Wikipedia:Teahouse

GoingBatty, a Teahouse host

Welcome to the Teahouse!
Your go-to place for friendly help with using and editing Wikipedia.

Ask a question

Question forumMeet your hostsArticles to improveBecome a host

New to Wikipedia? See our tutorial for new editors or introduction to contributing page.
Note: Newer questions appear at the bottom of the Teahouse. Completed questions are archived within 2-3 days.

Help Wikipedia

(Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.)

where to start

I am new here and very overwhelmed.I am so afraid of messing up that I dont even know where to begin! What is the easiest way to start helping here without it being too overwhelming? OhioGirl42986 07:15, 16 November 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by OhioGirl42986 (talk • contribs)

Not so new, you've been through the Wikipedia Adventure tutorial and have interacted with some other editors on your and their talk pages. One way to find little tasks that should not be overwhelming is to go to the Community portal and look through the categories of tasks listed there. Pick something and see if you can do it. If the thing you pick is still overwhelming, ask a question about that specific thing here at the Teahouse. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:56, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

It is hard to 'break' a Wikipedia article. At times, even experienced editors find that a change they made in good faith has been reverted (reversed) by the next editor. My suggestion is that you find articles on topics that you know something about. Look for ways to improve. If new content is needed, add it (with supporting reference(s) and explanation of what you did in the Edit summary. If reverted, consider going to the Talk page of the article to make your case for the changes. David notMD (talk) 09:08, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello @OhioGirl42986:, would you be interested in improving the article, Women in Nepal. I consider this the quintessential problematic article in the English Wikipedia; there's something to do for editors of any experience level. In the first round, you can go through it fixing spelling mistakes and basic punctuation. In the second round, you can go through it fixing obvious grammatical errors. Then, you could get bolder and reword some of the sentences where it currently sounds like Nepal is the worst country for women in the world and treats women like no other country in the world does. You could then try to verify the extraordinary claims made in the article by reading the sources and correcting them if they are inaccurate. For example, in the first paragraph of the article, there is a factual error in a claim, claim of the kind that could be used for quiz. Can you find it? I have the article in the watchlist, so if you do decide to work on it, I can check your edits soon after. Cheers! Usedtobecool ^TALK ✨ 05:45, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

Pinging OhioGirl42986 just to be sure she sees this. ----valereee (talk) 19:26, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi OhioGirl42986. Since you are starting, you can try making small changes first. For instance, you can work on entries in this list of articles that need copyediting. Doing small changes will not only keep you from making huge mistakes but also allow you to get a feel of what is accepted particularly in terms of article formatting, referencing, and tone. Good luck! Darwin Naz (talk) 13:28, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Autoconfirmed and Extended confirmed

If I would like to be an extended confirmed user, I must make 500 edits and join Wikipedia for 30 days, and I know that. If I can’t make 500 edits in 30 days, will I be a extended confirmed user if I make 1,000 edits and join Wikipedia for 60 days? I just wan5ed to ask that, does the Wikipedia software work like this: if I can’t make 500 edits in 300 days, the software will wait until 60 days I’ve joined Wikipedia and see if I can make 1,000 edits, or does it simply see if you meet the requirements (they review all the time)? -- Bank: Bank Robbery started a robbery (notify) 14:46, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

Bank Robbery, You can request to be one at WP:PERM/EC. However, requests there are rarely accepted. Interstellarity (talk) 14:52, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

Bank Robbery, the information about how extended confirmed protection works is here. It specifies "...registered users with at least 30 days tenure and 500 edits", which means that when an account is 30 days old, once it hits 500 edits it will be extended confirmed. It is not a check that runs every 30 days. If there is a particular article you would like to edit which has EC protection, you can always request edits on its talk page. --bonadea contributions talk 15:04, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

Bank Robbery: Wikipedia doesn't play silly games, or make people jump through hoops for no reason. The purpose of Autoconfirmation and Extended Confirmation is to make sure that people editing the specified pages have been here long enough, and made enough edits, to be serious and (hopefully) understand what Wikipedia is about. So once you have been here 30 days (or more) and made 500 edits (or more) you will automatically have ECP rights. But I wonder, why does this matter to you? You haven't so far edited in any of the areas where ECP is applied; and if you do want to, you can always use an edit request. --ColinFine (talk) 15:02, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

@ColinFine: Of course I know Wikipedia doesn’t play silly games, but I just want to know how I get to edit pages that are under extended confirmed. This applies for service awards and ribbons as well, right? -- Bank: Bank Robbery started a robbery (notify) 23:46, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

I have no idea, Bank Robbery. I have no interest in service awards or ribbosn, regarding them as an irritating distraction from the business of creating an encyclopaedia. --ColinFine (talk) 11:52, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

@Bonadea: Would you please answer the question I have asked above? ColinFine couldn’t answer my question. -- Bank: Bank Robbery started a robbery (notify) 14:20, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

@Bank Robbery: I don't understand the question regarding service ribbons. They are entirely self-granted, and can be used by anyone. If that doesn't answer your question, perhaps you can be more specific. What we're all wondering, though, is what article(s) requiring ECP you are so intent to edit, and why. You have to realize that any such articles are generally very high-profile (watched closely and/or by a lot of people) and any kind of controversial edits can get you in hot water pretty quickly. It's best to discuss changes and make edit requests on the article's talk page, which you can do now. Why does it matter who performs the actual edit? —[AlanM1(talk)]— 17:08, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

@AlanM1: I’m just asking anyway, and it does not matter me. What I really mean is not service ribbons but service awards like Novice Editor and Master Editor II. So now does it apply to service awards? -- Bank: Bank Robbery started a robbery (notify) 02:02, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

@Bank Robbery: I'm sorry, but I don't understand what the question about these awards is. AFAIK, ECP and service awards are unrelated. The first award is for 1 day of service and 1 edit. See WP:SVC and WP:AWARDS if that helps. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 04:31, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

@AlanM1: Seems like you don't really understand what I mean. Of course I know the first award, Registered Editor is for 1 day of service and 1 edit, and that's why I posted it on my user page. Does the question I asked apply to ALL SERVICE AWARDS? -- Bank: Bank Robbery started a robbery (notify) 07:12, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Bank Robbery, In theory, a service award is appropriate as soon as an editory has reached X edits and Y years of service. The edits may take significantly longer than the minimum time, or vice versa. This applies to all the service awards. But do remember tht unlike actual permissions such as ECP, no one and nothing monitors the placement of service award templates, and they have no consequences and grant no rights or privileges. An editor with 5 edits can place a service award claiming to have 100,000 edits and 20 years of service, if s/he cares to do so. It won't fool many people, nor matter at all. Has that clarified things a bit? DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 07:21, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

@DESiegel: So if a user reviews my user page, it will not be deleted even if I have put the award template for Master Editor III. So service awards don't really matter, and thank you for your help. If you see a problem in the first sentence (this reply), please tell me ASAP. -- Bank: Bank Robbery started a robbery (notify) 07:25, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Bank Robbery Of course it's a problem. It's called honor. I can go buy a probably fake Silver Star medal at the local military surplus joint. What do you think happens if I wear it when I go visiting my friends at the local VA cemetery? —[AlanM1(talk)]— 07:51, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Cullen328, could you please solve this question: is AlanM1 correct or DESiegel correct about the question I have asked above? -- Bank: Bank Robbery started a robbery (notify) 10:24, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Bank Robbery. Your original question was "If I can’t make 500 edits in 30 days, will I be a extended confirmed user if I make 1,000 edits and join Wikipedia for 60 days?" The answer is that, if you have not reached 500 edits in 30 days, then you will become an extended confirmed user when you reach 500 edits. It makes no difference if that takes 42 days, 78 days or any other number of days. The only numbers that matter are at least 30 days and at least 500 edits. I recommend that you concentrate on improving the encylopedia instead of worrying about such things. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:09, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

danger of changing an article title

I would like to change the title situational analysis to "situational logic." Will that change interfere with links or anything else? If so, how avoid negative consequences? Thanks.TBR-qed (talk) 22:34, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello, TBR-qed. No, Moving a page leaves a redirect behind so that links don't get broken. But before doing something as potentially controversial as that, please discuss it on the talk page and get consensus for the move. --ColinFine (talk) 23:51, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

TBR-qed, You can do this by following the instructions at WP:RM#CM. Interstellarity (talk) 23:53, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

Just to expand a little, in addition to page titles often being hotly-contested subjects, among the cleanup issues noted in the links above is the problem of double-redirects that need to be resolved (edited), the number of which can be substantial with a page about a term (as opposed to a BLP or company). Follow WP:RM#CM to get others involved and you should be fine. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 22:41, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Turning a draft translation into an accessible article

editː I believe this is called "moving it to mainspace".end edit — Preceding unsigned comment added by Simon Varnam (talk • contribs) 13:44, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

I've translated a Japanese article about a series of books by the Japanese author Koshu Tani.

I've pressed the "publish" button but it still remains invisible to anyone who doesn't know the URL. How do I get it "approved" for proper publication?

If there is a mentor available to answer more question about such details, I'd be glad to hear from them. Apart from proofreading for basic English or formatting errors, there are a few points within the article on which I would welcome some advice. For example, do I need to translate the titles of Tani's books which are not yet available in English? He has English subtitles for some but not all of his works, and some of those are questionable.

Also, I'd like to learn how to declare a Conflict Of Interest. Although these books are well known and have won prizes in the Japanese SF world, I am, I believe, the only person to have translated any of them into English. I intend to translate the whole "Annals" in due course.

"Questions should appear at the bottom of the page" it saysː I've pressed the "publish" button but it still remains invisible to anyone who doesn't know the URL. How do I get it "approved" for proper publication?

Simon Varnam SPV (talk) 12:17, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi Simon. For legal reasons "publish" replaced "save" some time ago. When you "publish" your draft it still remains as a draft, but is publicly visible. You need to request that it be moved into mainspace. As regards COI, see WP:COI for the official guidance. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 12:36, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

You would need to {{subst:submit}} the draft for AFC review, but there is no point in doing that until you have provided references to published reliable sources independent of the subject. You'll find advice at WP:Your first article. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:41, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the prompt response David Biddulph,

1) I've been unable to find the page by searching Wiki for it. It doesn't seem to be in the index yet, after several weeks wait. I can only get to it through the URL above, and that is the draft version with Japanese and English in parallel columns. How do I request that it be moved into mainspace?

2) I'm not sure what constitutes a "reference" or "source" since this is the translation of a Japanese page, which IS the source. (You can see both Eng and Jpn versions side by side at the URL above.) Should I list the same sources as on the original Japanese page? In Japanese?

3) As regards COI, I have seen WP:COI for the official guidance, but don't understand how to apply it since the page isn't yet published.

4) What does " You would need to {{subst:submit}} the draft for AFC review," mean? Do I need to paste {{subst:submit}} into the first line of the draft article?

No need to rush a response. It's bedtime here.

TIA Simon SPV (talk) 14:02, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Simon Varnam. The draft is in Draft space, so you can find it by searching with that prefix. You can also find it by looking at your own contributions (top right of every screen, in the skin that I use). I looked at your contributions, to find Draft:The AeroSpaceForce Annals.

