with are some links to books or newspapers which show that Bossi has been written about, in depth by one or more independent sources. Blogs and passing mentions in lists of makers simply aren't sufficient. Unfortunately, just like so many other brilliant and worthy men and women of science, medicine, academia and culture, if he hasn't been written about in some detail by reliable sources, he simply isn't going to merit an article on him here (unlike so many here-today-gone tomorrow minor TV non-entities who do manage to attract that coverage). Do make sure that you only include information from published sources, leaving out any content that you happen to personally know about him, but cannot support. Sorry I can't help much more, but I fear the article may not, as it stands, do will in a deletion discussion, and I would suggest that Italian Wikipedia might have been a far better place to have started with this article. Best wishes, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:43, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

How to make my page visible on search?

I want to make this page popular among visitors. What should I do to make my page available on search?— Preceding unsigned comment added by S3hira (talk • contribs)

@S3hira: What page would that be? Ian.thomson (talk) 16:49, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

S3hira, Wikipedia is not the slightest bit interested in whether pages are popular or not. If you want to make a page popular, please use social media, not Wikipedia. --ColinFine (talk) 17:17, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Need help from someone who can design Football Kit

Hello, Recently, a new jersey design unveiled for India national football team, its different from general straight stripes or parallel stripes, or boxes. I have gone through Template:Football kit/pattern list#Stripes 2, but didn't find such stripes on arm. Here is the new jersey design, https://www.foxsportsasia.com/football/asian-football/afc-asian-cup/1002013/afc-asian-cup-2019-india-national-team-kit-and-price-revealed/ It has "orange" colour tiger stripes on arm, pattern of which i didn't get anywhere. Can anyone please design the "home" and "away" color for the article, to put in the infobox. It will be a great help. Than you Dey subrata (talk) 16:55, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi Dey subrata and welcome to the Teahouse. I've asked at the football WikiProject page as they are more likely to have someone who knows how to answer this specific question. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:06, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Problem with the "Boxing Day" article

Some crazy stuff is going on at the Boxing Day article and I really think this needs administrator intervention. I'm new to this, so sorry if this is the wrong place to ask.InfoManiac297 (talk) 16:59, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

This is being addressed on WP:ANI Thanks for pointing it out! Schazjmd (talk) 17:06, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

WP:AN, rather than WP:ANI. The vandalism has been reverted, the article protected, and the vandal blocked. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:10, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Delete "Wrifraff101"

Can someone please report Wrifraff101

their edit of the page for "boxing day" is ridiculously inappropriate. I would also suggest any other accounts they have be deleted aswell. I am not sure how any of this works, as i do not have a wiki account — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:3021:83D:4000:C111:37F0:3DB1:9E8 (talk) 17:14, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

See the section above. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:16, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Thyroid Hormones - wiki page

Not so much a question. I don't know how to edit the 'thyroid hormones' wiki page where I have noticed has an error. Reference [2] is a paper by A Pilo et al fro m 1990. This clinical paper is biased and should not be used on this page. The main problem of the study was that participants was given 5 drops of Lugol's oil twice daily for the entire duration of the study. So this has given a massive bias to the whole paper.

In order to calculate conversion and production rates they used T4 and T3 molecules that were marked by radioactive iodine without understanding that this meant that the very high stable iodine dose given to the participants during the experiment to protect their thyroids from damage down-regulated deiodinase activity. This altered the natural secretion rate and under estimated the amount of T3 produced by the thyroid. This down regulation of deiodinase activity was not noted in the paper. Also the small number of participants, 14, cannot be be valid as representative of the population as a whole, nor can the fact that they were all healthy and none had hypothyroidism, so therefore the thyroid secretion rate cannot be representative of hypothyroid patients.

As individual human thyroid in vivo secretion rate is so difficult to determine, the clinical papers involving rat thyroid secretion is usually substituted and JJ DiStefano writing in the mid-1980's suggested that it was 4:1, not 14:1 - T4:T3.

Since discovering this anomalous A Pilo et al paper I have been trying to correct it everywhere I can. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gatzpo (talk • contribs) 19:35, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

The article Thyroid hormones currently states T4:T3 release ratio as 14:1 and cites Pilo. Will need a review citation based on human data if you want to update this. Also by "...I have been trying to correct it everywhere I can." looks to be places other than Wikipedia, as the Wikipedia article has not been edited. OR am I missing something? David notMD (talk) 20:13, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Articles for Deletion subject subscription

I thought I saw a page where you could subscribe to specific subjects in Articles for Deletion and you would be notified when articles in those subjects came up on AfD. You could also set the number or articles per month you wanted to be notified about. But I can no longer find that page. Please help. Aurornisxui (talk) 19:53, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

