Wikipedia:Teahouse

Hoary, a Teahouse host

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

Ask a question

Question forumMeet your hostsArticles to improveBecome a host

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

Help Wikipedia

Page for an Actor Declined

Notabilty, Actors

I wrote an article for a Thai actor named Mew Suppasit. It was just declined for failing the guidelines of "actor notability" according to wiki staff reviewers. I am confused as to why tho? The actor is quite famous in Thailand and throughout Asia. His drama has garnered an international fanbase, he recently reached 1M IG followers, acted in 4 dramas, several commercials, in-demand. So can someone please explain to me how that isn't significant? Is there something I am doing wrong? Thebriandez (talk) 01:34, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Thebriandez, did you read WP:NACTOR? Did you provide reliable sources that demonstrate that your subject pass those criteria? GirthSummit _(blether) 06:44, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

I just took a look at the draft. I think the problem is the sourcing - lots of TV schedules, no actual coverage of the subject himself. Can you find any reliable, independent sources that discuss him? GirthSummit _(blether) 06:50, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Yes, there are 2 articles (both in Thai and from the same source) talking about him. When I looked at a similar actor in his field on Wikipedia, they referenced similar articles. So is that not enough? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thebriandez (talk • contribs) 05:12, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

I have revised my draft, added more and in my opinion, better sources. I am hoping this will help get my article approved. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thebriandez (talk • contribs) 07:35, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Using research in Wikipedia

I have been making Wikipedia submissions for over 10 years. In the past I was able to create articles for my small community. They are hard to support because we are very small but live in an area where there is deep history of the native Americans and along the main access to the west in Canada. Some of my submissions I have researched for hours upon hours and used the words from local people and natives. They are now being rejected because I cannot find enough online sources to support them. This is such a shame. A Killer can kill 2 people and will get a Wikipedia page, but real history is rejected and deleted because there is no online information about it. This was where I was coming to make the online information about it. I am very disappointed in the direction that Wikipedia has gone. I believe that research should be accepted before cites from news papers etc. How can I cite a historical place if there is no place to get cites from? Singlepole (talk) 05:23, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

@Singlepole: if you have carried out detailed research, then the answer is to get it published elsewhere, when it can be cited here. The principle that an encyclopedia is not a place to publish original research is a sound one, and won't be changed. (By the way, you wrote "online" several times above as though only online sources count. This is far from being true.) Peter coxhead (talk) 05:55, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Singlepole, welcome to the Teahouse. If you can provide reputable independent sources (online or offline) it will help get your draft approved. I'm not sure when Wikipedia's notability standards became stricter: any other hosts able to chime in? Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 05:59, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Singlepole, welcome. The way Wikipedia works is that we rely entirely on assessments done by others of a subject, in the form of reliable sources. This is how the wiki was built: anyone can edit it because you just need to be able to assess reliable sources. You do not need to be a subject matter expert. This is why we rely only on good published sources, and do not allow original research. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 06:15, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

In addition to what others have pointed out, part of the reason why Wikipedia only accepts third party sources is to avoid bias. An author might have devoted years researching his work but he needs another set of eyes to ensure not just accuracy but also the objectivity of the information presented. Published reliable information are imperative because these have passed through the scrutiny of professional editors. Darwin Naz (talk) 23:40, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Who does not have COI?

Hi folks, I've read the COI pages, but need more guidance. I publish software packages. One of my packages is the subject of 3 books (2 published by Springer) and is often mentioned in papers published in professional Journals in the Medical and Educational fields. It has thousands of licensees and the freeware version has hundreds of thousands of downloads. I am often asked about it, so a Wikipedia page would be helpful. But who can write it? Me? One of the book authors? One of the paper authors? A licensed user? A freeware user? A knowledgeable competitor? I welcome your guidance. Thank you. User:MikeLinacre 02:02, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the teahouse User:MikeLinacre! I am assuming this is medical in nature because of what's said above. Best review Wikipedia:Conflicts of interest (medicine) and then bring a more detailed explanation on the content and your involvement at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine. WikiProject Medicine can't help determine is notability status and help find secondary sources and give guidance.--Moxy 🍁 02:37, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you Moxy. It's a software product, so let's discuss software in the same marketplace. There are pages for software packages SPSS and SAS (Software). It seems that the authors of these pages cannot be owners or employees of SPSS and SAS, but must be very knowledgeable about them. This suggest that the lead authors could be (1) ex-employees, (2) long-time users who have collected corporate news releases etc., (3) investigative reporters, (4) .... Am I on the right track? -- MikeLinacre (talk) 00:49, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

@MikeLinacre: Articles are supposed to be written by independent volunteers who just happen to have an interest in the topic. For example, I started the Debtera article even though I'm not Orthodox, Ethiopian, a musician, a deacon, a folk magician, etc; nor an anthropologist, historian, (professional) theologian... The only things I might in common with (most, not even all) Debteras would the Apostles' Creed and maybe spice tolerance. I've had a perpetual to-do to write an article on a type of gas can even though I'm not an engineer, mechanic, or a car owner. Elsewhere in the Teahouse, we have someone who wants to add a photo to an article on some old software because he found a copy when cleaning his house.

Of the categories you suggest, 2 is the most feasible: former users. However, there are some folks who are just interested in the history of computer software even for machines they otherwise would never both owning (or else the 8-Bit Guy's YouTube channel would consist of maybe five videos with altogether less than a hundred views). The books that are about your software would probably be valid sources (especially if your company did not contribute to those books and they are not "how-to" works but independent scholarly or journalistic analysis). Ian.thomson (talk) 05:36, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, Ian.thomson. Very clear :-) -- MikeLinacre —Preceding undated comment added 08:51, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Dates in references when you use a web archive

I have begun using a web archive to ensure that references I quote remain accessible. However, I am unsure about whether it is important to retain the accessdate parameter, as well as the archive-date parameter. Once you archive a web reference and give the archive-date, is the accessdate now irrelevant ? Here is an example I am working on: "National performance review - Residential water efficiency". Water New Zealand. Archived from the original on 9 Apr 2020. Retrieved 9 Apr 2020. Marshelec (talk) 03:24, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Marshelec, I would personally opt to retain the access date, as a page may be archived multiple times, so its good to note when you accessed the version so that someone searching the Wayback machine can find that exact version. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 09:17, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

references are linked to Sources on Johanna Alida Coetzee, is this method should be untouched ?

its kind of confusing to me to find links on same page. however, we have multiple ways to provide references. here author using {{sfn|Scott|2007|p=2}}.

my query : is this method correct ? or it can be improved ? Leela52452 (talk) 07:55, 9 April 2020 (UTC) suggestion or critique is preferred here

Short citations are perfectly acceptable under Wikipedia's citation guidelines. Generally speaking, you need a very good reason for changing a valid style of referencing if it has already been introduced by the article's creator; here, my advice would be to leave well alone. Yunshui ^雲_水 10:21, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

The use of shortened footnotes is one of the permitted citation styles. WP:CITEVAR says not to change an article from one style to another if the style is consistent in the article. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:18, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

New Desginer PAge

"I want to create a designer brand page. How can I do it without it sounding like a promotional page? Lavanya Venky (talk) 09:01, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Lavanya Venky, For starters, are you in any way associated with the subject? If so, you ought declare a conflict of interest. If you are being paid by the subject, are an employee of them, or have been compensated in any way for your edits, you must disclose that by following the steps at WP:PAID. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 09:14, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

I just want to write pages on Fashion Designers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lavanya Venky (talk • contribs) 09:24, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Lavanya Venky, Everything on Wikipedia must be written from a neutral point of view. I only briefly glanced at the page before it got deleted, but it was not written with formal encyclopedic tone and language. Avoid buzzwords, and language that puffs up the subject. Remember that we are an encyclopedia: we must present our subjects neutrally, and from an...almost uninterested position. We transfer knowledge about a subject, such as when it was created, not where you can buy their stuff and how much it costs. Additionally, your article was not appropriately sourced. Our articles need to be supported by reliable sources, cited inline. Again, since I can't see the deleted article, I can't give much more specific guidance at this time, unless you have particular questions. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 10:09, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Lavanya Venky. I think you can get a big start to getting the tone right by not framing it as "a designer brand page" but as "an encyclopaedia article about this brand". --ColinFine (talk) 10:33, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Police Constable John Woodcock, Northumberland County Constabulary. Interred Ponteland Cemetary. 1868.

92.23.114.59 (talk) 09:36, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Howdy hello, and welcome to the Teahouse! Do you have a specific question regarding this feller? If you want to make an article on them, you can use the WP:Article Wizard to draft one. You'll need to find some reliable sources that discuss their life. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 10:15, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Connie Glynn

Someone changed her birthplace to "Hatfield" - Herfortshire stood there first. I cannot confirm this change - and i don't know what to do... leave it like this or undo or??? Maybe you find better sources than me to confirm this? I'm excusing myself already if this is a very stupid question! Kind regards, Gyanda (talk) 12:07, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello Gyanda! I took that out, since it was unsourced and in a WP:BLP. If someone want to add it again, they should find a WP-acceptable ref first. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:58, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you so much! I translated the page for the german wikipedia and therefore i wasn't sure whether to also update the german site or not. Am happy with you! Thank you and stay safe! --Gyanda (talk) 12:59, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Help

23.176.32.1 (talk) 12:37, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

My name is Shelby Kloberdanz and somebody is hacking my account please call the MCPD at 641-424-3636

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. We can't help with these kind of questions. This forum is for questions regarding using and editing Wikipedia. Interstellarity (talk) 12:49, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Editing feedback

Hi, I am new to Wikipedia. I have copyedited a few articles from the backlog page, some in parts and others in full. Do I need to inform a senior editor so that they can double-check and removed the 'Need copyediting' tag from some of these pages? How does it work? The articles are as follows: 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero_downtime_manufacturing 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_information_on_the_Internet 3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO%2FIEC_27005 4. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gurdwara_Gobind_Ghat 5. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cameraman_Gangatho_Rambabu 6. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copula_%28probability_theory%29 Thank you Earthianyogi (talk) 13:38, 9 April 2020 (UTC) 6.