The fact that there is an article about this in ja-wiki does not guarantee that en-wiki will accept it. At present, the article has no references at all. References are citations of reliable published works, independent of the subject: "reliable" excludes any wiki, including any Wikipedia, because it is user-generated. See verifiability and referencing for beginners The ja-wiki article appears to have no references at all: some of our older articles here have the same property, but we are more careful now, and articles which do not have enough reliable independent sources to establish notability are not accepted. Basically, Wikipedia is not interested in what you know, or what I know, or what a random guy on the internet knows (such as whoever created the ja-wiki article). Being an encyclopaedia, it is only interested in what people who have no connection to the subject have chosen to publish about the subject, in reliable, editorially respectable places. Note that sources do not have to be in English, though English ones are preferred if they exist.

If you have a COI (which I guess you do, from your reply above) you should declare it on your user page, and on the talk page of the draft Draft tak:The AeroSpaceForce Annals - this is a red-link because the talk page does not yet exist, but you can create it.

To submit the draft for review, yes you paste {{subst:submit}} at the top of the article - what you paste into the source is what you see in the displayed version of this reply, not what we have put in the source.

I suspect you thought that translating an article from another Wikipedia would be a quick and easy way of creating an article; unfortunately this is not the case when (as here) the original article does not meet the standards of en-wiki.

I am not a reviewer, but personally I think there is far too much detail in the draft. If you can find independent published sources which talk at that level of detail, then maybe it may stay; but I suspect you won't. --ColinFine (talk) 19:33, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Thank you, ColinFine I'll look into what else is already on wiki and what other sources could be referred to outside Wiki. Re:I suspect you thought that translating an article from another Wikipedia would be a quick and easy way of creating an article; Not quite, but I thought that maintaining the format of the ja page would make sure I did't create an abomination that would need cleaning up by someone more experienced in the format. There are other Wiki articles on related topics such as that about the author but I thought it was better to translate the article which links the others first.

BTW, this is REAL translation, not in the least dependent on Google translate or the like.

I'll back. Simon SPV (talk) 00:51, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

additions: How do your ColinFine's comments apply to the references at the wiki article about the author himself? Kōshū_Tani

Are they valid? Reliable? Are the referred articles (Such as the "Seiun Award") better linked to superscript numbers or directly linked to the articles mentioned in the text? Or should links to wiki articles be in the text and those elsewhere in the references? Sorry for all the questions. I'm still getting used to the principles.

And how does this article compare with other literature articles, especially those which have not yet been translated into English?

SPV (talk) 08:10, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello again, Simon. Some elements of page formatting (the use of headings and wikilinks, for example) are universal in en-wiki, and I think across other Wikipedias; but other aspects vary between subjects, as well as Wikipedias. I suggest you have a look at WikiProject Science Fiction for information about how SF-related articles are structured in en-wiki.

It's good that it's a real translation, not a machine translation; but as I say that does not guarantee that all the content is appropriate in en-wiki.

As for Kōshū Tani (note: it's more helpful to use a Wikilink than a URL): the way the references are used is the recommended way. The numbering and links are automatic if you use the <ref>...</ref> mechanism. But I have tagged the article as needing references, because judging from their titles and origins, not one of the references there is independent of Tani. --ColinFine (talk) 09:22, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

--- That's very helpful, ColinFine. I'll take a look at the link you offered. And I'll take a look at some examples of similar articles about other authors' works to see how they are structured. Things like "the <ref>...</ref> mechanism" are still a mystery to me, so thanks for the pointer. Let me check: What references might there be that are independent of Tani since they are his books, and the whole world he describes exists only in his books? Would Japanese book reviews of the works concerned be of any value (in Japanese), or citations/quotations from the organizations that awarded the prizes he has won? Note that I've altered the links to parts of the real world to the appropriate articles in en-Wiki.

best regards SimonSPV (talk) 10:02, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Simon. WP:REFB (that I linked above) explains how to do the references. As for Tani: Wikipedia is not interested in what Tani has said, done or published, or what people or organisations associated with him have said about him, except as discussed by people unconnected with him. Book reviews are good, if published in reliable organs (eg not user-generated sites or somebody's personal blog); but unless the review contains material about the author as well as the book, it doesn't help for an article about the author. Citations from the prize-giving organisations are useful additional sources, but not enough on their own. What is needed is places where people unconnected with him have chosen to write about him, at some length, and been published in reliable sources, such as books from reputable publishers, or major magazines.If there aren't any such, then at present the subject fails to meet Wikipedia's definition of notable, and no acceptable article is possible. --ColinFine (talk) 10:19, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

ColinFine I would disagree with your comment that unless the review contains material about the author as well as the book, it doesn't help for an article about the author. WP:NAUTHOR point 3 says:

The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of an independent and notable work (for example, a book, film, or television series, but usually not a single episode of a television series) or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews.

I take this to mean that independent reviews of multiple books or other creative works, preferably more than one review per book, that discuss the creative works in some detail, establish the notability of the author even if not one word about the author (or artist) apart from the author's works is included in the sources. This has been sustained at several AfDs. Sourced content about the author is always better, of course. Simon Varnam you may want to take note. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 10:34, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

You're right that reviews can establish notability, DESiegel; but if all you've got is reviews which don't talk about the author, what is there that you can put in an article about the author? --ColinFine (talk) 13:59, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

ColinFine the result may be something like David Bret. The article is primarily about the totality of the author's work and the critical response to it, plus non-controversial details about the author which can be sourced from self-published sources such as the author's web site and the the non-independent sources, and sources that support info but do not have discussion in depth. Significant coverage of the author directly is better of course. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 16:10, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for weighing in here, DESiegel. N.B. The article I've translated is only about the book series. That's why I'm stumped as to what makes a good reference for this series of books. There is already an en-Wiki article about the author. I had not intended to add to that, though several topics raised there would usefully link to the translated article I'm offering. There are also en-Wiki articles about the prizes he has won. I will search out Japanese reviews of the originals though the stories set in this fictional world were not available as a set (4 volumes) until recently. The original stories came out piecemeal in SF magazines and anthologies as well as in sets of his stories in the 80s and 90s. The fact that his works (both old and new) still sell is surely a sign of his notability.

More later when I've done some more research. Simon SPV (talk) 12:10, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Simon Varnam: if they started coming out in the 80s, then not all the sources will be online. Sources online are more convenient, but they are not required: as long as the sources cited have been published, so they are in principle obtainable by readers, that is enough. --ColinFine (talk) 13:59, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

{+{U|Simon Varnam}} I quite agree with ColinFine about off-line sources. Reviews of individual works in the series, or of the series as a whole, from reliable sources, would be good for such an article, i would think. That would build up a comprehensive view of the series in a real-world perspective. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 16:14, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Categories

Here's a query I've had on categories for a while. If I categorised an article with Category:English soap opera actresses, would that article automatically be entered into Category:English actresses? Or do I need to place both in the article? I don't want to under/over-categorise an article. Thanks! – DarkGlow (talk) 15:31, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

The advice is at WP:SUBCAT. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:47, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Use only the most specific category, unless they are non-diffusing. In this case, use only Category:English soap opera actresses because it is a sub-cat of Category:English television actresses, which is a sub-cat of Category:English actresses by medium, which is a sub-cat of Category:English actresses. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 16:47, 18 November 2019 (UTC) (Pinging DarkGlow)

@AlanM1: Thank you! – DarkGlow (talk) 16:51, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Is there a way to automatically detect categories or at least somehow make this work easier? MenfesKidus40 (talk) 02:06, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

I'm not sure if there's an automatic way, but sometimes looking at articles about similar subjects can be helpful. You can some basic guidance at WP:CATDD. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:14, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

my article deleted

how can i upload my bio — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pep abala (talk • contribs) 18:22, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

@Pep abala: I saw who you are writing about on your userpage. Please note it is not an appropriate place for a draft. Your draft was declined by David.moreno72 because the draft doesn't show notability. Read WP:NBIO for information about the criteria for a person to merit his/her article. --LPS and MLP Fan (Littlest Pet Shop) (My Little Pony) 18:27, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

@Pep abala: I also saw that you wrote about the person in your sandbox, but you have not submitted it for review. I will help you the best I can, and please remove the content from your userpage. --LPS and MLP Fan (Littlest Pet Shop) (My Little Pony) 18:36, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Pep abala Just to clarify that, per WP:UPYES, it is perfectly acceptable to have a draft article on your user page, although most editors find it more convenient to create drafts on a user subpage. There is, however, no strict requirement to remove the content from your userpage if you do not wish to. Hug^syrup 23:05, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

... but what about WP:FAKEARTICLE? Dbfirs 07:43, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

I think it depends whether or not the draft is about the user/username themself. Usedtobecool ^TALK ✨ 10:52, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

I think WP:FAKEARTICLE is fairly clear that it is talking about the 'indefinite' hosting of 'pages that look like articles', and intentional fakes, not drafts in progress. Given that it specifically says 'when a userspace page reaches a point where it can be included as an article consider moving it into mainspace' the implication is clear that there is no issue with userspace drafts per se. And if WP:FAKEARTICLE did preclude userspace drafts, it would apply just as much to a subpage as to the main user page, so my point stands. Hug^syrup 17:05, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Technically, you may be correct but "drafts" which linger for too long on a user page run the risk of being deleted per WP:U5. If you come across such a draft, the thing to do might be to post a friendly notice on the user's talk page and let them know about FAKEARTICLE and WP:USD or WP:DRAFTS. Once they've been advised of such things, they would be wise to move the draft to another more suitable page if they intend to continue working on it before someone else does it for them or deletes the page altogether. Whether they move it an user subpage or the draft namespace is up to them, but things which are eventually going to end up submitted to WP:AFC should be moved to the draft namespace. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:28, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

U5 specifically does not apply to 'plausible drafts' so the risk of deletion should really only be insofar as there is a risk of a user incorrectly tagging, and an admin incorrectly deleting. And if a page does look like a case of U5, it is still a U5 case whether it is a top level user page or a sub user page, so I don't really follow the argument. Hug^syrup 09:04, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

The longer a "draft" stays on a user page, the greater the risk in my opinion that it may be deleted or tagged for deletion per U5, particularly if it seems to have been abandoned. Whether it would be proper to delete/blank the page may be suspect, but that will be up to the discretion of the administrator reviewing the tag. I left a legitimate USD go unedited for quite some period of time (I got involved in editing other things), someone came across it and wanted to know if I wanted it deleted. They were nice enough to ask, but there are others who tag or take such pages to WP:MfD when they come across them. Sometimes when an admin declines a U5 request for a page like this, they will suggest moving it or even move it themselves just to try and avoid any similar mistaken tagging; other times an admin will delete the page if they feel the tag is warranted. I agree that U5 applies the same way to all pages in the username space, but I think lots of editors see/treat user pages as being different from user subpages, perhaps because they’re easier to find since almost all signatures contain a link to them, and thus feel U5 is more of a concern for user pages than subpages; in other words, the former seemed to be more highly scrutinized/monitored than the latter. Anyway, this part of this discussion has probably already moved beyond the scope not only the original question, but also of that of the Teahouse, and it would probably be to continue somewhere else. — Marchjuly (talk) 23:47, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