It's not quite what you wanted, but you could put this page on your watchlist. User:DumbBOT/ProdSummary TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 20:07, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

@Timtempleton: Thanks for the suggestions, but not really what I'm looking for. Aurornisxui (talk) 20:58, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Could you be thinking of Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting, Aurornisxui? I have a couple of the deletion lists on my watchlist, to keep a track of what's going on in particular subject areas. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:04, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

@Cordless Larry:, Thanks, that looks interesting and I've bookmarked it, but it wasn't what I was looking for. Aurornisxui (talk) 21:29, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

@Cordless Larry: I just started exploring what you suggested and it's wonderful! Thanks again very much! Aurornisxui (talk) 01:03, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

@Aurornisxui:, could this be it? Wikipedia:Article_alerts/Subscribing Schazjmd (talk) 21:56, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

@Schazjmd:, Thank you, I saw that, but this had a list of subjects you could sign up for to be notified when your subject came up on AfD. Aurornisxui (talk) 22:08, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

@Aurornisxui: This might sound rude (and I really don't mean it to be), but it seems to me that if you're still not getting what you're after, you're either asking in the wrong forum, or are not being precise enough in what it is that you do seek. (none of us here are mind-readers to know what it is exactly you do want). So, if you're still stuck for an answer, you might perhaps get a more useful answer if you post your question at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Deletion sorting? Gosh - that sounded even blunter than I felt it might - genuinely not intended. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:54, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: No, no not rude at all, I didn't know where else I could ask, knew here probably wasn't right. I tried to add all the details I remembered in the hopes someone would recognize what I meant, but I only saw it once, briefly. Thanks for directing me to that talk page, I'll try there. Aurornisxui (talk) 00:01, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

@Aurornisxui: Oh that's good to know. Perhaps you could pop back and ping us if you do get an answer? I find the Teahouse is a great way to learn new skills...and it works in both directions. Nick Moyes (talk) 00:04, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: Did more searching and found it Wikipedia:Feedback request service. Not AfD after all but I found it from the main AfD page and I wouldn't have known the difference when I first found it. Thanks again to everyone. Aurornisxui (talk) 00:58, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

@Aurornisxui: As a former boss once said to me: "Consider yourself reprimanded!" (LOL). Glad you found what you sought in the end. I must go off and play with the AfD alerts as I think I could do with keeping my eye on one or two favourite topic areas myself. (In my opinion, too many editors around here seem to treat the proposal of articles for a deletion discussion as akin to "treading on bugs" because they don't have the time or the common sense to investigate and improve what they don't understand, and a few even seem to treat the destruction of poor quality, but nevertheless noteworthy, articles as some sort of badge of honour.) BTW: I use a lovely little script calledPage Collector that allows me to add pages I might be interested in later on to a 'useful pages' list -a sort of 'watchlist' for interesting guidelines and other and wikipedia pages. You might find it worth installing if this happens a lot. Cheers Nick Moyes (talk) 01:27, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: I agree completely. I actually left AfD after about a week because it seemed to me that Assume Good Faith didn't apply. But I think I can be of help fixing articles that need to be fixed. I get frustrated with the agendas, arguments, lack of searching, and lack of fixing the article, but that's something I like to do anyway. I don't know anything about using scripts, but I will check this one, it would be nice to just see articles I might be interested in. ETA, I just looked at this and will definitely have to try it, it would certainly be better than an abundance of bookmarks that aren't always useful. Thanks! Aurornisxui (talk) 02:15, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Ah, I did think that what you were describing sounded like the feedback request service and probably should have mentioned that. Anyway, I'm glad you found out about some other interesting tools in the process, Aurornisxui! Cordless Larry (talk) 09:56, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Did Google Books change something?

I can no longer look at previews of pages in Google Books. I get search results, but when I click on one of them, I'm taken to a page for that book, with no preview, and the entire page is "greyed out", so that while I can see the info, I can't select any of it, or click on any links. I've tried this on multiple browsers. Has anyone else experienced this? Thanks. Ewen Douglas (talk) 20:49, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

@Ewen Douglas: Could you link to one of the books that's happened to you with? I've not had that happen on the books I've checked today. Ian.thomson (talk) 20:51, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Sure, try this link. I have a feeling it's just my computer but it's odd that it's happening in multiple browsers. Thanks @Ian.thomson:. Ewen Douglas (talk) 22:07, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Okay, I take it back. Chrome and Firefox are giving me the greyed-out book page. Safari is somehow still handling my searches the normal way. I'm still trying to sort this out but any advice is appreciated. Ewen Douglas (talk) 22:10, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