Hello Earthianyogi! If you feel that you have dealt with the problem so the template is no longer necessary, you can remove it. If someone disagrees, they can reinsert it/talk to you about it. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:58, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Gråbergs Gråa Sång Thank you Earthianyogi (talk) 14:18, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

(Adding this anyway because I'd typed it in already, working off an older revision) Earthianyogi, if the tag accompanied a talk page note elaborating on why it was tagged, you'd best discuss it with the tagging editor first, to make sure that they too are satisfied that issues are now resolved. If not, it's like any other editing. If you think the tag doesn't apply (or doesn't apply anymore), you can remove it. There are some tags you should not remove simply because you disagree with the tagging, such as a "connected contributor" tag on an article you have considerably edited, speedy deletion tag on a page you created, etc. Copyediting tag is not one of those. On an unrelated note, Wikipedia articles can and should be linked within site as wikilinks by putting the title between a pair of large brackets, like so: [[Zero downtime manufacturing]]. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 14:22, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Usedtobecool Thank you Earthianyogi (talk) 16:46, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Question

Hi, this is Shadowblade08 again. I had a quick question. (at least I hope its quick)

Is it possible for me to close a topic on my discussion page? I've seen this on article talk pages. I currently don't have anything that I want to close, but is it possible for me to do it? Thanks. Shadowblade08 (talk) 13:57, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Shadowblade08, yes, you can. Usually, only editors whose talk page it is, close discussions on them; usually because the conversation is not going anywhere productive. The how of it is explained at WP:Closing. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 14:20, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

A more simple process for your own Talk page is to either delete content or archive it. You have already been deleting. David notMD (talk) 16:53, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Having looked at your >100 edits to date since registering an account on 29 March, so far you have done nothing to contribute to the encyclopedia process, i.e, you have edited no articles. You have repeatedly asked questions at Teahouse and you have started discussions on editors' Talk pages. If you continue this pattern you may be blocked for not being here to help with the encyclopedia. David notMD (talk) 16:53, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

I apologize for that all being harsh. I can understand wanting Wikipedia to be like friendly chat. But its not. David notMD (talk) 21:33, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

How to undo more than one edit?

The last two revisions of Noakhali riots (by the same IP address) look like they might be vandalism. How do I undo these two edits and bring the page back to the previous version?

Thanks for any help, Coldspur (talk) 14:08, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Coldspur, In the history page, when you click the radio button on the revision you want to restore the page to, all subsequent revisions will appear with two radio buttons. Hitting the right one in any of the latter revisions, and clicking "Compare selected revisions", you can open a diff. You should find a "Restore to this version" option at the top of the left column. I am not sure it's certainly a vandalism; please leave an edit summary explaining the revert when you do. More, including alternative ways, at H:RV. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 14:40, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Usedtobecool, [restore this version] is visible only to users who have installed Twinkle after qualifying for it. Can you please ascertain this. I verified this on sandbox. Undo appears to be the only possible way to do that in 2 separate edits. --Cedix (talk) 15:04, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

There is a way to do it with a single Undo, though – after clicking the round button by the revision you want to return to, hit "Compare selected revisions", and then just click "Undo". I sometimes do that if I want to leave a longer edit summary than the one automatically provided by Twinkle. --bonadea contributions talk 15:22, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Cedix, yes, seems that's true. So, Coldspur, you'd need to use "Undo" as Bonadea suggests below, until you can get Twinkle. The undo procedure is also explained at WP:UNDO, part of the help page I linked earlier. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:58, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

I've always 1) gone to the revision history, 2) clicked on the date/time stamp of the last good version, 3) clicked "edit source", 4) clicked "publish changes". --Khajidha (talk) 13:10, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Usedtobecool, Cedix, Bonadea, and Khajidha: The edits have already been reverted by someone else, but thank you for all the help! Coldspur (talk) 07:55, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Is it possible to hire someone to edit my page so that it conforms to requirements and can be published?

Is it possible to hire someone to edit my page so that it conforms to requirements and can be published? Alt4960 (talk) 15:30, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Alt4960, by doing so, you'd be forcing that person to follow Wikipedia's WP:PAID guidelines, which means they'd be discouraged from editing the article themselves. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 15:44, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Alt4960 Note that it is not "your page", but an article about you . We cannot stop you from hiring someone, but they would be required to declare that you are paying them. Please understand that Wikipedia is not interested in what someone wants to say about themselves (either directly or through a representative). Wikipedia only summarizes what independent reliable sources with significant coverage say about subjects that meet Wikipedia's special definition of notability. If you just want to tell the world about yourself, you should use social media or other forum where that is permitted.

I will add that a Wikipedia article is not necessarily desirable. There are good reasons to not want one. 331dot (talk) 15:57, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Submit a draft article

I realized that a product that can be found across the globe and that a few of us have dedicated our lives has no entry in the encyclopedia. So since we are confined to our homes, I thought to spend time to author one. How do I get my Draft:JNIOR article considered for release? What is my next step?

Bruce Bscloutier (talk) 16:05, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

@Bscloutier: welcome to Wikipedia and thanks for wanting to add to it. add {{subst:submit}} at the top when you are ready, and the draft will be added to the drafts awaiting review. Note that there is quite some backlog so after submitting, you will need to be patient. RudolfRed (talk) 16:15, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

But, Bscloutier, and welcome to the Teahouse. I second RudolfRed's acknowlegment to you, but I'm afraid that the answer might be "start again" (though it might not). Unfortunately, you have done what most new editors do when they have the idea of creating an article: write from what they know. Creating a new article is very difficult, and I always advise new editors to get some experience of how Wikipedia works before they try it. Wikipedia articles are not based on what you know (or I know, or any random person on the internet knows); and they aren't based on what the subject or people closely associated with the subject say about it: they are based, almost 100%, on what people who have no connection with the subject have chosen to publish about the subject. So writing an article starts with identifying reliably published sources wholly unconnected with the subject. Please have a look at your first article. --ColinFine (talk) 16:26, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Bscloutier I looked at the draft for Jnior, and while it is well written it is 95% original research. As ColinFine mentions above, we do not publish what we know. Rather, we publish a kind of summary of what we have found in reliable sources. I looked for reliable sources for Jnior, but could not find enough to establish notability. My opinion is that it is not notable enough to be included on Wikipedia. If you can find five or six newspaper or magazine article that talk abotu it in depth, then it might be a different story.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 17:47, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

@ThatMontrealIP: There are no articles as there is no press. We don't even employ a salesman or someone for marketing. Yet, there are 15+ years of this item in over 55 countries in use in 1/3rd of all movie screens for example. That is not to mention all of the other places it shows up. All of this from a company of 4 or 5 people. It is both insignificant and critical at the same time. No one writes about it. They just use it and rely upon it. So the topic has to start someplace. There is some evidence of it but presenting those references would more appropriate in a sales piece. I hope that with this Draft:JNIOR article just to document that it exists and what it is. Especially since I am uncertain whether or not we will survive this pandemic. Bscloutier (talk) 18:48, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

@Bscloutier: in that case, since we rely on articles published in the news, magazines or books, the subject would not be notable. Sorry, but that is the way we have built this encyclopedia. Arduino is a good comparator here: since there are hundreds of published articles about it, we have an article for it. Finally, you also appear to have a strong conflict of interest. Anyone involved with the subject should not be writing articles about it. That is how we maintain the neutrality of the encyclopedia. Thanks.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 18:53, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Links!

I have edited a page with a new link. My link is black, not blue like the other links. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odonis_Odonis Reference #8 Can someone please tell me what I've done wrong? This is my 1st Wiki edit ever. Thank you OGSepterhed (talk) 17:20, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, OGSepterhed. As far as I can see, you have done nothing wrong, and the link is working, but you may be confusing two different kinds of link.

Where you see one or more words in blue, they are "Wikilinks" – that is, they are links to an article elsewhere in Wikipedia: this may be an article with the exact same title as the blue word(s), or the title may be something different (because of grammar or synonyms), but relevant.

What you have created, correctly, is a citation of a numbered reference linked to a site external to Wikipedia. The citation (in blue) appears as a superscript 8 in square brackets immediately after the full stop following the album name you wanted to link. If you click that blue "[8]", it will take you down to #8 in the References list at the bottom of the article. The text of that reference comprises an URL which you have linked, so that clicking on it takes you to the actual site you have used as the reference source.

Please note that I am not making a judgement as to whether or not that site – the page for the album on Bandcamp – is acceptable as a Wikipedia reference. I will leave that to editors more experienced in this field. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.197.27.39 (talk) 18:47, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by OGSepterhed (talk • contribs)

@OGSepterhed: Your browser displays a link in a different color when you have already visited the target page (whether you did it by clicking the link or in another way). The color for an external link should normally change from blue to purple. Maybe it looks black to you. Internal wikilinks change from blue to dark blue. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:22, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Newbie - How best to respond to comments?

I have responses to my first question. What is the accepted procedure for replying to those? The same for a comment appearing on my article? Clicking on the (talk) link associated with the comment's author does not take me to a consistent form or entry point for a response. If it does where does that response show up? I can edit to add a response but then am I responsible for my own date and time? Is there a wizard or something? Searching the help... seems just to get me further and further away from an answer. Bscloutier (talk) 17:27, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

@Bscloutier: the standard way to reply on a talk page is to make a post as you did above, but you would add an indenting colon ":". Click edit and you can see the wikicode for my reply. For the date and signature, you just need four tildes like this: ~~~~. A reply is the same as what you wrote above, but it is usually indented. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 17:43, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

@ThatMontrealIP: Thank you! This is helpful. Is there a shortcut for this {{reply-to:someone}} block? This is not as simple as an email reply. Another issue that I have is that my email comes in on a different system. My attempt at a reply there using the link in the email shows only that IP address. I need to login there but where do I go to change my password as I used the cryptic thing first offered to me? I don't let Chrome shuffle around my credentials. If I click on my username I just get an opportunity to create my page. Bscloutier (talk) 18:20, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Bscloutier, you can use {{Re}} as a shortcut. The software will still recognise it as {{reply-to}}. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 19:01, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Bscloutier, you might be intrested in the reply link script. The details are at User:Enterprisey/reply-link.

It can be installed by placing importScript( 'User:Enterprisey/reply-link.js' ); // Backlink: User:Enterprisey/reply-link.js on Special:MyPage/common.js.

It places a link to reply after every comment, and then handles indentation and formatting for you, so you just write in the content. ~~ Alex Noble/1-2/TRB 19:12, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

I second this as I also use it for replying to a lot of talk page discussions. Just be aware there are times where this script fails to submit your reply and that you may need to go into the actual editing window to post a reply. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 22:04, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Bscloutier, you can change your password without leaving Wikipedia. Pick "Preferences" at the top of any page when you are logged in and you'll see the option there. --ColinFine (talk) 19:13, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Question about referencing

I am writing an article about a scientist who has published many highly cited papers. He is among the pioneers in several disciplines, which is reflected in many citations to those papers. The reviewers are asking to prove his notability by references. My problem is that I do not know which references would prove it. What sort of references or links are appropriate to show that a subject has highly cited papers? From the other articles on Wikipedia I can see that links to Web of Science or Scopus are not provided. I inserted some references in which Matej Pavsic is cited, but the reviewers say that causal mentions are not sufficient. This is not the case with mentioning of Pavsic. Especially in a paper published last year by a famous physicist in Physical Review D extensively describes two papers by Pavsic, which are important and gaining more and more citations. In addition, his book The Landscape of Theoretical Physics has many citations, as well as the paper External Inversion, Internal Inversion and Reflection Invariance that has more than hundred pure citations. He is among the members of the International Advisory Board for the series of conferences on Clifford algebras, and is in the Standing Committee of IARD conference series. So again my question. I need a concrete example of referencing that show many citations. Terazij (talk) 17:30, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Terazij, although producing highly cited papers is a good guideline for the kind of people that would be considered notable, what we need in the article is coverage about the person; our article is about the person, not about the subject of the person's research, so the sources should be about the person.