See WT:UP#Drafts on a users main user page for possible wider discussion of this issue. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 05:06, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

Wiki page creation

Do you create wikipedia pages — Preceding unsigned comment added by Septimiusthegreat (talk • contribs) 21:17, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

@Septimiusthegreat: Anyone can create a Wikipedia page, but it's not advisable to use Wikipedia as a means of promoting yourself. Content like User:Septimiusthegreat/sandbox is not going to be accepted because it's about you, the promotional tone isn't right for Wikipedia, and there are no sources cited. You're better off using Facebook or other social media to promote yourself. Also, you should read WP:COI and WP:YOURFIRSTARTICLE, specifically Help:Your_first_article#Things_to_avoid. (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.) TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 23:19, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

You can use a draft first. I myself would like to create one soon. MenfesKidus40 (talk) 02:05, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Draft in user page

What do I do if someone has a draft in the user page (i.e. the user's main page), such as User:Njoyseon. Should I move it to the user sandbox or draft? Taewangkorea (talk) 00:06, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

hello, Taewangkorea. If the draft is a clear advertisement or promotional page, you can tag it with {{db-spam}}. Otherwise, you can move it to a more appropriate location. I would suggest a user page other than the user's sandbox, myself. If User:Example writes a draft about TOPIC, move it to User:Example/Topic. Then place {{Userspace draft}} at the top of the page, and then notify the user what you have done and why. That last is important, because a) the user may otherwise coem complaining about a disparaging page, or even be put off and just leave the project, and b) the user won't learn anything if s/he isn't told anything. You could alos move to a Draft space page, but then you had beter explain G13 to the user. That is my advice. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 00:31, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

@DESiegel: Thank you for that. I think I did everything correctly. I moved the draft and talk to a user subpage (User:Njoyseon/Jung Hanmo) and got rid of the redirect. For some reason it also moved the talk page (which had some stuff there) so I unmoved the talk page only and posted a note to the user's talk page. Taewangkorea (talk) 02:37, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Taewangkorea A move always moves the corresponding talk page along with a non-talk page, because in 99% of the cases that is the right thing to do. I should have mentioned moving that back. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 02:46, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

@DESiegel: It is the first time I did a move like this so thank you for your help. Taewangkorea (talk) 17:34, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Please see #Drafting an article on a userpage below. I am now not as sure of the appropriateness of the actiuon i suggested above as I was yesterday. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 22:47, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

See WT:UP#Drafts on a users main user page for possible wider discussion of this issue. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 05:04, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

Help!

I thought I publish a page in the name space but I published it in the main space. Now I can't move it. It is Arrested Mayors in Turkey I`d be really thankful to have it in my user page. It is just a start. Best, Paradise Chronicle (talk) 01:21, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Paradise Chronicle, It has been moved to Draft:List of arrested Mayors in Turkey. Captain Eek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 02:14, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Really, thank you! To the whole Wikipedia in general and to the one who made it possible in specifically.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 09:42, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Review my draft please

hi. i have created a draft article and i would like someone to review. here it is. Draft:Squidward (series) thanks.Bill cage (talk) 01:37, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Bill cage, Your draft is not currently submitted for review. You will need to click the blue "Submit your draft for review!". However, your draft will be declined because there are no sources. Wikipedia articles need to have independent, reliable sources. Interstellarity (talk) 01:42, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Bill cage In addition to needing independent published reliable sources cited, Draft:Squidward (series) would need significantly more content to be a viable article, which should be content derived from those same sources.

Moreover, things that have not yet happened need particularly good sourcing to establish notability , as per Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. I urge you to read Your First Article, referencing for beginners, Wikipedia's Golden Rule, and all the other links in this thread. Bellow are some steps to creating a valid article that often work. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 02:55, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

• First, review our guideline on notability, our policy on Verifiability, and our general notability guideline (GNG). Consider whether your subject clearly meets the standards listed there. Also, check if the topic is already covered, perhaps under a different spelling or in a section of an article about a wider topic. You will waste a lot of time, if you create a new article, and then find that the encyclopedia already has an article about that.
• Second, read how to create Your First Article and referencing for beginners and again consider if you want to go ahead.
• Third, If you have any connection or affiliation with the subject, disclose it in accordance with our guideline on Conflict of interest. If you have been or expect to be paid for making edits, or are making them as part of your job, disclose this according to the strict rules of the Paid-contribution disclosure. This is absolutely required; omitting it can result in you being blocked from further editing.
• Fourth, gather sources. You want independent, professionally published, reliable sources with each discussing the subject in some detail. If you can't find several such sources, stop; an article will not be created! Sources do NOT need to be online, or in English, although it is helpful if at least some are. The "independent" part is vital. Wikipedia does not consider as independent sources such as press releases, or news stories based on press releases, or anything published by the subject itself or an affiliate of the subject. Strictly local coverage is also not preferred. Regional or national newspapers or magazines, books published by mainstream publishers (not self-published), or scholarly journals are usually good. So are online equivalents of these. (Additional sources may verify particular statements but not discuss the subject in detail. But those significant detailed sources are needed first.)
• Fifth, use the article wizard to create a draft under the articles for creation project. This is always a good idea for an inexperienced editor, but in the case of an editor with a conflict of interest it is essential.
• Sixth, use the sources gathered before (and other sources you may find along the way) to write the article. Cite all significant statements to sources. Do not express opinions or judgements, unless they are explicitly attributed to named people or entities, preferably in a direct quotation, and cited to a source. Do not use puffery or marketing-speak. Provide page numbers, dates, authors and titles for sources to the extent these are available. A title is always needed. Submit the draaft when you thimnk it is ready for reviewq. Be prepared to wait a while for a review (several weeks or more).
• Seventh, when (well perhaps if) your draft is declined, pay attention to the comments of the reviewer, and correct the draft and resubmit it. During this whole process, if you face any unresolvable editing hurdles, or cannot comprehend any editing issue, feel free to post a request here or at the help desk and ask the regulars. Repeat this until the draft passes review.

Congratulations, you have now created a valid Wikipedia article. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 02:55, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

it's a draft. i just made it so that it's there once the show comes out. i'm not planning on publishing it untill anymore information arrives, then i'll do all of that stuff. Bill cage (talk) 16:03, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Good start Bill cage! As someone who accepts/declines new articles, I appreciate you waiting until it gets closer to submit your draft. Reminder that if a draft isn't edited for 6 months, it might be deleted. Otherwise, go ahead and start stockpiling some reliably sourced articles about the show, and I'll look forward to seeing it when it's ready! Bkissin (talk) 16:54, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

to be honest, i have no idea how to cite sources. perhaps someone can help me with it? Bill cage (talk) 19:00, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Sure Bill cage! Take a look at WP:CITE for more information. How do you normally edit Wikipedia, through the visual editor or the code? One of the easiest ways of starting out with citing and referencing is with <ref></ref> this reference code and {{reflist}}. If you put the URL of what you are citing into that code (Like this: <ref>https://thesource.com/2019/11/18/squidward-spinoff/</ref>) then it will populate at the bottom of the page where you put the reflist information. But to make formal citations, you can follow citation templates and fill in the relevant information. I wish there was an easier way to explain. Usually there is an automated script that can help put together the references for you. DESiegel, did I do OK in explaining? Bkissin (talk) 21:04, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

@Bkissin and Bill cage: Citations can be made with or without using citation templates, but please do not use just a URL, it simply makes cleanup work for oterhs later. Supply at least the title of the article or work being cited, the name of the larger work it is contained in (say the name of a magazine or newspaper or website in which an article is published, and the author and publication date if these are known. This makes it easier for a reader to look at the references and evaluate what sort of sources are being used, and how recent or old they are. It also makes it easier to find the source again if a web link goes dead. Referencing for Beginners explains all this and more, and is aimed at new editors.

There are automated tools to generate citations - one is built into the Visual Editor. But they depend on making assumptions about what is where in a web page, and since there is nothing close to a standard format for a web page, they often get it badly wrong. I have seen the date stuck into the slot for the author's name, for example, and the name of the web site is often stuck into the title of an article. You must always check the output of such a tool, and correct it when it is wrong, which means you need to learn how it should be constructed. "Named references" allow you to use a citaiton several tiems without needing to retype the whole thing, and without it appearing multiple times in the reference list. You just use <ref name=ABCD> (where ABCD is a short name that identifies the citation. I like to use Work-date, so say "NYT-12Nov2019" for a New York Times source dated 12 November2019. But that is just a convention, any name works as long as it is unique in the article.) Then when you want to reuse the cite, place <ref name="ABCD" /> (note the matching name, and the closing / character) in the text.

I hope all that helps. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 21:26, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

New Albion Infobox question

I have a question regarding the New Albion infobox which you may find here: HERE.

I have just added the infobox as I realized that most wp:GOODARTICLEs contain such. And it does also, I believe, improve the article. Unfortunately I am having trouble with the line about the founder, Francis Drake. I am unable to arrange the word by on the same line as founded and Francis Drake--despite tinkering to properly manipulate the words. In short, I would like it to read all on one line as such: Founded by Francis Drake.

Perhaps someone would be so kind as to let me know my mistake or even perhaps correct the mistake. I truly appreciate any attention one may extend.Hu Nhu (talk) 03:40, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Hu Nhu, and welcoem to the Teahouse. The problem turns out to be the length of the parameter value for |named for=. If that value is long enough to force word-wrapping, the width of the label names column is reduced, and "founded by" wraps. I have made an edit to correct this. It may be that there is a better solution. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 05:30, 19 November 2019 (UTC)!~

Entry is almost word-for-word from another source- not sure what to do (new editor)

I started editing the "Rhiannon/Stevie Nicks" entry at Welsh_mythology_in_popular_culture. I added a citation and rewrote a bit then discovered that the whole thing is almost word-for-word from another book. "Witch Daze" https://www.amazon.com/Witch-Daze-Patricia-Della-Piana/dp/0557763339/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=witch+daze&qid=1574137318&sr=8-1 is not a reliable source. The first part about Stevie Nicks can be traced back to the source I added, but the rest is from Della=Piana with no support. I'm not sure what to do- remove the part about Welsh Triads and rewrite the rest? Thanks for any suggestions. Gwen the Cat (talk) 04:27, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Gwen the Cat If the content can be sourced elsewhere, rewrite so it isn't a copyvio or close parody of the Witch Daze book. If it can't, or you have good reason to believe it is incorrect (not correct but unsourced), simply remove it. We can't leave copied text in place in any case. In either case, make it clear what you are doing in your edit summary, and a mention on Talk:Welsh mythology in popular culture would be a good idea also, DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 05:06, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello Gwen the Cat and welcome to the Teahouse.