@Ewen Douglas: Huh, that link does do what you showed me, but when I search the book myself and open it it still takes me here instead. I'm on Firefox. For some reason, you're at https://www.google.com/books, while I started off at https://books.google.com/ . Are you starting off at www.google or at books.google? (Well, now that I try going at it through www.google myself, that doesn't seem to be it, either, unless you're going at it through some way I can't think of). Ian.thomson (talk) 22:21, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

I noticed the www.google and books.google difference as well, just now. I start at the same place in all 3 browsers - google.com, then click the Books link. Not sure why 2 of the 3 browsers are now handling the search differently and sending me to www.google, which is where the problematic page is, and Safari is still sending me to books.google where the results are fine. It's quite irritating, especially since I use Chrome the most and Firefox as a backup. I'm still trying to figure it out. Ewen Douglas (talk) 22:27, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

I've discovered a sort of workaround - I can right-click on the link featured in the search results (which is still a books.google.com link), then paste that in the address bar of Chrome, but then I still have to remove most of the tail end of the link, and only then am I allowed to see the preview text that I was previously allowed to see instantly. Most confusing. Ewen Douglas (talk) 22:35, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

@Ewen Douglas: Just a thought: have you tried this searching in an 'Incognito' or'Private' window? Sometimes when I'm researching a topic I only get a partial return for a page I had previously seen in full. Going Incognito in Chrome sometimes gives me back the full search results. Nick Moyes (talk) 01:06, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

That worked as well, thanks for the tip, @Nick Moyes:. So it's obviously something connected to my google account that I'm signed into on those 2 browsers. Wish I knew what it was, though. Ewen Douglas (talk) 07:59, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Translation

I was translating pages from English to another language, using the translate function, however I notice that the infoboxes don't usually function ( an exception being taxonomy.)

How can one fix this?

Ériugena (talk) 21:47, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

You'll find advice at WP:Translate us#Here's how you can help, bullet point 8. --David Biddulph (talk) 21:51, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

This states that " If you want to add templates, do that, too. (Note that templates for such items as Infoboxes have different wording in other language Wikipedias, and can't simply be copied from one Wikipedia to another." This is not exactly the case, as I have stated before, the infobox for articles to do with 'taxonomy' ( for instance, a species of plant) all show up in the translated article on the right hand side (well this is the case for translating from English into Irish Gaelic!). This poses the question, hopw does one translate an infobox from English into Irish Gaelic or another language, when no subject is in the list of preformed infoboxes in the target language? Ériugena (talk) 22:01, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Owner Permission to Use Photos

The owner of some photos recently gave me his permission to release the photos as Creative Commons. I noted this when I uploaded the photos, used the photos in a new Wikipedia article I created, and forwarded his emailed permission to Permissions. Would you suggest taking any additional steps?

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:E.S._Schubert.jpg
2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bust_of_Dred_Scott_and_Descendants.jpg
3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Sacred_Heart_Close-Up.jpg

— Preceding unsigned comment added by WayneofNottingHill (talk • contribs) 23:00, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

@WayneofNottingHill: Welcome to the Teahouse. No need to worry about Image 1 - it's clearly recorded your OTRS submission. Provided your email eventually clearly demonstrates permission has been correctly given for free use for both commercial and non-commercial applications, you can do no more. Images 2 and 3 show no such permission has been submitted for OTRS, and a warning notice states the images will be deleted in 6 days time if you don't demonstrate the relevant permission. Was it your belief that you had? If so, you could perhaps add a note to the image that an OTRS submission had been made - and then follow it up. Maybe give the same OTRS ticket number if you submitted them at the same time, which I suspect you did? Or, you could go back to the owner of the image on the blog and ask them to edit their blog to show a CC-BY-SA Creative Commons licence is given for that image. The folks at OTRS would then follow that link and confirm if the correct licence was cited.  Hope this helps. (And please remember to sign all talk page posts with four keyboard tildes (like this: ~~~~). Nick Moyes (talk) 00:33, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

@WayneofNottingHill: You say that Schubert is the owner of the photos: Is he also the owner of the copyright on the photos? Ordinarily the photographer owns the copyright (unless they specifically transfer the copyright). In particular the portrait was certainly taken by a professional photographer. Also, there are several flavors of Creative Commons licenses, and not all of them are acceptable to Wikipedia. On your file description pages you specify CC-BY-SA-4.0, which is a good license. In order to avoid delays, be sure that the OTRS message identifies Schubert as the copyright owner and CC-BY-SA-4.0 as the specific license. —teb728 t c 08:33, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

oops I misnamed an article

I'm working too late without coffee, while updating another laptop, and wanted to post an article before I left for dinner. However, in my rush, I misnamed the article "Edward P. Hunter" instead of "Edmund P. Hunter." Can someone please correct my error? Thanks, Jweaver28 (talk) 00:39, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

 Done Nick Moyes (talk) 00:45, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

federal crimes should be listed in a person's biography posted on Wikipedia

There is a biography for Adam Milstein on Wikipedia. Nowhere in the article does it mention that Milstein served a federal prison sentence for tax fraud. I mentioned this once before, and a brief statement was posted to the Milstein Wikipage for a few days, then someone went back onto Milstein's page and deleted the information.