Someone could have done lots of influential work, but if there isn't any information about them out there, there aren't any sources for us to base an article of, so we can't have an article. ~~ Alex Noble/1-2/TRB 19:09, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

I'm not very familiar with this area, Terazij, but it seems to me that your subject may satisfy section 1 of WP:NACADEMICS. It is up to you to demonstrate that he does, though. --ColinFine (talk) 19:16, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

At a simple level, it's not what he has written, but what people have written about him that conveys notability. David notMD (talk) 21:46, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Deletion proposal

An IP user with zero other contributions deleted my Proposed For Deletion tag on the “Little Dogs on the Prairie” article without providing a reason why it should be kept. Could I undo their edit or do I have to go through the formal deletion process? Dronebogus (talk)

Dronebogus: although users are strongly recommended to provide a reason when removing a prod tag, this is not a requirement. Unless the tag was removed by a banned or block evading user, the page is considered deproded, however poor (or non existent) the reasoning.

Hence, to progress with deletion, it should go to AFD.

~~ Alex Noble/1-2/TRB 19:05, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Article for filmmaker declined

Hi there,

I submitted a draft today for an article and filmmaker which was declined. I was wondering if you could give me some specific tips to make this article wiki-worthy?

This is the feedback I received: This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia. USHistorian1867 (talk) 18:09, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

@USHistorian1867: Hello and welcome. I would say the advice in the feedback above is correct: include more reliable sources. For example, the early life section on Draft:Jordan Shanks has no references. What we look for is in-depth coverage of the subject in independent publications. More of those is what is needed. Trivial coverage (event announcements, name checks etc) do not help with determining if a subject is notable enough to have an article.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 18:43, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swaraj_Abhiyan

Swaraj Abhiyan is not a political party and is not synonymous with Swaraj India, which is a registered political party in India. Swaraj Abhiyan is a socio political forum for social work (like an NGO) and a sister organisation of Swaraj India. Now Swaraj India redirects to Swaraj Abhiyan. I thought Swaraj India has grown significantly in the past few years and deserves its own page. Can a draft for Swaraj India be created? Davidindia (talk) 18:23, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

@Davidindia: welcome to Wikipedia and thanks for wanting to make it better. For suggestions on existing articles, start a discussion on that article's talk page. To start a draft of a new article, follow the guidance at WP:YFA and there is a wizard there to help you create your draft for review. RudolfRed (talk) 18:26, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

A vandal undid my editing twice and pretend to forbid me to correct his errors - French schooner Belle Poule

Moved to Talk:French schooner Belle Poule

User "Llammakey" stated in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_schooner_Belle_Poule that "The vessel was constructed in 1932 as a replica of a cod fishing vessel used off Iceland for the French merchant marine school". It is obviously wrong. This boat was ordered for the french naval school ("Ecole Navale") and not for the merchant marine school.I corrected this twice and this guy nndid my edition twice. This kind of vandalizing is unacceptable. I asked him to restore my text.

cf https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Llammakey

There is an official description of this boat on french navy official website at:

they clearly state (in french) that "L'Étoile à été mise en service le 20 novembre 1932 et la Belle-Poule le 20 juillet 1932". Which means in english that Belle-Poule was commissioned into the French Navy (Ecole Navale) the day it was delivered that is the 20th of July 1932. No way it could have been ever commissioned by french merchant navy.

Plus, this boat is somewhat different from french fishing schooners, its hull lines are much narrower and designed for higher speed. It could be qualified as a sail training vessel inspired by XIXth century Dunkerque's sailing schooner which mostly operated off Newfoudland and not off Island.

I know this boat for ages having first visited it #45 years ago. My grand-grand-father also knew this boat quite well in the 30' 78.194.143.124 (talk) 18:40, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello and welcome! I am pretty sure that Llammakey, with over 80,000 edits to their credit, is not a vandal. If you are having a dispute about content (which needs to be verifiable through published sources, by the way), post a message about it on the talk page of the article.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 18:47, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Ah, the English language, ever a fickle creature. 78.194.143.124, the prepositional phrase for the merchant marine school modifies the noun phrase a cod fishing vessel, not The vessel [Belle Poule]. The article text does not contradict the official information from the French Navy. Stay well, Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 21:17, 9 April 2020 (UTC) and reworded 21:28, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

I agree with Rotideypoc41352. However, the sentence could be more clear that the Belle was not constructed for the merchant marine school if the words "that was" are added after the word "vessel." David notMD (talk) 21:55, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

No, Rotideypoc41352 is wrong, whatever the prepositional phrase for the merchant marine school modifies, he is plain wrong, this schooner was not built for the french merchant navy school and is obviously not "a replica of a cod fishing vessel used off Iceland by the French merchant marine school". Because 1) no cod fishing vessel where ever built for the French merchant marine school, and, 2) The Belle-Poule is not a replica of of a cod fishing vessel used off Iceland. It is a very much altered and reinterpreted adaptation of fishing schooners used off Newfoudland, with much sleeker water-lines. So this text is rubbish and "Llammakey" and "Rotideypoc41352" don't know what they are talking about.

Plus "Llammakey" undid my editing twice without asking anything, insulted me, treating me of "vandal", and menaced me of forbidding me access to Wikipedia editing if I persisted to correct his errors, and nobody seems to have read my comments on the talk page of the article. I am shocked by his incorrect behavior and by his refusal to let people who know something about boat correct his mistakes.

Hello IP editor. The proper place to discuss this routine content dispute is Talk:French schooner Belle Poule, where no one has commented since 2011. You have not posted there. Calling a good faith editor a "vandal" is unacceptable behavior on your part, and calling their efforts "rubbish" is not a very good first step in reaching consensus for whatever changes that the article needs. Please try a more collaborative attitude. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:01, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

I first commented my addition to this article with this text : " l'Etoile and la Belle Poule were built in 1932 for the French Navy (Ecole Navale..) at the request off Admiral Durand-Viel then chief of staff, who attended Ecole Navale in 1892 and had been part of the last round-the-world cruise of sail-frigate "Iphigénie" (in "View History"), then "Llammakey" undid all my work saying I had "Vandalized his article", after that, I corrected once more his error about who had this boat built in 1932, with following comments ("View History") " are just plainly wrong l'Etoile and la Belle Poule were built in 1932 for the French Navy and not for the merchant marine. Please stop vandalizing my text because of german errors or propaganda. Plus they are not copy of fishing shooners, hull line are much finer. They ware inspired by Dunkerque's fishing schooner of 1850'. Naval architect was probably the same as for french battleship Dunkerque (1935)" and "Llammakey" answered ''"Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at French schooner Belle Poule, you may be blocked from editing. Llammakey (talk) 13:00, 8 April 2020 (UTC). I have every reason to consider that I am a the good faith editor who has been treated of "vandal" by "Llammakey, and that, for reason I can not understand he just refuses to have his error corrected whatever my arguments which he refused to discuss before undoing my work twice and forbidding me to persist in correcting this.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.194.143.124 (talk) 23:19, 09 April 2020 (UTC)

Again, IP editor, please discuss the content dispute at Talk:French schooner Belle Poule, rather than trying to debate the details in edit summaries or here at the Teahouse. Thank you. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:28, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

I responded to the IP's comments on the Belle Poule page. Just to summarize, most of what they claim as fact is not backed up by the sources. Llammakey (talk) 00:02, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

References

Linking to Commons photo without displaying photo

I'm working on some improvements to our article on Pillar Point Harbor. I uploaded a photo on Commons of a plaque in the harbor commemorating a local shipwreck. The photo itself is not great, with the text impossible to read in a thumbnail and difficult to puzzle out even at full size. So I don't really want to put the photo in the article, but the text itself (which is transcribed in the description of the Commons file) is of some interest. Would it be appropriate to put a link to the Commons file in the External Links section of the article? Or is there a better way to handle this? CodeTalker (talk) 21:36, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, CodeTalker, and welcome to the Teahouse. I think that adding the image as a thumbnail would still be the way to go, in this instance. When you add it as a thumbnail, interested readers that click on the image to try to get a better view of the text would see your description from Commons and would be able to read the text on the plaque from that. OhKayeSierra (talk) 22:01, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

“ ANCHOR OF THE RYDAL HALL
On the night of October 17, 1876, the square-rigger Rydal Hall ... ”

@CodeTalker: I would use {{Rquote |1=right |2=ANCHOR OF THE RYDAL HALL<br /> On the night of ...<ref>(cite for the source of the text)</ref>}}, producing the quote box at the right. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 23:04, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

References

Thanks AlanM1, I think that works well for this case. It displays the text readably in a sidebar and has a link to the photo for those who want to see it. CodeTalker (talk) 22:45, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Gadget/tool for developing talk pages of newly created pages?

Curious if there's some kind of gadget or tool for easily developing talk pages of new pages. I've created a couple dozen pages so such a tool, if there is one, could definitely help me out. Thanks. Loksmythe (talk) 22:35, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Loksmythe, The tool I recommend is WP:RATER, which allows you to easily create talk pages and sort a page into WikiProjects and rate them. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 22:51, 9 April 2020 (U

Ditto on that advice. In my browser I have to reload the page after rater is run in order to see the work it has done.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 22:55, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

This is great! Thank you for the recommendation CaptainEek and the affirmation ThatMontrealIP! Loksmythe (talk) 23:08, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Pro tip: you can also revisit a page a few months or years later, and it will update the ORES rating (stub, start etc) when you run it.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 23:13, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Ooooooo, very cool! Good to know, thanks! Loksmythe (talk) 23:14, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Can i ping a non user?

can i ping a non user? --Disoff (talk) 01:13, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Disoff, If you mean can you ping anonymous IP users? No you cannot, but you can still leave them talk page notices and they do get notified about those. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 01:27, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

CaptainEek yea thats what i mean, thxs!--Disoff (talk) 01:32, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

what is the right way to fix "Warning: Page using Template:Authority control with "XXXXX", please move this to Wikidata if possible (this message is shown only in preview)."

issue is on Julie Cairney. it contains code {{Authority control|ORCID=0000-0003-4564-2675}} . i have added url on https://m.wikidata.org/wiki/Q49882552, however the issue still persists. Leela52452 (talk) 01:48, 10 April 2020 (UTC) suggestion or critique is preferred here

How to cite/include tribal knowledge

How do you cite something that is more less tribal knowledge, such a common nickname or do you just not include it? I wanted to include the nickname of the airplane the RQ-170 Sentinel which I know from working in the defense and aeorspace industry. But this isn't something I feel like I can give a reliable online source because what comes up is www.militaryfactory.com and medium.com

I've found before that the best parts of wikipedia are when they mention connections to other ideas that may not be "offcial" but to a layperson or someone not familiar in the area, it makes the mental connection. Therefore I'd like to properly include some of this type of information. Estatic707 (talk) 01:49, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Estatic707. Acceptable Wikipedia articles summarize what published reliable sources have to say about the topic. So, the only way to include "lore" in the encyclopedia is if a reliable source describes that lore. Please read Wikipedia's core content policy Verifiability which is very relevant to your question. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:01, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

If you means "Wraith" then that name appears in the website you mentioned above (militaryfactory), so that can be the reference. David notMD (talk) 12:53, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Comic Book Lists

I recently posted a question in the teahouse about comic books which is archived on my talk page - Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1054#Comic Books Someone responded that you could not make a list of a publishers publications regarding comic books.

but here: List of Timely and Atlas Comics publications I found a list of these publications.