One thing to be aware of in these situations is that many people copy content from Wikipedia and publish it, sometimes as if it were their own writing and in violation of the requirement to provide attribution. It appears that may be the case with the Witch Daze book. When you find copyright violations that go in this direction, you can safely leave the Wikipedia content alone, it's not in violation. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:39, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

If you suspect copying FROM Wikipedia, sometimes this can be confirmed if the content in question has a date, and the date is newer than the Wikipedia article. David notMD (talk) 05:49, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Quite true, jmcgnh I should have mentioend that above. If it seems clear that this occurs {{backwards copy}} can be used to mark the article so that later editors are not fooled or confused. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 05:58, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for your edits to Welsh mythology in popular culture, Gwen the Cat and especially than you for providing a needed source. A couple of minor points: when providing a citation to a book, only supply |url= if the link goes to an online copy of the book (that is not a copyright infringement). If |oclc= is supplied, a link to the World Cat entry will be provided. Please use |last= for the last name or family name of the author, and |first= for the given name. Please provide a page number in the book if at all possible. |page= can be used for this. See my edit for an example. Again, thank you. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 05:58, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Use of fAgent Orange

Anyone aware of the use of Agent Orange or other Herbicides at Osan Air Base S. Korea from 1968 to 1969 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.118.160.56 (talk • contribs) 00:57, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

The Teahouse is for asking questions about Wikipedia editing. This question might possibly be on topic at the reference desk but i am not sure of that. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 06:00, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Adding another person to a category

Hello,

I am new here also and seeking some desperate advice! I just want to add a singer to a 'category' but can't for the life of me work out how to. I have been madly reading all of the help pages to no avail. Any advice you could give me would be so greatly appreciated :) It seems like something that should be relatively straight forward but I am stumped.

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by JMOB88 (talk • contribs) 07:10, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi JMOB88. You can find out more at Wikipedia:Categorization#Articles, but it't pretty much the same as adding a WP:WIKILINK to an article. Instead of adding a link to another article, you'll be adding a link to a category page. The easiest way to see how it's done, it probably click on the "Edit" tag of the "External link" section of the article you want to add the category to, and then just format the link same way as the other categories are formatted. If there's no "External link" section then just click on the "Edit" tag of the very last section of the article; if there are no other categories as all in the article, just add the one you want to add using the syntax [[Category:(Category name)]] where "Category name" is just the name of the category. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:18, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

New Wikipedia User

To whom it may concern,

I hope you are fine. I am new to wikipedia and I would like to create a page, however, I am not confident of the content and even username I will choose. I would like to create a page about a company that deals with interesting stuffs like arts, exhibitions etc which I think may contribute to wiki a bit. I would like to put articles etc etc.

My question is:

  1. Can I use the company name as the username?
  2. Can I create a page about it?
  3. Will I get blocked or banned in wikipedia for creating a page and posting articles about a company?

Let me know please, thank you so much in advance for the answer :)

This is Maureen — Preceding unsigned comment added by 111.125.120.12 (talk) 10:03, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi, and welcome to the teahouse. I think you may have slightly misunderstood the purpose of Wikipedia. Unlike social media sites, we don't have 'pages' where people can place whatever content they like. We have articles about specific, notable, topics. It doesn't sound, from what you are saying, as if your company is notable yet so I would advise against this. And to answer your specific questions:

1. - No, we do not allow usernames that imply shared usage, which a company name as username does.
2. - Probably not, unless the company has been the subject of significant coverage in multiple, reliable sources.
3. - Not immediately, but inappropriate content will be swiftly removed, and if you persist in posting it or appear to be here only for the purposes of promotion, you may be blocked or banned.

I hope this helps. Hug^syrup 10:08, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello, Unregistered editor 120.12, and welcome to the Teahouse.

1. No, we have a policy agaisnt usernames that are the same as buisness names, so one cannot be User:IBM, say. However, User:Maureen at IBM is permitted. All accounts must be for an individual person, and user names must not imply shared use.
2. Yes, provided that it is written neutrally. See WP:SPAM. If you are in fact associted with the company, see conflict of interst, and if you are an employee, or hired by the company, see WP:PAID
3. No, not if you write within Wikipedia policy to the best of your ability, and disclose any conflict of interest or payment as shown in the links in the previous point.

I hope this is helpful. Do please read our guideline for notability of a business and Your First Article. referencing for Beginners is also very helpful. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 10:14, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

"we do not allow usernames that imply shared usage" — so I can't be User:Popular Front for the Liberation of Cardassia? —Tamfang (talk) 05:18, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Primary Source Verification page

Hello

A couple of years back, a colleague of my company had created a page on Primary Source Verification which got published but later after a month got deleted. May I ask the reason for wiki deleting the page?

Thanks Karishma — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dataflow1234 (talk • contribs) 10:28, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Your question has already been answered elsewhere. Please just ask in one place. Wikipedia requires secondary sources to establish WP:Notability. Dbfirs 10:40, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Newbie's first article was removed

Thanks for the work you are doing.

I recently posted some additional sections to an article and it was removed. I found the edits and saw the user who removed them, but not much else. I completed the interactive training. I don't think it violated any copyrights and I had lots of references.

Is there a way to find the reason the article was removed? Could you look at the content and give me some constructive feedback? Have you ever gone through the appeal process? I saw a user could click a button and get articles to review. Is there a way I could get my article on the "articles to review" list?

Any feedback would be appreciated.

Shenaw2016 (talk) 10:43, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Shenaw2016 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The best way to find out would be to ask the user who removed it directly; but from looking at it, the text you added seemed more promotional or like a how-to guide than encyclopedic. 331dot (talk) 10:48, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Courtesy: Article is Sacred Heart. Shenaw2016 added a section "Enthronement of the Sacred Heart of Jesus" which a subsequent editor removed. David notMD (talk) 11:57, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Difficulty developing Wikipedia page

A good day to all the folks at the Teahouse! I'd welcome any tips on how to improve a Wikipedia page with a C-class rating and not a lot of information on the whole. I have added requests to Wikiprojects, issued a RfC, and provided editors with online sources that present facts about the topic in question. Not much has happened. Are there any other ways I could try to get support? Am I doing something wrong? --KatherineBusby2019 (talk) 10:42, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

@KatherineBusby2019: For additional context, I assume that we are talking about IWG plc, with which you have a declared COI, and that is why you are not making the changes yourself? That is significant information to help people answer your question, as really your question is not about how to improve the page, but how to get other editors to implement the edit requests you are making - right? It looks to me as if you have been regularly making content suggestions, and these have been fairly reliably answered, most recently Dormskirk seems to have been engaging with you on the talk page and either implementing your changes or explaining why they have not been implemented. You seem to be quite impatient to get changes made, a GAN pushed through, etc, but you have to understand that other editors here are volunteers, and there is WP:NORUSH to make changes to articles, so all I can suggest is that you slow down a bit, keep on engaging with editors at the talk page, and proposing specific changes that they can evaluate. Hug^syrup 11:02, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Greetings & Creating new pages

Hello all, First of all thank you for the TeaHouse invitation and glad to connect with experts wiki contributors.

I've created a new page and apparently it is under review, which might take at least 8 weeks (which sounds like a lot of time!). The page is for a rising actress I know (Jacynthe Cauvier). Is there anything I did wrong, or it is the standard processing time until a page is published?

Meanwhile, can I create other new pages or should I wait until the page is accepted and posted online before creating a new page again? There are three other rising artists profile I would like to create a page for, and also creating pages on some red links that I've seen in some pages related to Indian Ayurveda and other topics.

Few years ago, I contributed to many pages, though I have since changed my email ID and can't remember the previous password. Is there another way to access my previous wiki account ?

I'm really excited about contributing more to Wiki shortly!

Thanks a lot for any clarity you may bring to my questions.

Maplekalari0888--Maplekalari0888 (talk) 15:32, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Maplekalari0888, First off, please do remember that wikipedia is run by volunteers, and there is no rush to review a new article. Also please read Your First Article. MoonyTheDwarf (Braden N.) (talk) 15:39, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

MoonyTheDwarf (Braden N.) (talk), Thanks for the reply and the link.

Hello, Maplekalari0888, and welcome to the Teahouse.

To answer your other questions: The only thing you did wrong in creating your draft was to create it in both your sandbox, and your sandbox's Talk page (Talk:Maplekalari0888/sandbox). Talk pages are for editors to talk about articles, so I suggest you simply blank your sandbox talk page. (Alternatively you could ask an admin to delete it, by inserting {{db-user}} - with the double curly brackets - but since there may at some time be discussion there about the draft, you might as well leave it there, blank).

You haven't in fact submitted your draft for review, and until you do, nobody will consider it for publication. I have added a box at the top with a "submit" button. The weeks don't start counting until you actually submit it.

But there is no point in submitting at present, as it will certainly be rejected, since there are no sources cited. Reliably published sources are essential to a Wikipedia article, especially one about a living person.

You can create other drafts while that is waiting (though I would suggest you put more work into that one, after reading the link Moony gave you). It's best to use the article wizard, and you can create them either in your user space, as User:Maplekalari0888/Some other topic or in draft space, as Draft:Some other topic.

Finally: if you no longer have your password or the mail address you used with your previous account, then there is no way of recovering the account. You may, if you wish, put a note on either or both User pages linking to the other, so that editors can see that they are the same person, and why you have two accounts.

One more point: are you associated with Cauvier in some way? If you are, it is essential that you read about conflict of interest before you go any further. --ColinFine (talk) 16:14, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Courtesy: at User:Maplekalari0888/sandbox. No references. David notMD (talk) 22:32, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

I need support

So I need to begin with a backstory. I was watching the article “James Bond Film List” after a person removed 15k characters. Me and him undid/redid each other’s undo a bunch until he explained to me it was a duplicate table. He posted a point of the undo/redo on my talk page. While I was apologizing for the undo, he edited his post with a threat to me. I quickly posted “Please don’t threaten me” on his talk page with “I am sorry for the edits.” He quickly deleted that comment. I would like to report him for the original threat against me. It was clear he did not want this to be seen by others, hence why He quickly deleted my apology from his talk page, but I think an administrator should know.