Adam Milstein is a professional propagandist who uses his money and power to influence everything from US state and federal elections to media reporting. His actions are fascist in nature and extremely biased.

Wikipedia should suspend the account that is deliberately whitewashing Milstein's biography and post the historic truth about Milstein's activities which are readily available for reading outside of Wikipedia.

This is a travesty when information is being submitted for permanent record on Wikipedia, with a total ignorance of the truth of this man. Its like writing an article about Hitler, and completely ignoring Hitler's human rights atrocities. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fd52944 (talk • contribs) 04:59, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

@Fd52944: Could you provide a WP:DIFF of where you added the edit? Also, see WP:BLP. Wikipedia is not censored but all information must be reliably sourced. Ian.thomson (talk) 05:08, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Fd52944. The article currently states "In 2009 he was convicted of minor tax fraud." If you want to add more details about this conviction, then you need to furnish a reference to a reliable source that discusses this matter in depth. Put forward your argument at Talk: Adam Milstein. Calling a person's actions "fascist in nature" and "extremely biased" is a policy violation without extremely strong sourcing. Be cautious. Comparing tax evasion to invasions of other countries, aggressive warfare and genocide is hyperbolic. You are unlikely to persuade people by using such rhetorical tactics. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 08:35, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Error

Why does my Edit keep getting say Error when i am about to save the changes on an Article? This time, i have put References/Sources as evidences for my Contribution at an Article... thanks for answering, i'm just curious why and how to solve this problem... i think the CAPTCHA is broken.... i just need help. Thank you again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FauxWhistle9262 (talk • contribs) 06:03, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi @FauxWhistle9262: Welcome to the Teahouse. Do you have any more details on the type of error you're getting? When it happens, what it looks like, what it says, what article(s) you were editing, any of that would be useful. Thanks, ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 06:18, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Janet Robin

Hi- my team was trying to update my wikipedia page. Everything listed can be sourced. I would like to know how we can remove the warning header saying it's written like a resume... it's more of a biography. And the close connection is because the updates are from people who have worked with me. Please help as I'd like the updates to go through as well as I'd like a new photo implemented. Appreciate any help you can lend. Thank you, Janet Robin Team — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:304:CD5E:D739:546C:68CA:EBE2:4818 (talk) 07:38, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi IP 2602:304:CD5E:D739:546C:68CA:EBE2:481. If you are indeed Janet Robin, then neither you nor any members of your team should be editing the article directly. Please refer to Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and Wikipedia:Biographies of living people#Relationship between the subject, the article, and Wikipedia for more information. In addition, if any members of your "team" are being paid or compensated in any way to edit the article, then they need to comply with Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:54, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

how publish draft article's?

hi sir , how i published my draft article's?. i cant find option of publishing the draft. please help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Muhammad Faheem Muhammad Ameen (talk • contribs)

@Muhammad Faheem Muhammad Ameen: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. In looking at your draft, I would see that you seem to have a common misunderstanding as to what Wikipedia is. It is an encyclopedia and not social media for people to tell the world about themselves. As an encyclopedia, Wikipedia is only interested in what independent reliable sources state about article subjects that are notable as defined by Wikipedia. In this case, that would be defined at WP:BIO(please review). Wikipedia has no interest in what an article subject wants to say about itself. Wikipedia also strongly discourages writing autobiographies, please review the autobiography policy at WP:AUTO.

For these reasons, I regret to say that the draft article about yourself is not acceptable, as you are just posting a social media-type page about yourself. You would only merit an article if independent parties have significantly written about you on their own; and in order for you to be successful in writing about yourself, you would need to forget everything you know about yourself and only write based on what those independent parties have stated. Most people cannot do this, as people naturally write favorably about themselves. If you want to write about subjects other than yourself, you may want to use the new user tutorial to learn more about Wikipedia. I'm sorry this message could not be more favorable. 331dot (talk) 09:51, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Edit the box office collection of the movie hebbuli

This movie hebulli has collected 55 crore+ ,and the source of its box office in Wikipedia (at present) is of its 1st week collection. Here is a reliable source Soure=ttps://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thenewsminute.com/article/hebbuli-s-huge-success-amala-paul-gets-tag-rs-100-crore-actor-61504%3famp

Therefore this movie should be placed in the highest grossing indian movies (kannada).And its page also needs to be updated.

I would appreciate if someone edits these 2 pages. Add 'h' at starting of the source. Thank you