My original goal was to make a list of all the comic books published by several different publishers and add them to wikipedia, because organized lists can often be helpful to those who read and collect comics.

Is that answer still valid or is there something different about this list that makes it different than what I am trying to achieve?

A response would be helpful. Thanks. Svrangerchrista (talk) 03:06, 10 April 2020 (UTC) Svrangerchrista (talk) 03:06, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Svrangerchrista. That list article you linked to above is a really poor quality article because it is referenced to websites that sell old comic books to collectors. Such sales sites are not considered reliable independent sources for Wikipedia since they profit from those sales, and Wikipedia should not be driving traffic to sales sites. List articles should be based on the same quality of reliable sourcing as any other article and Wikipedia is not a collector's sales catalog. We now have well over six million articles and at least a million or more of them have serious problems like this one does. We do not need to create more poor quality articles like that one. Instead, new articles should comply with our policies and guidelines. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:56, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

How do you make a wikipedia template?

Aaron Justin Giebel (talk) 06:19, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

@Aaron Justin Giebel: Welcome to the Teahouse. The help page is over at Help:Template. Generally templates are created in the Template space, but if it's for personal use, you can do so in your own userspace. Consider my template {{User:Tenryuu/GOCE talk}} as an example. If you're looking for ideas as to how to use templates, search for templates that fit what you want, take a look at the code, copy it over, and experiment with it. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 06:53, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Pranjal Bhatt

Disregard

 – OP blocked for legal threats. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 15:05, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

dear sir, these are all valid , i am doing on pranjal bhat behalf and please dont interfere and remove all your work done on her, it is serious issue . you have no right of her profile and photos and wikipedia. you cannot change our profile , if you do it again we will take police action regards sumeet Suprach (talk) 07:29, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

@Suprach: A Wikipedia article is not a profile, and it does not belong to the subject of the article. However, much more serious than that is the fact that you seem to be making a legal threat here. You must retract that before you make any other edits to any Wikipedia page (I will post about this to your user talk page as well). --bonadea contributions talk 07:37, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

give me your mobile no - need to know more about editing Suprach (talk) 07:49, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Of course not. You could have asked any questions you had about editing here, but since you ignored the note above and on your user talk page, your legal threat has been reported. --bonadea contributions talk 08:01, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

User Suprach has now been blocked for legal threats. This thread should be closed.Cedix (talk) 08:50, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

My article it has been declined

my article it has been declined, i don't know why and am just new in here, i need your help. Moses rukanima (talk) 08:46, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Moses rukanima, I think the advice of the reviewer was quite clear: Websites that are associated with Mohameds' company (that is, websites written by people working for/paid by Silent Ocean) and social media websites aren't reliable information because they're primary sources. Instagram and YouTube are user-generated websites, so they aren't reliable, either. What part of that is not clear to you? Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 09:27, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

i real appreciate for your help. sorry can you help me to edit it if possible. thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Moses rukanima (talk • contribs) 09:43, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Volunteer editors here at Teahouse provide advice. If they so choose, they may provide help, but that is outside the function of Teahouse. David notMD (talk) 10:44, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Editing the text published on List of countries by food energy intake - Wikipedia

Dominique.Habimana (talk) 09:16, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Dear Sir/Madam,

I am Dominique Habimana, a statistician at FAO based in Rome.

We appreciate the publication of information and data on food energy intake that we produce. Thank you for that. However, we would like to request you if there is a possibility for us to support the editing and revising the numbers and text related to this page so that we provide the more updated information as a team in charge of producing such data.

In summary we need to know how we can edit the text and figures published on this page. Thank you. Dominique

Briefly, individuals (not teams) may edit existing Wikipedia articles as long as quality references are added. The information in the list List of countries by food energy intake is from a 2009 FAO document that tabulated data from 2003-2005, so newer information would be welcomed as long as it is referenced. As to how-to, clicking on Edit on the top menu opens the document for editing. A new number would need to replace the old number for each country. Once done, click on the blue-boxed Publish changes at the bottom. A replacement reference is required. This can be a published FAO report. It cannot be unpublished information known to FAO. OK to leave a question on my Talk page if this is unclear. David notMD (talk) 10:45, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Dr. Ajeet Jaiswal, Anthropologist

Draft:Dr. Ajeet Jaiswal, Anthropologist. I want to publish this information related to Dr. Ajeet Jaiswal, but i am not getting approval from your side. Please let me know the reseaon. I have checked all info there is no copy write issue is detected. 2007.sapna (talk) 10:24, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

@2007.sapna: Don't paste his CV here. Even if you have permission, that's just not how we create articles here.

Articles are a summary of independent professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources that are specifically about the subject but not dependent upon, affiliated with, nor connected to it.

Here is a guide on how to write articles that will not be rejected or deleted. Ian.thomson (talk) 10:28, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

@David.moreno72: pinging the user who had reviewed your Articles for Creation submission. — MarkH₂₁^talk 10:30, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Kindly go thru it again, I have not pasted his CV here. I typed all important information related to his career and his teaching specialization. Please check it again. Thanking you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2007.sapna (talk • contribs) 10:33, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

@2007.sapna: Kindly read my last response again (and actually look at the guide I gave you) and you'll see why the review is going to fail -- you don't have any source. Ian.thomson (talk) 10:43, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

@2007.sapna: See Franz Boas and Jane Goodall for examples of fully-developed articles on anthropologists. You should consider developing your article at Draft:Ajeet Jaiswal (no "Dr." prefix or suffix per MOS:TITLE), not your talk page, which is like an "inbox", designed primarily for other editors to communicate with you. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 13:47, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

I copied what was on your Talk page to the draft space Draft:Ajeet Jaiswal created by AlanM1. Continue editing there. Per what Ian.thomson wrote: references are required. After the draft is improved, ask here how to submit it for review. David notMD (talk) 17:47, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

How do I create a new article page on Wikipedia?

I am a new contributor to Wikipedia and I would like to create a new article. How do I do this? MrJCasey (talk) 11:19, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

MrJCasey Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Be advised that successfully creating a new article is the absolute hardest task to perform on Wikipedia. It takes much time and practice. New users are much more successful when they first learn how Wikipedia works by editing existing articles in areas that interest them, to get a feel for how Wikipedia operates and what is expected of article content. You should also read Your First Article and use the new user tutorial to learn more about Wikipedia.

I see that you have attempted to declare a conflict of interest on your user page- it's even harder for users with a COI to edit or create articles. If you have a conflict of interest with what you wish to write about, you definitely should use Articles for Creation to create a draft. You also should not directly edit any existing article related to your COI, instead you may make formal edit requests on the article talk page. 331dot (talk) 11:28, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Wanted to know the status article.

I created an article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohan_Shakti_National_Heritage_Park but unable to know, what's the status with few queries like : Do I need to verify it from someone for getting Grading scheme ? Thankyou Pankajkukreti03 (talk) 11:32, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello Pankajkukreti03, welcome to the Teahouse. I have rated it as one of our shortest/most incomplete article types (a Stub) and have added it to WikiProject India. There might be other relevant Projects it could be added to, but it's not a field I am familiar with. I would make the following suggestions for you to improve the article, please:

• Consider adding approrpiate categories to the article.
• Add an infobox with cooordinates so it can be located on a map
• Remove the excess number of images and add a template to Wikimedia Commons to show that further images can be found there.
• Add wikilinks to other articles (like Solan and Atal Bihari Vajpayee), ensuring you clarify where in the world this site is. I assume it's India, but you didn't explicitly state that! Remember that we have readers from all round the world who will not be intimately familiar with such places.
• Please don't use Wikipedia as a source - wikilink to a topic instead, please.
• Consider what the top notices states and try to address those issues.

Hoping this feedback is of help. regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 14:33, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Nick Moyes I made changes as you suggested, Please let me know if there are improvements left & do I still need to verify it from someone ?

Quick question

Hi all dos anyone know of somewhere or someone who I could go to to request the creation of football kit patterns? on the subject is there a way for me to create some patterns myself that is simple and easy and dos not cost the earth like photoshop thanks! REDMAN 2019 (talk) 12:36, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

@REDMAN 2019: I don't think any of that is really what the encyclopedia is for. Ian.thomson (talk) 13:08, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

@Ian.thomson: What about season articles? example. REDMAN 2019 (talk) 13:10, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

@REDMAN 2019: Ah, if you mean for adding them to articles, those aren't actually picture files but text inputs. If you edit the source, you'll see code in the infobox like pattern_b1 = _chelsea9394h | pattern_la1 = _drkredhoop | pattern_ra1 = _drkredhoop | pattern_so1 = _chelsea9394h and so on. The best thing to do with that would be to experiment at the sandbox. Ian.thomson (talk) 13:16, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Section edit links disabled

Edit links are disabled in all articles I have tried to edit. Only the edit link on top of the page is active but with it, I can only edit first section Ugbedeg (talk) 12:52, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi Ugbedeg, welcome to the Teahouse. The pencil icon for mobile section edits is currently invisible for some mobile users (reported at phab:T249864). It still works if you can hit the right spot. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:44, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

It works, though difficult and time wasting to locate. Thanks. Ugbedeg (talk) 14:00, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Need help on the page - Gary Vaynerchuk

Hi,

I am a paid editor and had suggested clean-up edits on the talk page (along with paid disclosure) of Gary Vaynerchuk to deal with the COI tag on the page. Since the page is too long, I had broken down the requested edits section-wise. I had also shared the explanation of each change along with the requested edits, but I was asked to 'Please work in smaller requests, and explain why you want the changes.' I had already done that.

There is no addition of information, just toning down the current text working inline with WP:CLEANUP but my requested edits were misjudged as an attempt to whitewash the article. I request help or cooperation of the editors to understand the underlying issue and deal with the COI tag on the page. Thanks a lot! FamJoshua1 (talk) 17:00, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

I don't see a COI tag on the page? REDMAN 2019 (talk) 17:23, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

I copied the PAID tag to your User page and removed the COI tag from the Vaynerchuk article. Given your paid status, you properly proposed specific from-to changes on the Talk page. The reply was that you had put everything into one large, multi-part request. I suggest you create a series of requests, each limited to one section of the article. This may induce an editor(s) to review each request. David notMD (talk) 17:25, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Is this a reliable source?