Please give feedback on if I should report him for a threat against my Wikipedia account and if yes, how do I make the report. Thanks for any help given.Elijahandskip (talk) 17:25, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Elijahandskip, I have warned them. Please wait for further advice from other editors. MoonyTheDwarf (Braden N.) (talk) 17:30, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Moonythedwarf, don't leave patonising dross on my page again. Whan an editor accuses me of vandalism while edit warring, I will not hesitate to tell them that a trip to ANI awaits. That is a WP:BADFAITH accusation (accusing someone of vandalism when there is no vandalism is seen on a par as a personal attack, which would be the grounds of the complaint: Elijahandskip, please learn NOT to accuse other editors of valdalism unless you are damned sure of your grounds). Moonythedwarf, do NOT editwar on my talk page or I will be happy to take you to an appropriate venue too. - SchroCat (talk)

I requested a response from you in the edit summary. I did not plan to continue if you reverted again, and would like to remind you that WP:AGF applies to you, too, and also request you keep a civil tone. --MoonyTheDwarf (Braden N.) (talk) 17:42, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

@Elijahandskip: Sorry for your poor experience with the other editor. I would just let it go, unless the threats or uncivil behavior continues. Also, remember to never engage in an edit war. If someone reverts one of your edits, don't immediately put it back, instead start a discussion on the article's talk page. RudolfRed (talk) 17:34, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

• Elijahandskip, Moonythedwarf, DO NOT edit war on my talk page, as you have both done here and here. Per WP:OWNTALK and WP:UOWN I am allowed to remove what I wish. If such harassment continues, you can guess what is likely to follow. - SchroCat (talk) 17:47, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

I am sorry, and I will not continue the edit war, just for a reference, you just threatened again. Just some advice, threatening never leads down a good road. Elijahandskip (talk) 17:49, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

• SchroCat, I did not make any further changes to your talk page, and do not wish to be further involved in this nonsense. MoonyTheDwarf (Braden N.) (talk) 17:52, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

• @Elijahandskip: So you accused an experienced editor of vandalism, twice, and was appropriately told off for doing so. No threats involved, just a warning that was worded a bit sharply, but to be honest I don't blame them for that. One thing to take away from this would be to stop using the word "vandalism" in edit summaries when there's actually no vandalism involved; it looks like that is your default edit summary when reverting any edits, which is probably a bad idea. --bonadea contributions talk 17:50, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Bonadea, you are correct, except SchroCat threatened my Wikipedia account (Which was the “told off” message). Now I understand I was wrong and SchroCat understands also. Let’s let this be archived.Elijahandskip (talk) 17:54, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

@Elijahandskip and MoonyTheDwarf: You both edit warred on another editor's talk page. Do not reinstate warnings or messages if the user addressed deletes them from his or her own talk page. Such deletion (or archiving) is taken as acknowledgement that the user has read the message. It remains in the talk page history, if there is ever need to demonstrate that it was sent. You do not have the right to insist that an editor reposd to your message or warning. If a user is refusing to engage on an article talk page, it may be that this is disruptive editing, in which case the matte can be raised at ANI, but refusing to respond to a talk page notice when ther is no outstanding article issue does not constitute "refusing to engage". Moony, I would have thought you would know better. Elijahandskip, this is two separate edit wars on two different pages over the same incidient. Please do not make edit warring your first resort -- or even your last. and as Bonadea said, be careful with the word "vandalism". Disagreement in a content dispute, even if your position seems obvious to you, is not vandalism. Mind you, ANI is not likely to take any serious action over such a thing unless it is done persistantly, so the "threat" was not, in fact, much of a threat. Perhaps you did not know that. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 18:09, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

DESiegel, I should have known better, yes. I'm going to take a minute to brush up on policy again, and try and keep my nerve better in the future. MoonyTheDwarf (Braden N.) (talk) 18:13, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Fair enough, Moonythedwarf we all get overheated at times -- I certainly have. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 18:18, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

DESiegel, you misplaced your message. I moved it back up to the correct section, hope you don't mind. --MoonyTheDwarf (Braden N.) (talk) 18:23, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, Moonythedwarf DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 18:41, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Editing...

I have submitted a page for my friend who was cast in the High School Musical Series that is new on Disney+. I fear I have lost a lot of my coding skills over the years. How does the process work? Will people be able to help fill in the page? I should make mention that he is a rising star, it's not like I just made it because he was my friend. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Voller82 (talk • contribs)

Courtesy link - This is presumably the page in question: Draft:Joe Serefini Hug^syrup 18:23, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Yes, thank you! I wasn't sure how it needed to be set up and tried to follow another page.

@Voller82: - The way the process works is that at some point a reviewer will look at your page and either accept it or decline it. Both while it is in draft, and if/when it is moved to mainspace, other users can edit it to improve it, although whether or not they will largely depends on whether someone comes across it and wishes to contribute. I am afraid that if someone reviews your draft right now it is unlikely it will be accepted as it does not contain sufficient reliable sources. IMDB is not a reliable source, nor is the Disney+ Wiki, and the Broadway World page doesn't seem to be an article about him, though maybe some of the articles linked within that listing page are about the subject. If so, link directly to them. Finally, you have a WP:COI so you need to just review that policy and ensure you abide by it. Hug^syrup 18:27, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

What he said. I looked at the 2 top ones at broadwayworld, but they were just passing mentions and don't "count" here. More on what you need at WP:GNG and WP:BASIC. Also check out WP:BLP and Help:Referencing for beginners. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:34, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

@Hugsyrup Thank you very much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Voller82 (talk • contribs) 18:29, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Oh dear. Welcome to the Teahouse, Voller82. I am sure you are acting with the best of intentions, but I fear you have embarked on a path of struggle and disappointment. Writing a new article in Wikipedia is one of the harder tasks. Writing about somebody you know makes it even harder, because what you need to do is to forget everything you know about the subject, and just report what the reliable published sources say. And writing an article about a "rising star" is often (though not always) impossible, because sometimes it is just too soon. I wish you well in your Wikipedia journey, but my advice would be that you drop this for the moment. If you want to contribute to Wikipedia, then choose another topic - or, better still, choose some of the thousands of existing articles which need some TLC. If you find you're not really interested in Wikipedia, but just want to tell the world about your friend, then please do it somewhere else than Wikipedia. What you are doing is then promotion, which is forbidden anywhere on Wikipedia. --ColinFine (talk) 18:50, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Follow-up to Follow-up to Creating a page for John Grossman biography

Hello Teahouse. I want to submit a DRAFT of a JOHN GROSSMAN biography, a list of 36 sources, and a list of 22 Authored,Co-Authored,Collection exclusivity books with IBSN'S. This is not formatted yet, as I am not sure if this DRAFT is the first stage to get 'notability' recognition to then create a page? Do I just cut and paste all of this information for a review to answer the notability issue? If so, please let me know. Thank you in advance--MrsJohnGrossman (talk) 19:04, 19 November 2019 (UTC) MrsJohnGrossman (talk) 19:04, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello again MrsJohnGrossman A Wikipedia article (and therefore a finished draft) must be more than a list of sources and works created. It should be prose summarizing the sources, and citing them, to describe what has been written about the subject. A list of sources is a good place to start, but then someone needs to read those sources, confirm that they are reliable and independent, extract the significant facts, write those facts up into a neutrally phrased body of well-organized prose, citing the sources to support the statements mad in the article, and format it in accord with wikipedia's manual of style. If the sources are not online, they must be found and accessed.

Also, 36 is a large number of sources. Often fewer high0quality source produces a better result, although that depends on the specifics of the article and the sources.

It might be that given the list of sources, an editor would be willing to format thaem into an article draft, which could then be approved as an article. Or you might be able and willing to do this yourself.

You could certainly start by creating Draft:John Grossman and pasting your list of sources and works into it. Much furthe work would be needed, but it would be a beginning.

I know you have already been cautioned about a conflict of interest, which can make it hard to write in an unbiased fashion about a topic. Note also that your personal knowledge of John Grossman is not a verifiable source; Wikipedia must depend on published sources. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 19:26, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

FYI in case anyone is interested (as I was) in understanding who John Grossman was. [[1]] It almost seems an article about the ephemera collection to include a brief bio of him would make more sense. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 21:30, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

redirecting to an existing page from a page/term that is not available

Hello,

There is an existing page on Extrachromosomal DNA, which has a section on 'Role of ecDNA in cancer'. ecDNA is a sub-type of extrachromosomal DNA. One day I think it would be useful to have a page on ecDNA. However, in the interim, how can I make it so that a user searching on the term 'ecDNA' (which does not have a page) gets redirected to the existing Extrachromosomal DNA page?

Thank you, Jason — Preceding unsigned comment added by JC203760 (talk • contribs) 19:34, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

JC203760, Look into WP:REDIRECT MoonyTheDwarf (Braden N.) (talk) 20:17, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

JC203760 would not Extrachromosomal circular DNA make a better target for a redirect from ecDNA? It seems to ahve more on the topic. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 20:20, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

A message from Acarlson25

how do I create my sandbox?Acarlson25 (talk) 20:42, 19 November 2019 (UTC) Acarlson25

Hello, Acarlson25, and welcoe,m to the teahosue. Simply go to User:Acarlson25/Sandbox and start editing. There should also be a link "Sandbox" near the top of every Wikipedia page, although that may depend on options and customizations. A sandbox is most often used to prqactice editing tasks, from the basic to the complex. Some also use it to start a new article draft, but i think a userspace draft or a draftspace draft is better for that. if you wanted to start a draft about SomeTopic, you could put it atUser:Acarlson25/SomeTopic or Draft:SomeTopic. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 20:48, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

What CSD do these articles fall under?

I found a bunch of pages created by the same user that I think would qualify for speedy deletion (Wikipedia:Accuracy matters, Wikipedia:Brand insight, Wikipedia:The line, and Wikipedia:Big Idea), but I don't know what criteria they would fall under. Am I right in thinking they qualify for speedy deletion, and if so what criteria should I use? Merlin04 (talk) 22:53, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Forgot about Wikipedia:Consumer insight. Merlin04 (talk) 23:00, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

@Merlin04: G6 I assume. GMG^talk 23:01, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

They are somewhat marginal, Merlin04. If they had been in article space I might have draftified. In draft or user space I would probably not have done any speedy deletion at all. But in Wikipedia space -- well I tagged them with G2 Test page as they don't hold anythign of value to the project. We will see if another admin agrees. I would personally not use G6, but some would. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 23:04, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Even though these are in Wikipedia space, how does an editor who started editing only today create five (empty) articles? David notMD (talk) 23:29, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Probably G2. Taewangkorea (talk) 00:08, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Purpose of editing

Hello: What is the point of editing Wikipedia? What does an editor get out of making grammar corrections and adding content, other than good feelings from contributing to a cause? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stapmoshun (talk • contribs) 01:49, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

It's volunteering. We do this just for fun in our spare time. You know like how some kids play video games for fun. MenfesKidus40 (talk) 02:04, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Some people enjoy gardening ... and then there's the impulse illustrated here. —Tamfang (talk) 05:32, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Making information readily available and accessible is fairly rewarding since you know other people are going to rely on your information. There's also a little bit of a videogame element to Wikipedia which makes it slightly addictive. – Thjarkur (talk) 02:17, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Stapmoshun, To me, its a much more productive form of procrastination. Instead of watching TV, I edit Wikipedia. Its fun, there's a cool community, and you're helping the world! I hope you find something you like about Wikipedia, and decide to stick around too. Captain Eek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 02:33, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Stapmoshun I love to learn. The best way to learn something is to edit the Wikipedia article until you understand it. Plus I like to help fix things. My favorite other pastime is Sudoko, but that's easier to fix. (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.) TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 05:56, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Stapmoshun: Besides the Wikipedia essay Wikipedia:Why to contribute, there are various reasons why editors edit Wikipedia. I approached your question the way a Wikipedia editor would approach a topic they were writing or expanding an article about, and looked for reliable sources discussing this question, and here's what I found: Editors contribute to Wikipedia for many reasons, including:

• altruism or wanting to contribute,
• blatant self-promotion,
• bragging rights,
• wanting to improve information on a given topic,
• pushing a particular point of view on a topic,
• and for fun!

I would also add another reason, from my own experience: in order to exercise my translation skills, by translating articles from other Wikipedias. I hope this helps answer your question. May I ask you one? I see you've been editing for a couple of years, now. Why do you edit Wikipedia? Mathglot (talk) 08:11, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

I edit because it bothers me when I see punctuation and grammar mistakes. Thank you :) Stapmoshun (talk) 03:11, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

References

Best way to do wikilinks.