Would East-West Digital News be considered a reliable source to use on articles?  ArchonBoi—(Talk) 17:36, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, IP user. The place to ask about reliability of sources is WP:RSN. Searching the archives, that source doesn't seem to have been discussed before, so I suggest you post a query there. --ColinFine (talk) 18:58, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, should have pinged ArchonBoi. --ColinFine (talk) 19:01, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Colin, I wanted to say thanks as this is a question i also had. appreciate you sharing your brain.ToeFungii (talk) 04:14, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Rishabh Jain

Header inserted by ColinFine (talk) 18:58, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

I am Rishabh jain I am a Indian actor I want to edit my own page so what is the best way to do it? 122.161.66.229 (talk) 18:15, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

As an addendum to ColinFine, you may edit an article about yourself if there is obvious vandalism on it or make edit requests with reliable sources on your article's talk page. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 21:05, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi

Hello, Rishabh. I guess you are not the same person as Rishab Jain the inventor. I'm afraid that the answer to your question "What is the best way to do it", is to go to some site that allows self-promotion. (see WP:OUT): Wikipedia doesn't allow promotion of any kind.

If at some point Wikipedia has an article about you, it will not be your page, it will not have your text on it, but will be based on what people unconnected with you have published about you; and you will not be allowed to edit it directly. See autobiography for more information about why you shouldn't do this. --ColinFine (talk) 19:06, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

What do you mean by your own page? Do you mean your userpage (if you have an account) or a real Wikipedia article or the page you had created (with your account)? Wynn Liaw (talk) 15:25, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Can a stub-article contain only the lyrics of a song?

I just found this article and I think it doesn't meet the wikipedia notability. sorry if I should have found this myself but I was overwhelmed by all of the pages and couldn't find what i was looking for so even a link to the description would be greate. Erfan Talk☻ 18:44, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

In general no, but this is something of a special case. This song is written by Stephen Foster, who pretty much invented what we now consider traditional American music (think of anything you consider a traditional American song and chances are it was written by him), and as such the exact nature of his lyrics is of more interest than would usually be the case. We generally delete stubs that don't actually say anything about their article subject, but in this case we can say with certainty that there's going to be more to say about this song (Foster is one of the most written-about musicians on the 19th century) and that it just hasn't been expanded yet. ‑ Iridescent 18:50, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

thanks for the help Erfan Talk☻ 18:54, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Et0z. We cannot include full song lyrics for the large majority of songs published since 1925, because they are copyrighted. This restriction obviously does not apply to this and similar songs published long ago, but even then, including independent commentary by reliable sources about the song is more important than adding the complete lyrics. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:08, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

• (Pinging Et0zl) —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 12:58, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for your reply. where can i find a list of these reliable sources that used for this type of article? should i just look at the reference section of the article or does it have a special place? — Erfan Talk☻ 13:03, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Follow-up to 1968 Democratic National Convention

Bob, thank you for accepting my change to the 1968 Democratic National Convention! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 100.36.105.237 (talk) 18:52, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

(Pinging Bob305) —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 13:02, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

You're welcome 100.36.105.237, and thanks for the ping AlanM1! Bob305 (talk) 16:33, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Follow-up to COI

Hi. Regarding Michael Stokes (photographer), I would really like to resolve the issues of conflict of interest and incorrect citing of sources. I have stated -- though it's likely I did it in the wrong place -- that I do not know the subject personally. I did email him to ask if I could upload a photo from his website. He said yes, and I uploaded it, not realizing that this would create a copyright issue. The photo was removed (I understand why) but then the conflict of interest note appeared at the top of the page. I guess it was assumed that if I asked his permission to use the photo that I must know him. I do not. I have never met him. As for the incorrect citing of sources, I have tried a few times to fix this but I clearly don't know what I'm doing.

If someone can please tell me what I need to do to resolve these issues, I would appreciate it. I find this all a bit confusing, and I feel bad for messing up this person's page. Glendon wasey (talk) 19:09, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

It's not "this person's page," it's an article you created in 2015 and have edited on and off since then. If there are better sources, assume that in time someone else will add them and someone else will decide to remove the tags. David notMD (talk) 19:32, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia writer

I’m trying to write Wikipedia of a supermodel actress . How can I get her more information?? I have draft ready , anyone can see and tell me what correction needed ?? -- 202.134.174.127 (talk) 19:54, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. Do you mean you are trying to write a Wikipedia article? There are no other edits from your IP other than your comment here, what is your draft? If you created it under an account, remember to log in. 331dot (talk) 19:58, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Article was rejected. Where i can find concrete reasons?

Hello, i am posted first of it's kind Article and it was rejected.

"published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject." It's not a concrete reason.

• Draft:Heated_stick

Where i can find reasons? Because we are the source of unique and relevant information. I can't understand. Paulwingle (talk) 20:48, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Paulwingle Your submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article they don't show significant coverage about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Theroadislong (talk) 20:55, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Paulwingle Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. It actually is not accurate to say that Wikipedia("we") is "the source of unique and relevant information". Wikipedia is not for merely providing information. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia; as an encyclopedia, Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources with significant coverage state about article subjects that meet Wikipedia's special definition of notability. The sources you have provided don't seem to have significant coverage of the subject, just brief mentions. 331dot (talk) 20:57, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

@Paulwingle: You wrote It's not a concrete reason so I'm guessing that you missed that the blue links in the message on your talk page are links to the pages that describe the meaning of "published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject". Click on those blue links to read about those policies. This is a core principle of Wikipedia; it's how we determine whether a subject is "notable" and should have an article, or not. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 13:19, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Rejected drafts

Are rejected drafts allowed to be resubmitted? Is there a difference between rejected and declined? What is the procedure to applying suggested edits to a rejected draft? Pilot333 (talk) 22:24, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Pilot333 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I believe that "rejected" means that the reviewer feels that there is little chance the draft can be improved to meet the standards of an acceptable Wikipedia article. "Declined" means that while the draft is not currently acceptable, there is at least a chance that it could be made so. To resubmit a rejected draft, you would need to radically change it from its current state. If this is with regards to Draft:Renowned LA, you would need to summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to write about the brand. Interviews, press releases, and routine announcements are not acceptable for establishing notability as defined by Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 22:44, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

MORE (application)

Cleaning house in the Time of Coronavirus. Getting ready to discard original disks containing the program in question MORE (application). Took photo of each (2). Thought they's be a positive addition to the above-referenced entry. Have never edited Wikipedia. Will forward photos to anyone who can/will insert them (if that is possible). Regards. Stay healthy, y'all. WasTherein'84 (talk) 01:15, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

@WasTherein'84: This link will take you to a guide to uploading images. This link will take you to a guide on adding images to articles. Ian.thomson (talk) 01:31, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

@WasTherein'84: You also need to be autoconfirmed as it is copyrighted. Wynn Liaw (talk) 15:20, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Sita Jayawardana-Parakrama

Hi I am trying to upload two articles- one of which I have already placed for some months now on my Wikie sand box for vetting/ approval for upload on Wikie . It is about Sita Parakrama(nee Jayawardana) Actress, Journalist and founder Editor of the first Women"s Magazine In Ceylon(now Sri Lanka),possibly one of the first In Asia .She was one of the leading personalities in the arts in post-independence Sri Lanka. It is as far I know well cross referenced and I have a huge amount of other content and links if needed.. but I I'd like to first get approval that as is,. it is fit for uploading Pls tell me how.. I have been through Help and am still unsure of the process. I could give you a sandbox link if neededor copy it out here..pls advise.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SchezID/sandbox SchezID (talk) 02:55, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello SchezID, and welcome to Wikipedia! I made some changes to your draft, and moved it to Draft:Sita Jayawardana. If you hit the "Submit your draft for review" button, it will be added to the queue for review by an independent editor. Currently, there are a few issues I think need fixing. First of all, cross-referencing with other Wikipedia articles is not enough, and we can not use Wikipedia as footnotes/references, as Wikipedia is not a reliable source. Second, the draft is not written in neutral encyclopedic language; it's too promotional for a start. There are many extraordinary claims (such as:"Jayawardana’s modelling and fashion sense was far ahead of her time"), and quotes which require inline citations. I think the content needs some reorganising but that's not a dealbreaker. I suspect the subject is notable and deserves an article on Wikipedia, but I do not have access to the sources to be able to contribute efffectively. If you are OK with what I have tried to do so far, please say so, and I would be happy to copyedit the draft for neutrality and add more tags where your attention is required. You might also seek help from WP:WikiProject Sri Lanka if there are active editors working in the area. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 06:57, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

If a series show's plot is taken from a fandom site ....

If the plot for a tv show episodes is copied directly from fandom.com does that violate wiki's copyright policy? Thanks all and stay well.ToeFungii (talk) 03:29, 11 April 2020 (UTC) ToeFungii (talk) 03:29, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

I should add that I don't know which is the chicken and the egg. I assumed fandom's info was copied here, while it is entirely possible that it was on wiki first and put there. The site's terms of use has info regarding using the info and it appears it's ok. This is the link www.fandom.com/licensing ToeFungii (talk) 03:34, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

@ToeFungii: It's just easier to say "never copy and paste texts from other websites to this one." There are exceptions, such as quotations, but it's just easier to say paraphrase everything to the point where it's legally distinct.

That said, Fandom hasn't been around as long as we have, and our terms of use would allow Fandom users to post the content there with conditions probably similar to Fandoms. What is the article in question? If we had that info, other users could better investigate the matter.

(Also, FYI, "wiki" is just a software that this site and a bunch of unrelated sites use. This is Wikipedia, which can usually be shortened to WP.) Ian.thomson (talk) 04:58, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

@Ian.thomson:I didn't put any particular show because ive actually found several overlaps, so i apologize. this is the one that caught my eye because it refers to a basketball "match" when it obviously should be "game". oh, thanks for the wp; ive been using wiki to save typing and this is much better.

List_of_Austin_&_Ally_episodes#Season_2_(2012–13) look at s2.21 sports&brains. this is the dup i found: link ToeFungii (talk) 06:04, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

@ToeFungii: The Fandom article was created 20 April 2017. The Wikipedia article started with that description way back on 5 August 2015. Ian.thomson (talk) 06:11, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

WOW i didnt even see that they had logs. thanks. (as to how you figured out when it got put on wp im still trying to figure out how to truly understand page histories. it's very confusing to me trying to figure out and understand changes, but like falling off a log practice makes perfect. you're awesome. ToeFungii (talk) 06:27, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

ToeFungii, you may want to take a look at WP:BLAME. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:00, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Adding information for the USAF 2075th Comm Sq that was located in Korea

I have additional information that I would like to add to the USAF communications squadron listing of all the various squadrons. I notice that the 2075th comm sq is missing the emblem and other details that I can provide. I'm not familiar with Wikipedia updates and just wondering if I could provide the information for someone to actually do the inputs? Thank you. Danof 2075 (talk) 05:47, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

@Danof 2075: Most articles are unlocked, so you could try to make the edit yourself (maybe test it out at the sandbox first or even try the tutorial to get an idea of how to edit). Whether or not the article is locked, you could make an edit request on the article's talk page.

Whichever route you take, do note that new information must cite a reliable (published) source where possible. If you the squadron has an official website, or an entry on an official USAF website, those should be sufficient. Ian.thomson (talk) 06:15, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

How to report spam on a page

Have you see the Daisuke Kambe page and the Haru Kato page? People are spamming and deleting info and putting inappropriate things all over the page. How do you stop that? 2601:681:5300:AE80:D13A:5008:4D9E:1E95 (talk) 06:23, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. Thanks for letting us know that The Millionaire Detective Balance: Unlimited was being vandalized. I went ahead and reverted an edit that seems to have added factually incorrect information. The page seems to have stabilized now, but I'm going to take a second look at the page history to make sure I didn't miss anything. OhKayeSierra (talk) 06:35, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

I'm assuming you are referring to The Millionaire Detective Balance: Unlimited. The page could be semi-protected to prevent IPs from editing, but I don't think it's reached that level yet. It seems an issue being edit-warred over is how to anglicise Daisuke's family name; I have addressed that issue in the article's talk page. Anyone else able to weigh in on if the page warrants protection? Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 06:42, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

what if 9 out of 10 reference url are permanent dead ?

usually we mark a link as permanent dead. what should i do if almost of them are permanent dead ? Leela52452 (talk) 06:31, 11 April 2020 (UTC) suggestion or critique is preferred here

Hello, Leela52452, and welcome to the Teahouse. In this instance, I would recommend using User:InternetArchiveBot, which has the ability to automatically rescue dead links and replace them with links to their pages on the Wayback Machine. Simply go to this page and login with your Wikipedia login to get started. OhKayeSierra (talk) 06:43, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Adding multiple URLs to news networks.

There are news websites which encompass a few other sites. For example, Nine.com.au is actually a network of sites, which includes two subdomains (wwos.nine.com.au, 9honey.nine.com.au) and a different domain name (9news.com.au). The main domain is (nine.com.au).

Currently, it's Wikipedia page only lists nine.com.au under the field "URL" in the sidebar. What is the correct way of linking it's children sites in the sidebar (wwos.nine.com.au, 9honey.nine.com.au, 9news.com.au)? I'm looking to scrape a list of URLs of news sites from Wikipedia for an internet filter, but it seems that some subdomains and affiliated domains are not listed on Wikipedia, so they will be missed. Examples of other Wiki pages that links multiple URLs are welcome. Thank you. Aaronshenhao (talk) 06:41, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

I found an example of a Wiki page with multiple URL's: Sina_Corp. I've noticed that some pages use the field "website" instead of "url" (most common) in the infobox. This actually renders differently in the HTML code. With the latter, it is properly classed as "url" in the HTML code and is easier to parse. Aaronshenhao (talk) 11:32, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

@Aaronshenhao: Practice is supposed to be to not list sibling- or sub-domains. Just a representative main site is sufficient. Wikipedia shouldn't be a link farm that has to keep track of the structure of its article subjects' websites; we've got enough of that work already in dealing with link rot in citations. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 16:16, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

@AlanM1: Thanks a lot for the info. Do you know where I could read more on the accepted conventions? This does make web scraping harder though :P Aaronshenhao (talk) 16:20, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

@AlanM1: If it helps, I've also programmatically visited all Wiki pages under the category "News websites" and placed all the pages with multiple URLs as a list in a text file. The list will be available here for 1 year: https://textuploader.com/1l5aa It's a draft only, so there may be mistakes. I've also done it for websites in other categories, but it is not available yet. Aaronshenhao (talk) 10:10, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Non-contemporary depictions

I noticed that the image was removed from the infobox of several popes (e.g. Pope Gregory VI, Pope Benedict VIII, Pope Benedict IX, Pope Clement II) with the comment "removing a fanciful and misleading depiction". It is not explained why the image is fanciful or misleading, except perhaps that it is not a contemporary image. I don't necessarily put into question the removal of these images, but it's very easy to think "oh, there's an image missing here, let's link one I found on another page", inadvertently undoing the removal which may be lost in the history of the page.

Is there a guideline that requests the removal of non-contemporary depictions ? How does one tell if an image is fanciful (when it's not overly obvious) ? (I might as well start removing several images of Christ for that reason) Kwakeroni (talk) 08:17, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

If we're using an image that we know is unlikely to be accurate, it at minimum ought to have an accompanying caption to say where it's come from, so readers and reusers can assess it (see Harold Harefoot for example). The images on Jesus aren't a fair comparison; they're all very carefully labelled to explain where they came from and which tradition they represent and the article has an entire section dedicated to explaining this, which in turn links to the more detailed Depiction of Jesus which explains how and why the depictions vary. In general, for western portraiture any image earlier than the 1830s that isn't contemporary or derived from a contemporary original is unlikely to have much relation to reality, and contemporary images earlier than the 1830s are likely to be idealised either to make the subject appear good or bad, depending on the opinions of the artist and whoever commissioned the work. (The significance of 1830 is that it marks the point when portrait photography became mainstream, and artists began to paint their subjects as they actually appeared rather than as they wanted to appear.) The images of the popes may well be appropriate for their articles, but they need some kind of disclaimer to prevent readers and reusers thinking that they're going to be accurate representations. ‑ Iridescent 09:06, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Yes. Take Pope Benedict VIII as an example. I can't find any when/by who info on the image, but my guess is that it was made about 1000 years after he lived, and it's not exactly Michelangelo. It is not unreasonable to question if such an image adds anything of value to the article. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:50, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, Iridescent, for the clear explanation. This gives a good guideline to go by. -- Kwakeroni (talk) 08:37, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Obscure 19th-century depictions not found in modern academic biographies or reference works, and other depictions not commonly associated with the subject in such literature, should not be included in Wikipedia articles. Such illustrations fail WP:IMAGERELEVANCE, which says that images must be "significant", of "encyclopedic nature", and "not primarily decorative". Surtsicna (talk) 13:26, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

I see your point. But it's not always clear when a work is considered obscure, or not of encyclopedic nature. A work like "The Lives and Times of the Popes" when published by "The Catholic Publication Society of America" may seem very legitimate, even when published over a century ago. Well, continuous improvement is a never-ending task, I suppose. -- Kwakeroni (talk) 08:37, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

An image used in oreliable reference works should be acceptable, even in cases where the depiction might be largely imaginary. In most of these cases, there is one or a few images that are the conventional ones used in writing about the person, of placing their figure in a historical picture of similar context. The reader is helped by knowing what the figures are likely to be used to represent. An example is medieval monarchs, where there are normally nothing more than conventional images on a tomb, or seal, or coin. This is the way they are known and recognized, and it is valid information for the reader (obviously the caption should indicate the source, so no naïve reader will think it's a true portrait in the modern photographic sense) DGG ( talk ) 18:12, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

WP:NOTBIBLIOGRAPHY

Some time ago, I noticed articles like Bibliography of Bhutan and Bibliography of Canada and was interested in updating them. But then I remembered the guideline WP:NOTCAT, and that seemingly includes bibliographies. I don't want to waste my time on articles that might someday be deleted so my question is, is there any chance that articles like Bibliography of Canada will be deleted under WP:NOTCAT? TryKid (talk) 09:19, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the teahouse User:TryKid. They will not be deleted..(some real old). as compiling bibliographies for research is a major activity of historians and scholars here on Wikipedia Wikipedia:List of bibliographies. Join us at Wikipedia:WikiProject Bibliographies.--Moxy 🍁 14:09, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Create a page for me

I'm hoping someone can help me. Looking for someone to create an author page for me (who knew you could do that? I only just discovered it). The learning curve is a bit steep for me at the moment as I'm on chemotherapy which causes brain-fuzzies, plus lack of sleep and I still have to work full time. If anyone knows a reliable and experienced editor, I'd be happy to give over reasonable payment (if I can afford it) if they could create a page for me. Please contact me through FB (Aiki Flinthart) AikiFlinthart (talk) 10:19, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi @AikiFlinthart: and welcome to the Teahouse. Unfortunately you seem to have been misinformed. Wikipedia does not have "author pages", but articles about topics (including people) who are notable according to Wikipedia's definition of notability. An article about a person does not belong to that person, and if there was an article about you, you would not have any particular influence about its contents. Wikipedia editors are volunteers, and anyone editing for pay has to follow the policy for paid editors, which among other things means that they should not edit articles directly but just make suggestions for edits. This text explains why an article about yourself is not necessarily a positive thing. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 10:28, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

(By the way, the above is not to be interpreted as a reflection on your authorship. I don't know whether you do meet Wikipedia's notability criteria, and if you don't, well, many of the authors I read and enjoy don't, while quite a lot of authors I wouldn't touch with a ten-foot pole do. Wikipedia notability is not connected to that, nor to literary quality, at all.) --bonadea contributions talk 10:40, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello AikiFlinthart. You can see WP:s "rule" for "Should WP have an article about you" at WP:GNG, WP:BASIC and WP:NAUTHOR. Per this googlesearch [1] I don't think an article about you can be written at this time, but of course google does not know everything. Also, Wikipedians generally prefer to discuss WP-stuff on WP. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:39, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

A question

why my page has not published yet -- Skylark Sportz (talk) 11:11, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

• 1. your content at User:Skylark Sportz/sandbox has been Rejected (more severe than Declined) and nominated for Speedy deletion, meaning that very soon an Administrator will delete it.
• 2. your User name is the company name. This will result in you being blocked from any editing until you change your User name. David notMD (talk) 11:20, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

How to upload files

How to upload image file like this? => ( File:Twitter icon.svg ). Where i can upload my images? Zebuready (talk) 13:36, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

You need to be autoconfirmed (your account must be four days old and you must make 10 edits) in order to upload image files like the one above. You also can upload images on Wikimedia Commons if the image you want to upload is not copyrighted. Wynn Liaw (talk) 14:58, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

@Wynn Liaw: thanks for the valuable information, Can you tell me what is the requirement for extended confirmed user? Zebuready (talk) 16:02, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Zebuready, extended confirmed isn't needed for images, but is 500 edits over 30 days. There are very few uses for extended confirmed though, mainly very controversial articles where editors can't behave. ~~ Alex Noble/1-2/TRB 16:45, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Carlo Masi

I wrote a biography of Carlo Masi (Ruggero Freddi) basing mostly on a biography written by Strega Prize winner Walter Siti, who is one of the most important Italian writers alive. This biography is a book published by Rizzoli Libri one of the most important Italian publishers. Apart from the book I used as a source Corriere della Sera, la Repubblica, La Stampa and Il Giornale which are the most important Italian national news papers, very reliable and authoritative (here you can find a list of the most important Italian daily news papers and you can check they are respectively in 1st, 2nd, 5th, and 10th position). Moreover I used Attitude (magazine), Times Higher Education, Gay Star News, Vanity Fair (magazines) (here it says it is reliable for wikipedia) and Vice (magazine)(here it says that its reliability is not consensus ) but mostly in the "media attention" part. I also used for some details about his porn career Xbiz (here it says it is reliable for wikipedia). Finally, I gave the link to the segment of the tv show where he asked his partner to marry him. Every single article I cite here is entirely on Carlo Masi (Ruggero Freddi) apart from the review of theater show he did, but even there his name is in bold and he is the main character.