What is the best way to use Wikilinks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by !matt2446 (talk • contribs) 02:35, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

@!matt2446: That is a very broad question. WP:LINK has information on how to best use links in a variety of cases. If you have a more specific question, you may post it here. RudolfRed (talk) 02:43, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

fixed link. RudolfRed (talk) 02:44, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

@!matt2446: There is also the tutorial, which has a section on linking, which is probably what you want to start with instead of the other link. RudolfRed (talk)

The meaning of my question is there a good and/ or a effective way to help clear the backlog. — Preceding unsigned comment added by !matt2446 (talk • contribs) 02:47, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Thank You. — Preceding unsigned comment added by !matt2446 (talk • contribs) 02:54, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

@!matt2446: Which "backlog" (what page are you looking at)? —[AlanM1(talk)]— 05:48, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

• • !matt2446 there is also the WP:PIPETRICK which is a cool little way to save time that took around 3 months before someone showed me. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 14:13, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Scripts not working

I've imported several user scripts to my common.js page, including User:GregU/dashes.js, User:Ohconfucius/script/MOSNUM dates.js, and Wikipedia:AutoEd/complete.js. However, none of these seem to work, ever. I use Google Chrome, but also tried in Edge but nothing is working. Couldn't find any tutorials either. I'm stumped. Any help would be much appreciated. (Please {{ping}} me in a reply.) Bobbychan193 (talk) 04:49, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

@Bobbychan193: From the MOSNUM dates script, do you get the links ("DATES to dmy", etc.) added to the toolbox on the left side of the page under the Tools section? Which skin are you using (at the top of Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-rendering)?. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 05:44, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

@AlanM1: Vector. I think I did get those links in the past, but they're not appearing anymore. Bobbychan193 (talk) 05:48, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Actually, I get the links after I enable AutoEd through the More drop-down. Regardless, none of them work. AutoEd and the dashes script both appear as dashes by the way, which seems like it could be a bug. Bobbychan193 (talk) 05:50, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

(ec) @Bobbychan193: Try disabling all but the MOSNUM dates script (remove or commment out with // in front of the lines). If it works then, enable combinations until you find the offender. Also, assuming you're using a desktop (not mobile), go to your sandbox and edit it. Open the browser's Developer Tools window and switch to the Console tab (press F12, Ctrl+⇧ Shift+K on Windows; or ⌥ Option+⌘ Cmd+C, Control+4 on Mac Safari). Now reload the page. See anything relevant (you may have many unrelated warnings)? Copy (on Windows, right-click and choose Select All, then Ctrl+C) and paste it into a new section on my talk page if you like. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 06:06, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

@AlanM1: Stuck at step 2. I can't test it because the options no longer show up. Bobbychan193 (talk) 06:22, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

No idea what any of this means

VM69:238 This page is using the deprecated ResourceLoader module "jquery.tipsy". mw.loader.implement.css @ VM69:238 load.php?lang=en&modules=jquery|jquery.ui&skin=vector&version=1fmkj:152 This page is using the deprecated ResourceLoader module "jquery.ui". Please use OOUI instead. mw.loader.implement.css @ load.php?lang=en&modules=jquery|jquery.ui&skin=vector&version=1fmkj:152 load.php?lang=en&modules=jquery|jquery.ui&skin=vector&version=1fmkj:141 JQMIGRATE: jQuery.fn.delegate() is deprecated migrateWarn @ load.php?lang=en&modules=jquery|jquery.ui&skin=vector&version=1fmkj:141 13A cookie associated with a cross-site resource at <URL> was set without the `SameSite` attribute. A future release of Chrome will only deliver cookies with cross-site requests if they are set with `SameSite=None` and `Secure`. You can review cookies in developer tools under Application>Storage>Cookies and see more details at <URL> and <URL>. VM77:1039 This page is using the deprecated ResourceLoader module "jquery.throttle-debounce". Please use OO.ui.throttle/debounce instead. See https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T213426

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Bobbychan193 (talk • contribs) 06:25, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Hmmm. I get most of the same warnings in FireFox. Just to confirm, the links are not in the left-side toolbox when you go into edit mode, right? I'm stumped. As always, anyone else is welcome to chime in. You might find more capable technical help at WP:VPT (I'm pretty inexperienced at JS). Sorry I couldn't help. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 06:53, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, the links aren't in the left-side toolbox in either visual or source editing. No worries, thanks anyway. Bobbychan193 (talk) 19:48, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Bobbychan193, your script setup works correctly for me. Those scripts don't work if you have syntax highlighting on (there's a pencil icon to turn it off and on). The warning messages you're getting aren't important. Also note that these scripts don't work with the VisualEditor, does nothing show up under the Tools section in the side bar if you use the the wikitext editor? – Thjarkur (talk) 13:51, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

@Þjarkur: I didn't know syntax highlighting existed. I just checked; it's always been off. Right now, the scripts just aren't working, even in source editing mode. The MOS date links don't even show up. The only way I can get them to show up is when I enable AutoEd, but clicking any link has no effect. As a side note, the only script that works for me is the prose size script. Bobbychan193 (talk) 19:40, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

proper procedure for 3RR warnings

An IP editor made a change which I reverted, some "other" IP editor came along and reverted my revert. As I recall, for 3RR to be effective, there is some sort of notice requirement that must be made. Surviving this procedure seems heavily dependent on adhering to process.

As I'm indicating, my grasp of this process is pretty weak in the normal case, and I'd appreciate any clarification on what my obligations are (as the original "reverter"), and how the fact that IP editors are involved affects the steps I would be required to take. Thanks for your help. Fabrickator (talk) 05:12, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

@Fabrickator: Thanks for being careful and not wanting to engage in an edit war. Check out WP:3RR for that rule, and also some links where you can report an edit war if needed. RudolfRed (talk) 06:27, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

At Ages of consent in the United States you and other editors appear to be editing in good faith, and you have participated in Talk discussions when you and other editors have disagreed on points of law. I suggest continuing that, with patience. My own experiences with IP editors is that they tend to stop editing or register. Don't be too hasty to 3RR warn, as likely they are not aware of the guideline. David notMD (talk) 12:20, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Create a page for me on Wikipedia

Dear Team, I needed help if any of the freelancers associated with Wikipedia create a page / pages for us. Request you to send me a proposal on madhuri.dadia@yahoo.com if ok? I do understand that there is enough and more 'support' but i'm not equipped to use the HTML codes and design a page. Shall await your revert and guidance soon! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr Ashish Singh (talk • contribs) 07:29, November 20, 2019 (UTC)

Dr Ashish Singh, Hello, can you share with us, whether the page you are interested in creating, is related in any way to this section on your Talk page? Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 07:37, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Dr Ashish Singh: when people try to use Wikipedia for self-promotion, the result is usually unhappy and frustrating for everybody. If you meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, then somebody will eventually create an article about you. If not, then there cannot be an article. Please read WP:autobiography and WP:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. --ColinFine (talk) 09:52, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Where to request Template Creation for image use?

This question is with reference to this deletion request. I have personally received an email from ISRO which says that content from its official website can be used for non-commercial purposes as long as reproduced accurately.

Can we create a template so that editors can use it to upload images for the above purpose.?— Vaibhavafro ^💬 07:31, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi Vaibhavafro. Neither Wikipedia nor Wikimedia Commons will accept content (text or files) which has non-commercial restrictions placed upon it by the copyright holder; although there are Creative Commons licenses for things licensed in such a way, none of them are accepted per Wikipedia:Copyrights or c:Commons:Licensing. So, the only option you will have in such a case would be to try and upload the files locally to English Wikipedia as non-free content, but only if the way they are intended to be used complies with Wikipedia's non-free content use policy as well as other relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines. Wikipedia's non-free content use policy, however, is quite restrictive by design and it's hard to give you a more specific answer without knowing more about what images you'd like to use and in which articles you'd like to use them. You might want to try asking about this at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions since that's where editors familiar with the different types of image licenses as well as relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines often can be found. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:42, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: I have asked the question at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. What I am proposing is a template for 'educational' fair-use for content from www.isro.gov.in. If we don't do something, Wikipedia will be facing a devastating loss of images from all articles related to ISRO. That is why I am so concerned. I had tried persuading them to accept a free license, but to no avail. This is Indian bureaucracy. Regards— Vaibhavafro ^💬 07:59, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

I've responded to your post at WP:MCQ. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:22, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

How to create a link to an anchor further in the same page

How do i create a link to an anchor further in the same page using visual editor? I cant possibly imagine this is difficult. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dragonboat Ronin (talk • contribs) 08:31, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

@Dragonboat Ronin: I'm not familiar with VE, but in the standard editor, the link to this section of this page is [[Wikipedia:Teahouse#How to create a link to an anchor further in the same page]] or just [[#How to create a link to an anchor further in the same page]] for use within the page. I.e., it's '#' followed by the anchor name (section heading or a manually-inserted anchor from {{Anchor}}). —[AlanM1(talk)]— 09:33, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

​Using the VisualEditor, just write a pound sign (#) and then the name of the section you want to link to. If you wanted to link to this section, you'd write #How to create a link to an anchor further in the same page. – Thjarkur (talk) 14:19, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

How do I put myself to social network

How do I put myself to social network— Preceding unsigned comment added by Shanshaimran (talk • contribs)

Shanshaimran Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. This is a place to ask questions about using Wikipedia only. Do you have a question about using Wikipedia? 331dot (talk) 11:03, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Your User page is not for social media content or promoting a website. David notMD (talk) 12:35, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

If you seek help in using social media, you might ask at WP:Reference desk/Computing. But ask a more specific question, please. —Tamfang (talk) 03:16, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

Request for Speedy Deletion of article

My recent article about the author C.S. O'Cinneide has been requested for speedy deletion. C.S.O'Cinneide I could not find a "contest this speedy deletion" button, but I would like to contest the nomination for deletion of the article. How do I do this? MarcusK0100 (talk) 13:12, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

MarcusK100 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The article you reference was deleted in June; while there is a "contest this deletion" button in the CSD notice on the article, an article that meets the criteria for speedy deletion may be deleted without delay. If you wish this to be reviewed, you may go to Deletion Review. It was deleted as not making a credible claim of significance, so you will need to address that in any request. The article had no references to independent reliable sources with significant coverage indicating how the person meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable author. 331dot (talk) 13:16, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

The article C.S. O'Cinneide (with differently spaced letters) is still here though? Theroadislong (talk) 13:21, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Marcus, your article C.S.O'Cinneide was deleted in June, but the article you created today, C.S. O'Cinneide, has not been nominated for deletion. – Thjarkur (talk) 13:25, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Thank you so much for clearing this up and for your speedy response. MarcusK0100 (talk) 13:44, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

New Here

Hello, I am completely new here and recently attempted to add a citation for the "Hello Girls" article. The article mentioned the name "Hello Girl" may have been coined prior to the initiation of the famous Hello Girls of WW1 and a citation had been requested. I discovered a citation in a newspaper article whilst conducting genealogy in the Agra Sentinal from 1913. Turns out, my great grandmother, Mary Newell, was reported as begin the "new Hello Girl" in town. I had attempted to add the citation and it was my very 1st time ever doing so. Can someone please check the citation and guide me if I have made any mistakes? Your assistance is greatly appreciated.