I don't know if this makes any difference but his biography is present in the Spanish (https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlo_Masi) , Italian (https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlo_Masi), Polish (https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlo_Masi), French(https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlo_Masi) and Korean (https://ko.wikipedia.org/wiki/%EC%B9%B4%EB%A5%BC%EB%A1%9C_%EB%A7%88%EC%8B%9C) wikipedia (I didn't use any of them as source).

As a porn star he was one of the most important and he was definitely the most important at Colt Studio Group, the company he worked for, in fact he is the only one ever named "emeritus" and he is the cover man of the 40th anniversary celebrative book of the company. Apart from the porn career his theater debut rose a lot of attention among critics and media. Moreover, media from all around the world have spoken about him when he become a professor for one of the most prestigious university in Italy, Sapienza University of Rome.

He is not notable as a professor but he is definitely notable as a porn actor and even more notable as a composition of porn actor-professor as the unique ever known case in the world.

If there is a problem with one or more specific sources please tell me which one and I will replace it or delete the specific information. Can you please tell me how come I got a "is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia" message and a STOP? a problem with one or two sources or with a specific part of the bio can not be cause of rejection.

--AlejandroLeloirRey (talk) 13:44, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello: @AlejandroLeloirRey:, someone will answer you shortly. In the meantime, please stop posting the same request al over Wikipedia. This post is the fourth time you have posted the same thing on different talk pages today.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 15:08, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

@ThatMontrealIP: i apology, I thought they were different and separated thing where to gather information. i didn't mean to be inpolite. i am sorry. should i delete those posts? --AlejandroLeloirRey (talk) 15:30, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Chinu Kala Article Discussion

I am here to raise an issue about Draft:Chinu Kala recently draftified by User:billinghurst I had already disclosed on my userpage that I've been paid for this; requesting that the article be moved to mainspace . I promise that I will not take payments in future . Regards Albertkerl (talk) 14:44, 11 April 2020 (UTC) Albertkerl (talk) 14:44, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

What issue are you raising? If something is in draft: namespace, then please put it through the drafts process. Have a look at Wikipedia:Articles for creation — billinghurst sDrewth 14:54, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

The draft has not yet been submitted to Articles for Creation. That is the proper pathway rather than a direct move to mainspace. P.S. Paid work is allowed as long as declared. David notMD (talk) 16:05, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello billinghurst , I have submitted it for Afc submission and I had disclosed paid edit at very ealry stage please re-review Albertkerl (talk) 09:23, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Albertkerl, I'm also keeping an eye on the draft. Hoping that it is moved back to mainspace as indicated by David notMD. The case of suck puppetry raised by dear billinghurst when he draftified the article, does not seem to be a good reason for the article to be draftified. Suck issues should've been raised on ANI as per my view. Best. Aaqib Anjum Aafī (^talk) 13:35, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

AaqibAnjum Please do not misrepresent what I said, or what I did. I stated that there were three separate accounts working on the subject's biographical information at three different wikis, whether they were three individual paid editors or sockpuppets was noted, though not my concern at that time. The article was put back to draft solely due to the paid contributor moving it unchecked to the main namespace. Once it is suitably reviewed and passes our community's processes it will be moved to main namespace, just like any other draft article. We follow the process laid out, not let a conflict of interest get in the way of due process. [Noting that I don't undertake the AFC process.]— billinghurst sDrewth 13:47, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

billinghurst, Best. Thanks for the clarification. Aaqib Anjum Aafī (^talk) 13:50, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Table of Contents -Bryan Morel Muhumuza

I would like guidance on how to create "table of contents" for the page to list the different sub headings/categories Icecommtech (talk) 14:54, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

You don't need to create it — it would automatically appear like what I did in my sandbox from this to this. You can view the source if you don't believe me. Wynn Liaw (talk) 15:04, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

TOC is created automatically if the page has at least four headings. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:07, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

The content you had created in your Sandbox has been deleted. David notMD (talk) 16:08, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

How is this even relevant? Wynn Liaw (talk) 01:53, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Because the article where he wants to create a table of contents has been deleted. David notMD (talk) 02:06, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Date parameters

Resolved

 – Extra digit removed fixed editor issue. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 20:13, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi, I just started working on my wikipedia page, and for some reason, I can´t get the editor to accept my date paremeters within the web cite template on my page.

I´ve pasted the actual text below, along with the source in my sandbox. I´m sure it´s a quick fix, but I just can´t figure out why my dates would be wrong.

Worley, Will (07 January 2016). "Kids photograph the slum they call home". CNN.com. CNN. Retrieved 06 April 2020. Check date values in: Chrisc5234 (talk) 15:36, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

@Chrisc5234: I think it might be becaose of the zero in "06". Try without it and see if it works? (More info on accepted date formats at MOS:DATE. --bonadea contributions talk 15:43, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

That did it, thanks.

Discouraging Behaviour

Hello,

I am after some advice as I feel quite discouraged today but hope it doesn't come across as whinging!

I have been on wiki for some time, but as my contribution pages show, I'm a creator and tend to avoid doing anything other than that task! As I am constructing an article I'm happy for experienced editors to contribute, and particularly correct my typos, MOS etc as I know that is my weakness. Most editors come along, make quite a few soft edits, and off they go. I am not too bothered what happens with the articles, because as soon as I've finished the research, and written them to the best of my ability, I move on to the next one, as I've done my bit. Today, I've started an article, put up my usual under construction or in use template on, and within minutes a patroller is sticking notability and major error templates on it. It is very discouraging. I look at the person's talk page and they seem to be good at putting tags on articles and falling-out with everyone. It does make you think why do I bother creating articles, and feel it would be very off-putting for newcomers. Am I being oversensitive? Is this typical behaviour? After somebody has been given additional tools is there ever a review to consider if they are still suitable?

And mine is with milk and two sugars please! --WPCW (talk) 15:43, 11 April 2020 (UTC) WPCW (talk) 15:43, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

WPCW, you don't say which article this is about, so I can't give a direct answer. But I suggest that, instead of using "under construction" notices, you create your articles as drafts, and only move them to article space once you're confident that they meet Wikipedia's standards (or submit them for review, if you're not sure). That way, you'll avoid the attention of patrollers until your work has reached an acceptable state. Maproom (talk) 16:21, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

I think you've found the article Chester and Wrexham Turnpike. Yes, I agree with the page name change, it is much better. However, I still think the patroller is likely to discourage people, and really should not be doing that role!--WPCW (talk) 16:41, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

I agree that this can be avoided in the future by developing the article in draft space rather than main space. For a newcomer, being confronted (affronted?) by a patroller's comments may feel equivalent to being wacked by a trout, but the intentions are good - to improve the quality of Wikipedia. David notMD (talk) 18:59, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Table aligned right

Hello, I am trying to my align my summary table to the right hand side of the page as seen in most articles.

(The table shows the name of the musical act, years active, label genre etc.)

Can anybody help?

Thanks 185.176.90.147 (talk) 16:23, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Do you mean an infobox? By default they are on the right. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:52, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Irritability

Hi! I'm funded by the NIH to study Irritability and a physician. I edited the Irritability page yesterday and then realized that I probably needed to disclose that I'm funded and my views do not represent those of the National Institutes of Health. I tried to do that on my personal page.

I did cite myself, but removed those citations on realizing that's understandably not welcome. I am not particularly keen on self aggrandizing. The most important thing (to me) was to update the content and make sure it was accurate, reflecting the cool stuff going on, and that it was clinically accurate and safer. What else can I or should I do to disclose my relationship to the topic? Thank you!

The Irritability page sorely needs a disambiguation. DMDD/ODD need updates too. I'm not sure if I'm welcome to do that given my funded clinical scientist status.

Thank you! JoelStod (talk) 16:40, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Joelstod, Well for starters you should read the guide to conflict of interest editing. The most important thing is making disclosures, but you do need to be careful with what you add and how. You can read WP:SELFCITE which discusses citing your own work. If its been published in a peer reviewed journal, and you don't use it to cite more than a few sentences, then it should be a perfectly fine addition. You might also wish to try to cite the literature you cited in the paper, as that allows you to add relevant material without needing to cite yourself. Make sure to keep the content neutral and formal, but understandable. Wikipedia is not a scientific journal, its content needs to be accessible. The most important point: don't promote your views unduly. The latest scientific research is very cool, but if your study is just a single paper and not a meta-review or large analysis of the field, limit the scale of conclusions you draw into an article. Give any research its WP:DUE weight.

All in, we're glad to have ya editing. We need more experts editing Wikipedia, as they know way more about their fields than we do. As long as you keep your editing professional, and make the relevant disclosures, you shouldn't run into any trouble. Smooth sailing, CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 20:17, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

You may wish to read our guide for expert editors. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 20:17, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Joelstod. Welcome to the Teahouse, and thank you for wanting to improve Wikipedia. Contributions from expert editors are welcome, but the way we work is often different from what academics are used to: have a look at the essay expert editors. As you surmise, citing your own works is regarded as a form of conflict of interest. If you think such a citation would be an improvement to the article, you are welcome to make an edit request, and then an uninvolved editor will look at your suggestion and decided what to do. --ColinFine (talk) 20:19, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Question

Please advise.

Updating and expanding a stub, human gene cloned in 1999. I worked in the field 20-30 years ago.

In the 10 years a subfield of clinical neurogenetics has grown around this gene.

Is it considered reasonable as per TOS for me to be doing these edits - no commercial or professional activity in this field. Basically, to help out students.

Thank you for your kind attention! DL7700 (talk) 16:50, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

DL7700, I don't think that there is any conflict of interest there. In fact, we love having experts help out because they bring knowledge with them and can better read and apply sources. Now if you worked for a specific company/organization in the industry, I would recommend you not edit their page, but otherwise you're golden. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 20:06, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, DL7700. We welcome expert editors, but if you haven't edited in Wikipedia much, it is worth looking at Expert editors first. --ColinFine (talk) 20:15, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Will do. Thank you both. DL7700 (talk) 00:56, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Black Widow (2020 film)

I made a change to the Black Widow (2020 film) article. It incorrectly says "Robert Downey Jr. reprises his role as Iron Man..." As the movie is not out yet, and will not be out until November, that line should not appear anywhere on the page until it is confirmed. 173.86.51.152 (talk) 17:03, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, IP user. Thank you for wanting to help improve Wikipedia. I see that you removed that information from Black Widow (2020 film) on the 6th, and that Locke Cole reverted your edit a few minutes later: neither of you left an edit summary explaining why. Looking at it, the claim that Downey is cast is cited to Deadline Hollywood: unless you think that is not a reliable source (I have no idea, but WP:Reliable sources/Perennial sources seems to say it is) it would seem appropriate for the information to be in the article.