Thank you, Soil Baby — Preceding unsigned comment added by SoilBaby (talk • contribs)

Hello SoilBaby, your citation is correctly inserted and correctly formatted. While it does demonstrate usage of the term, the source isn't about the term or its origins – a secondary source such as a dictionary or an article about the term would be better. If you ever come across such a source that would of course be ideal. Thanks for the improvement, hope you continue contributing :) – Thjarkur (talk) 18:43, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Translation from English to another language by a COI.

Hi, Could you inform me about "translation from English to another language by a COI"? (I could not find any source for that.) Is it possible to translate an existing page in English to another language by a related person? Or is it also following the same rule as creating or editing an article by a COI? Thank you for your time and help. --217.111.48.242 (talk) 14:26, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello, anonymous user, and welcome to the Teahouse,. Sonce you're translating to another language, you really need to ask at that Wikipedia, because each language Wikipedia is a different project, and they don't all have the same policies. But if you were talking about translating into English, then yes, I would say that you should treat it as a new COI article. (In fact, I always recommend treating translation as creating a new article, with the source taken from the other language, and attributed appropriately). The relevant page is WP:Translate us. --ColinFine (talk) 17:56, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Citing the same source multiple times

Is there anyway to cite a website or book multiple times without the references at the bottom being the exact same thing repeated 7 times? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Texas-Dude1914 (talk • contribs)

Yes, there is. When you add a reference, you can name it - this can be done using the referencing tool or directly in wiki markup, but the output will be something like <ref name="BLAH">{{cite details go in here as normal}}</ref>. Then when you wish to reuse the same reference, you can pick it from the 'named references' in the editor, or you can just type <name ="BLAH"/>. Note the / at the beginning - that is not a typo, it is essential. I am afraid I don't know how it works in visual editor as I don't use that, but I expect the process is similar. No doubt another editor can advise. Hug^syrup 14:46, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

You'll see far more named references formatted like this <ref name="BLAH" />. See Help:Ref for more info on references. - X201 (talk) 14:58, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Apologies - you're absolutely right. Got muddled as I was typing up the explanation. Corrected my post above. Hug^syrup 15:26, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Is this topic notable enough to justify a new wikipedia page?

The software company Atonix Digital, a software tech startup under Black & Veatch: Black & Veatch

https://atonix.com/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jdb296 (talk • contribs)

Jdb296 "Startups" rarely are notable enough for their own Wikipedia article. (Wikipedia has articles, not mere "pages", a subtle but important distinction) In order for any company to merit a Wikipedia article, there must be significant coverage of the company in independent reliable sources that show how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable company. Those sources cannot be press releases, routine announcements, staff interviews, the company website, or any other primary source. 331dot (talk) 15:44, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

If you have to ask, probably not. Is there a suitable place for it within the article Black & Veatch? —Tamfang (talk) 03:09, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

Editing a name

I'm trying to edit my bosses's wikipedia page, per her request, and I'm having difficulty changing her title name. I'm able to change her name throughout the page but I can't find a way to change what her name says at the header. How can I do this? Thank you for any help.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:e000:1510:dba:1dc0:acd1:e1dd:e8c6 (talk • contribs) 15:58, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Heads up. The article in question is Dipa Shah, there have been edits since October changing the name in the article to Ananyaa. There's a requested move on the talk page that was denied due to lack of evidence of the actress changing her name. Wikipedia goes on what is written in reliable sources. - X201 (talk) 16:12, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

IMDB have changed her name. WP still needs a reliable source though. - X201 (talk) 16:22, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Also, it isn't her Wikipedia page. It is Wikipedia's page about her. It may seem trivial, but keeping in mind that the page belongs to Wikipedia and only describes her may help you understand why things are done the way they are. If it were her page, ie a webpage that she owned and operated, her say-so would be enough to get it changed. As it is Wikipedia's page about her and Wikipedia articles must be supported by reliable sources, the page will not be changed until such sources are presented to us. And, no, your word that you are working for her and that she wants this is NOT a reliable source. --Khajidha (talk) 19:11, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

As a technical matter, you cannot move (rename) the article because you are not a registered editor. —Tamfang (talk) 03:08, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

Template/Formatting Help

So I am working on an article over Winter Storm Bessie. Draft:Winter_Storm_Bessie_2019 I have gotten tons of references and I feel I have enough to begin writting the article (Assuming it is notable with 28 different sources, including national sources). I have tried to find a good template to base the article off of, but I haven't found a good one yet. If anyone can give any suggestions for a good template please post it below. -Thanks in advance for any help given.Elijahandskip (talk) 16:20, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

@Elijahandskip: How about November 2012 nor'easter or 2011 Halloween nor'easter? - X201 (talk) 17:09, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Reducing an infobox image to a thumbnail size

My infobox image

William Oliver Williams
Born	1823 Worcester
Died	1901 Kensington, London, England
Nationality	British
Occupation	Artist
Spouse	Jane Elizabeth (Hughes) Williams
Parent(s)	William Williams, Jane (Oliver) Williams

is too large. Where do I put the word 'thumb' to reduce it? Sorry to be so simple and taking up so much space BFP1 (talk) 16:32, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

 Done That template has a field that can control the image size. I've added | image_upright = 0.5 to the article (William Oliver (artist, born 1823)). the 0.5 part means "50% (half) of original size", 0.75 would be three quarters etc. Tweak it to the size you require. - X201 (talk) 16:37, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Begoon (talk · contribs) has just increased it to 80% - X201 (talk) 16:41, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

To be precise, upright will scale it roughly relative to default thumbnail size (it does some 'rounding'), so if your thumb size in preferences is 220px then 0.5 = 110px wide. I altered it to 0.8 = 180px, because 0.5 seemed very small in comparison to most bio pics, and it's not such poor quality that you need to reduce it to lessen flaws, but you can adjust further if you like. -- Begoon 16:44, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Thank you both. I'll know how to reduce if there are any complaints BFP1 (talk) 18:22, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

@BFP1: This has already been resolved, but please remember that since the file is licensed as non-free content it can only be used ("displayed") in the article namespace per non-free content use criterion #9. So, if you want to discuss/refer to the image on any talk pages, etc., please only provide a link for the image (see WP:TPG#Non-free images and WP:COLON) or a link to the article where it can be seen. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:28, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Addition of Global Health Security Agenda (GHSA) Action Plans under Global Health page

Hi, I am a student at university of Edinburgh doing my Masters degree in Public Health. I wrote an article about Global Health Security Agenda (GHSA) Action Plans which was intended to be linked to the Global health page, however, I got a notification stating that the content is promotional and I have an obvious conflict of interest. I am an independent student trying to contribute to an open source knowledge base. Also, the content intended for posting is based on actions taken jointly by countries so far in achieving global health goals. There are no opinions but facts stated in a straightforward encyclopedic manner. Can anyone please help me understand this as I am finding it really difficult to wrap my head around this obvious conflict of interest bit and the content being promotional (of the World Health Organization??). Also, if this is promotional, then how does an entire page on World Health organization get published on Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rimanundy (talk • contribs)

Hello, Rimanundy, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm sorry you've had a frustrating experience. Unfortunately, this is quite common for people who plunge straight into the difficult task of creating new articles in Wikipedia without spending time learning about how it works.

The general answer is that if you think that the people who deleted your article and challenged you are wrong, you should engage with them in a discussion: either on their talk pages (User talk:CASSIOPEIA and User talk:Jimfbleak or continuing it on your own (but WP:ping those editors if you do).

I'm not an administrator, so I can't see the deleted article. But from the comments, my guess is that it was either not referenced, or referenced only to sources connected with the subject. That is (part of) what makes it promotional: Wikipedia isn't interested in what anybody or any organisation says about themselves, only in what people unconnected with the subject have published about it. (If you look at World Health Organization you will see that many of the sources are independent of WHO).

As for the COI: again, I can't tell for sure. Jimfbleak evidently thinks that you work for the organisation which behind the GHSA: if he is wrong, then you can explain - but you may need to address whatever it was that caused him to think so. That in itself won't address the question of promotional text: it may be that CASSIOPEIA will be willing to restore your text as a draft for you to work on, unless they think it is irredeemably promotional.

My suggestion would be that you read your first article, and then start again, creating a draft in Draft space. But do follow and read all the links in the messages on your user talk page. --ColinFine (talk) 18:19, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Rimanundy. The draft was deleted as promotional. I don't know that I would have done that, but it was not, as writen, suitable as a Wikipedia article. It began:

In order to attain goals of global health security, eleven Global Health Security Agenda (GHSA) Action Packages were identified in May 2014 at the GHSA Commitment Development meeting ...

Wikipedia articles normally begin by identifying or defining the subject of the article: Joe Blow was an 18th century English artist. or {Harris Associates is a holding company specializing in transport firms. Here the draft should have started by identifying the Global Health Security Agenda, indicating who created the Agenda and why, and why it is significant. The tone should be descriptive, and all statements of opnion should be identifed as the opnions of specific people or entities, and cited to their sources. Statements such as The Action packages aim to encourage member countries to take on leadership roles do not make it clear whose aim this is. Correcting these issues of format and tone might make it clearer that the draft is not intended to be, and is in fact not, promotional.

I could start a discussion aimed at overturning the deletion. But so little of the deleted draft would actually be useful in a new draft, that I don't think it is worth while. Perhaps Jimfbleak will comment here. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 22:15, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Thanks DESiegel. Even the choice of article title shows that the editor has plunged straight in without reading anything about editing. No sources, and its basically regurgitating what the organisation says about itself in uncritical tones, aims and visions rather than facts. The article looks like a text dump, but since it seems to be based on a US federal page, not worth checking for copyright violation. Rimanundy, I'm prepared to AGF and accept that there isn't a COI here, but there's little worth keeping there, better to take time to read WP:YFA and WP:MOS and start from scratch Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:53, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

Notability of an article that I cannot find sources for

Is this article notable? Henri_Vincent-Anglade I was going to nominate it for AfD after finding no sources that demonstrate SIGCOV through google, google books, google news, and google scholar, but this article (https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=fr&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.montmart.org%2Fvincent-anglade) said his works were published in "major magazines of the time" that I could not find. Taewangkorea (talk) 18:41, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

The painting is notable, but I think it might need to become a drag unit more sources have been found. Elijahandskip (talk) 19:59, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

@Taewangkorea and Elijahandskip: I rather suspect this artist is notable, but i can't be sure. If you couldn't find online sources, it may be that offline ones are needed, such as could be found at a university or museum library with a good collection on art history. Or it may be that sources are in french, rather than english. Or both. It certainly could be moved to Draft, but it would be better if some specific editor agreed to make some effort on it, otherwise that might just be a slow deletion via WP:CSD#G13. Or it could just be left alone for the moment -- there is no rush. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 21:52, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

By "drag unit" do you mean "draft until"? —Tamfang (talk) 03:06, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

Resizing an infobox picture

So im trying to make a draft on my sandbox but I can't seem to find a way to shrink and image to normal size (example from the pictue of the m4 infobox >M4_Sherman) Can someone help explain how to fix this please? --Texas-Dude1914 (talk) 18:50, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

@Texas-Dude1914: Check my edit to the article. You'll see what I've done and be able to change the size. - X201 (talk) 19:30, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Texas-Dude1914: The image code in the infobox allows you to custom size the image. It's the number before the px at the end. For example, the Sherman tank code is |image=[[File:M4 Sherman tank - Flickr - Joost J. Bakker IJmuiden.jpg|border|300px]] . You can play around with the px number like using 150 or 200 until you get it how you like it. There's more detailed info here Help:Pictures#Thumbnail sizes. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 19:33, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Drafting an article on a userpage

This may have been asked before but I couldn't find it. What can we do if a userpage looks like an article draft? I'm only showing WP:FAKEARTICLE but I think these are just good faith edits and just needs to be moved to a draft page.   Sub |_HMU  18:57, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

You can move it to a subpage. Ruslik_Zero 20:59, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

I’ve been having this discussion in another thread above (WP:TEAHOUSE#my article deleted) and my reading of the rules, and my opinion, is that there is nothing (least of all WP:FAKEARTICLE which clearly does not apply) to say someone cannot draft an article on their userpage, and we shouldn’t be in a rush to move these to either a subpage or draft space for no good reason. However, it seems that not everyone agrees with me and it’s certainly not a hill I’m inclined to die on. Hug^syrup 21:26, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

@Subwaymuncher, Ruslik0, and Hugsyrup: WP:UPYES includes in the list of things allowed in user space pages: Work in progress or material that you may come back to in future (usually on subpages). That (usually on subpages) is probably grounds to politely suggest to the user that such a page be moved to a sub-page as a user draft. Whether it justifies makign such a move preemptivly is not exactly clear.

WP:FAKEARTICLE never app;lies to something that is arguably a good0-faith attempt at a draft of a valid article -- it is primarily aimed at PoV forks of existing articles, copies of deleted articles, and pages so constructed as to attempt to deceive others into thinking that they are live articles. An extensive autobiography in the form of a fully developed article, but with promotional content, that might be linked to from outside, could be a FAKEARTICLE, but if it is honestly intended as a draft, it should not IMO be so classed. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 21:46, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Yes. Much the point I made in the thread above to which I have linked - but thanks. Hug^syrup 22:01, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

A few days ago DESiegel suggested this. Taewangkorea (talk) 22:40, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Yes i did, and i have now rethought a bit. I think maybe there needs to be a discussion soemwhere , perhaps WT:UP, to clarify the proper choices in such a situation. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 22:46, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

See WT:UP#Drafts on a users main user page for possible wider discussion of this issue. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 05:06, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

would ri be notable?

Would ri (Ri_(administrative_division)) be allowed to have an article (notable) under the notability guideline for geographic features? Ri is an administrative subdivision for myeon (township) (List_of_townships_in_South_Korea). However, I noticed that hardly any of the myeon have article, let along ri, so I was wondering if I was allowed to create articles on ri that wont be deleted.205.175.106.30 (talk) 20:31, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Ri (administrative division) currently exists as a page. Some individual Ri may be notable per WP:GEOLAND. But to be honest, if you were going to work on creating articles, you might wish to focus on the Townships first. Do you have a particular Ri you'd like to create, or were you just thinking of creating them in general? Captain Eek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 21:16, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

I was just curious. Maybe I should create the articles on townships. Also, why do other people's contributions show up for my contributions and what happened to my old contributions? 205.175.106.30 (talk) 21:19, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Howdy hello! Likely because your IP address has changed. You can fix that problem by creating an account which will allow you to hide your IP address and also have sole attribution for your edits. Your old contributions can be found at your old IP address, whatever that may have been. For the townships, yeah, that'd be very useful! The list of townships is a good place to start, as there are many redlinked pages there. Captain Eek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 21:28, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

I'd think they'd probably pass provided that they are legally recognized entities; we have articles on all the townships in the U.S., for example. Although I agree with CaptainEek, myeon would probably be better to create first. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 05:28, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed protection

Where should I request that an article be unprotected? I want to edit the Bigg Boss Tamil 1 page to help with copy editing, but the page is extended-confirmed protected. Thanks! --xRENEGADEx (talk) 00:11, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

​It is currently protected due to long-term disruption from sockpuppets, so it's unlikely that it will be unprotected soon. I'd recommend copying the article to your sandbox and then making an edit request at the article's talk page. But to answer your question about how to have an article unprotected: You discuss it with the admin that protected the page, and if they're no longer an active editor you can discuss it at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection#Current requests for reduction in protection level – Thjarkur (talk) 00:30, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

Submission of a Draft

How do I add a draft to WP:Afc? I have come up with a completed draft, but I cannot see a submit button on AfC. 數神 (talk) 00:39, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi 數神. I've added Template:Submit to Draft:Markov constant (Diophantine approximation) and submitted it for you. If you're not ready for it to be submitted, revert my edit and then add Template:AFC submission/draftnew to the top of the page instead. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:50, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. 數神 (talk) 00:56, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

@數神: I would also like to add that if you choose to use that template, the template needs to be substituted like this {{subst:AFC submission/draftnew}} without the nowiki tags. Interstellarity (talk) 00:58, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

@Interstellarity: Also, I have an extra question: What does 'subst' do anyway? 數神 (talk) 01:03, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

數神, It means substitution. Please check out WP:SUBST to learn more about this. Interstellarity (talk) 01:05, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. 數神 (talk) 01:08, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

House intel cmt pge

On United_States_House_Permanent_Select_Committee_on_Intelligence

The latest edits are partisan; can these be re-evaluated?

This should a) probably be a discussion for that article's Talk page, and b) be linked properly - you've just linked to the page, not a specific edit, so how do I know what you're on about? (Also - please sign your comments with four tildes when posting on the Teahouse. Thank you!) --Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) 02:40, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

Re: New Article Review

Hello everyone,

I have just created an artist page for the first time and requested for review.

Can someone check this page Draft : Rinosh George and let me know if everything is in order as per the wiki guidelines so that it won't be rejected while being approved.

Thank you in advance.

Rienzie.

Can someone check this page Draft : Rinosh George and let me know if everything is in order as per the wiki guidelines so that it won't be rejected while being approved?

Rienzie06 (talk) 03:24, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

Declined, edited subsequently by Rienzie, resubmitted. In my opinion will be declined again because of weakness of refs not establishing notability for musician/actor. David notMD (talk) 05:16, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

Missing Map Sheet- Site Map

Problem: Hello all- I have been working on colonial period maps of Taiwan this week that I believe can help English-speaking readers have a better understanding of Taiwanese geographical concepts during Japanese occupation. However, I can't find one of the sheets of the map series I have been working on (from map series Formosa (Taiwan) 1:50,000 AMS Series L792). I previously encountered a similar problem with sheet suirembi-2418-iii of the map series which is not listed on the index of sheets of the map. I was able to blindly guess out what the url was.

Using my guessing method, I have previously found at least one other map sheet in The University of Texas' maps of China that is similarly already scanned and uploaded but not linked in their index of maps. Unfortunately, sending them my feedback has proved fruitless- they haven't corrected the problems yet.

I feel strongly that the map I am looking for (sheet 2115-iii) is probably already scanned and online, but I just can't guess out what the URL would be.

Sheet 2115-iii definitely exists in paper form- it is referenced in several places in the 1945 book "Gazetteer to Maps of Formosa (Taiwan) Map Series AMS L792, Scale 1:50,000" and it the area it covers is highlighted in yellow in the Index map to Series L792.

Question: Is there a tool that can show me a list of ALL of the urls that have ever existed that start with http://legacy.lib.utexas.edu/maps/ams/formosa/? If I can find that list, then I could probably figure out if sheet 2115-iii was uploaded but not added to the index of sheets (similar to suirembi-2418-iii), or if sheet 2115-iii was never uploaded at all. If not, is there another way I could find this map without contacting the library directly? You can't email them, their feedback system gave me no results and calling them would be a little expensive for me. I have tried my guessing method (not yet exhaustively), but have yet to hit it. Geographyinitiative (talk) 04:04, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

@Geographyinitiative: The index page claims to have Saigaen as 2115-iii, but the link actually points to 2215-iii, which is the correct number for that Saigaen sheet according to the image, and 2215-iii does not appear elsewhere in the list.

Archive.org has archived 133 URLs in that series, and they don't have a 2115-iii. This may simply mean that they archived the ones that were present/referenced at Wikipedia, and didn't do 2115-iii because it wasn't. As you said, it would be worth reconciling that list with the UT list.

I found the following relevant sources, which may give a clue as to the name of the missing map. It might be useful to look at how other known map names from the UT list compare to get an idea of the types of differences to expect in the name transliterations.

• [2] has:
  • chikushiko
  • chikushiko-kei
  • kashiryo
  • kyukoko
  • midako
  • shinsekishi
• [3] has:
  • hsin-chiang-kou
  • shin-koko
  • kuang-ho-tsun
  • kaentei
• [4] and [5] have "mi-to"
• [6], [7], and [8] have "mida"

I'm surprised there is no way to reach the UT map collection people – it's a well-known map resource and I know I worked with them some years ago on some issues. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 06:59, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

I've emailed them. I'll use chat if I don't get a response in a week or so. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 07:13, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

Advice on a recently revised AfC draft (revived)

My appologies if this isn't the correct way to go about this but the previous section was archived before being resolved so I'm re-posting it. ImberAlacritas (talk) 07:01, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello, As my first contribution to Wikipedia, I've made an attempt to resolve the remaining comments on the draft for the Draft:Water_Wall_Turbine page. I believe that I've resolved the tonal and reference issues reported by previous reviewers, but would very much appreciate feedback on whether some issues remain. Thank you for your time and expertise. ImberAlacritas (talk) 06:56, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Water Wall Turbine appears to be about a type of water wheel. It does not make it clear in the draft how a Water Wall Turbine differs from other water wheels - in one place it says that they can capture potential energy as well as kinetic energy from water, but in another it claims they are suitable for extracting power from currents. However, the consistent capitalisation of "Water Wall Turbine" suggests that it does not designate a type of water wheel at all, it is a brand name used by Water Wall Turbine Inc. Maproom (talk) 08:44, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Declined four times. IA, the recent editor, is not the creator, and in a Talk page reply, declares does not have a COI. My advice to IA is to state no-COI on own User page, and if intending to continue, aim toward neutral point of view, as I agree this still has a promotional bias. I did some editing. David notMD (talk) 13:20, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Thank you everyone for your feedback, especially to David notMD who made useful edits to the page directly. I believe that I've made some further improvements given the comments here and would appreciate it if you could take another look. I've also added a no-COI statement to my user page as suggested. ImberAlacritas (talk) 02:21, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

why my page deleted?

i have submitted my company page eDelta enterprise solutions, but it was deleted. can anyone help me to add it?