But if you think it should go, then the thing to do is to start a discussion on the article's talk page, explaining why you think it is not appropriate: preferably pinging Locke Cole to join in the discussion (but I have pinged them here, so they should see this discussion). Please see BRD for this way of working. --ColinFine (talk) 20:34, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Confusion about how to cite references?! George William Eve (1855-1914)

Dear Tea House, Being brand new to adding material and editing on Wikipedia, I need some advice about how to and and cite references on my 1st piece of work, which is a genealogical addition to an existing article about George William Eve (1855-1914) who was an Heraldic Artist. He was an ancestor of mine. Thanks, Christopher Eve 95.150.221.41 (talk) 17:17, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

You'll find advice at Help:Referencing for beginners. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:53, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy: The article in question is George Eve. David notMD (talk) 19:05, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

On April 10th an editor added a large amount of content to the article without any references. I deleted all of that, not because I believe it untrue, but because verification from published sources is required. For you, I caution "genealogical addition" may not be appropriate. The article is about George Eve, not his ancestors (or descendants). David notMD (talk) 19:13, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

An alternative guide to referencing is at WP:EASYREFBEGIN. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 04:09, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Edits

Hello, I make some edits but I can't see the updates live. Is that normal?. Thanks 154.189.18.1 (talk) 17:20, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Does this still occur if you follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Bypass your cache. This sounds like a caching issue. ~~ Alex Noble/1-2/TRB 18:40, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Question on merging articles

I want to perform a merger of certain articles. Unfortunately, I am topic banned from creating redirects. Does it mean that I am not allowed to perform any merger? --Soumyabrata ^{stay at home} _{wash your hands} ^{to protect from coronavirus} 17:57, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

@Soumya-8974: I think you would be better off raising this at AN/I where your TBAN was issued , as anything said here would be anecdotal and not binding, imho. Or ask on your own talk page, linking to the original report and ping the original admin(s) involved. [updated] Mathglot (talk) 19:14, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

How can I add another template to the page

I want to add a new category in a page as a sub-template (new page), how can I do it? Thanks Sw135792003 (talk) 19:07, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, [{U|Sw135792003}}, I don't understand what you are asking. Adding a category is not normally anything to do with templates, and I don't know what you mean by a "sub-template". Please explain. --ColinFine (talk) 22:22, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Repinging Sw135792003 --ColinFine (talk) 22:23, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

How to create a family tree page

Hi how do you create a family tree page on here. I want it to talk about the notable couch family from England. Nbarratt31 (talk) 19:30, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Nbarratt31 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that summarizes what independent reliable sources with significant coverage say about topics that meet Wikipedia's special definition of notability. It isn't a place to just tell about a subject or post genealogical information. If the family that you wish to write about gets significant coverage in independent sources, it would merit an article(including a family tree as part of it). 331dot (talk) 19:37, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Nbarratt31, if you're asking about how to create a family tree chart, you may want to take a look at {{Tree chart}}. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 20:10, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

George William Eve (1855-1914) article and questions

Dear Sir, Thank you for your reply to my post about George William Eve (1855-1914). I note your reason for deleting my additions to the article. I'm a little puzzled, about your comment that genealogical material should be left out, because, when looking randomly at another Wikipedia example, in this case, William Wordsworth, that article has both his parents and children listed. I was doing exactly the same for George William Eve. Perhaps you meant that some of the biographical material about his family might in 'inappropriate' for Wikipedia. In which case, I could leave some of that out. I need some guidelines for this, though.

Thank you for pointing me towards a help page for beginners, re referencing. I'll have another go soon.

Many thanks, Chris Eve CelticViking.1 (talk) 20:59, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Apparently in reference to George Eve, and a continuation of this discussion, above. Adding David notMD. Mathglot (talk) 21:09, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Parents and children can be considered appropriate if not too lengthy on any of them. What I meant is don't go big - grandparents, great-grandparents.... David notMD (talk) 01:11, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

. See WP:EINSTEIN: the amount of detail about a person depends to some degree on the extent to which an ordinary reader is likely to want information. There is a considerable difference between the general cultural importance of your subject, and Wordsworth DGG ( talk ) 18:05, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Mistake

NEW - Talk on Emma Robert’s Wikipedia page is locked to protect it against vandalism.

I can’t find any other way to tell someone about this mistake - that the filmography in Emma Robert’s Wikipedia entry is missing the film Nerve (2012) which she was a star in. 2600:8800:7D80:707:F57B:2270:5D38:169F (talk) 21:19, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The best place to bring up an error you may notice in an article is on the associated article talk page(if using the desktop version, click "Talk" at the top of the article). I'll put a direct link: Talk:Emma Roberts. 331dot (talk) 21:21, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Talk on Emma Robert’s Wikipedia page is locked to protect it against vandalism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8800:7D80:707:F57B:2270:5D38:169F (talk) 21:29, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

The article itself, Emma Roberts, is locked, but not the talk page, Talk:Emma Roberts. It would be very unusual to protect("lock") a talk page. Are you using the desktop version? 331dot (talk) 21:31, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Discussion created; Talkback link added. Mathglot (talk) 22:34, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Additional Information

I recently came into possession of a rare photograph of Marmaduke Military Academy Faculty, of which my great grandfather was an instructor. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marmaduke_Military_Academy I have a photo of the faculty taken about 1892. Can this be added to the site? ```` Jonrmoore (talk) 21:43, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Is it copyrighted? If it is not, then you can upload to Wikimedia Commmons and use it on Wikipedia. Otherwise, you must be autoconfirmed (your account must be four days old and you must make 10 edits) in order to upload to Wikipedia. Wynn Liaw (talk) 01:46, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

If it was taken before 1923, it's not copyrighted. You will need to state this clearly when you upload it to Wikimedia Commons. Maproom (talk) 06:56, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edittion request

Please tell me if there is any invalid link(404) exit in any Semi-protected article so can I ask to replace that link my potential blog's link of the same topic? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Khalidlatif12 (talk • contribs) 21:49, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Khalidlatif12. Wikipedia is a neutral encyclopedia. It is not a platform for self-promotion. You cannot add your blog to Wikipedia. Please do not try. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 22:23, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Nominating articles for deletion that were previously nominated

I want to renominate Animated Hero Classics et al. for deletion, as they were nominated for deletion back when Wikipedia had looser standards and kept on flimsy grounds (basically a pity keep). Notability was never actually established, and the closest things to references on any of the current articles are links to primary/unreliable/non-notable sources, which do not count towards notability. However, when I tried doing it with Twinkle it just redirected to the archived deletion discussion. How do I properly nominate it again? Dronebogus (talk) 22:16, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Dronebogus. The first thing you should do before nominating an article for deletion is to follow the recommendations in WP:BEFORE, which says:

"Search for additional sources, if the main concern is notability. The minimum search expected is a normal Google search, a Google Books search, a Google News search, and a Google News archive search; Google Scholar is suggested for academic subjects."

In less than a minute, I was able to find significant coverage in a book called Abraham Lincoln on Screen: Fictional and Documentary Portrayals on Film and Television. Deletion should be the last resort after all other reasonable alternatives have been exhausted. If you are having trouble with Twinkle (which I don't use), you can always nominate articles for deletion manually. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 22:42, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

New article

I would like to create a new article, but I can not find the place of writing. Where can I feed the information? Please let me know the menu of entry. Attoexa (talk) 23:06, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Attoexa. You cannot create a new article until your account is autoconfirmed, which means that the account is at least four days old and has made at least ten edits. Please read and study Your first article. I see that you have been adding unreferenced content, which I have reverted. Please provide a reference to a published reliable source when adding new content, and familiarize yourself with our core content policy Verifiability. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:50, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

questionable biographies on wikipedia, poorly sourced and no reliable

Hallo, there is a certain number of biographies very poorly sourced with number of dead links and unreliable sources. here are the bios I am referring to:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Dreyden

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Daigle

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colby_Keller

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cameron_Marshall

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurt_Marshall

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Radcliffe

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zak_Spears

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austin_Wilde

and

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fran%C3%A7ois_Sagat

this last one for being way too celebrative (the article is written as a press release for him).

Is there a special procedure to follow to ask for this pages to be reviewed? I think that this pages were written many years ago when wikipedia had less strict rules about sourcing and they have survived only because no one has looked at them anymore. thank you. --AlejandroLeloirRey (talk) 00:23, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi AlejandroLeloirRey. If your main concern is that the above-mentioned articles have "dead links", then that's not really going to be seen as a reason for deletion. Dead links are often a problem that are found in articles, but it's often a problem, as explained in WP:DEADREF, that can be fixed. Moreover, sources aren't required to be available online per WP:PUBLISHED. Although it's easier to verify a source available online, a source isn't considered unreliable if it isn't online. If you're concerns are that there are "bad" (i.e. unreliable sources) being cited in the article, then that's a different matter. Even it that case, however, deletion might not be necessary if better sources can be found or the content in question is removed depending upon its context. Adding templates like Template:BLP sources, Template:More citations needed or Template:Citation needed is often done per WP:BURDEN to let others know of a possible problem if you're unable to resolve the issue yourself. The main reason for deleting the article is going to be whether the subjects are considered to meet Wikipedia:Notability or one of the various notability sub-guidelines. Notability is not a temporary thing so try and keep that in mind when assessing it. If you feel that the subjects of these articles are clearly not Wikipedia notable, then you can proceed as explained in WP:DELETE; however, you should also take a look at WP:BEFORE, WP:NEXIST and WP:ARTCON before doing so. You might also want to post a query on the talk page of relevant Wikipedia projects to get other input. You'll usually see which WikiProject's scope an article falls under by check the article's talk page. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:44, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @AlejandroLeloirRey: You did the right thing by raising discussions on the Talk pages of some of those articles about their Notability issues. You could follow that up by adding a {{Notability}} template to the top of each article where you suspect that notability is an issue, and be sure to include the |bio= param with it. For those articles that need better referencing, you could also add the {{Refimprove}} template. For cases where the source is unreliable, tag the article inline by adding the {{better source}} template right after the questionable reference, and be sure to use the |reason= param to briefly indicate your objection to the poor reference. For dead links, see WP:LINKROT. If the url can be found in the Internet archive, you can use {{webarchive}} or the |archive-url= param of the {{cite}} templates. If it's not in the archive, please append the {{dead link}} template inline. HTH, Mathglot (talk) 00:49, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

@Mathglot:, @Marchjuly:. tell me if I am wrong. Bad sourcing is not a synonymous of lack of notability but it can be a symptom. Bad sourcing can be improved while there is nothing to do for a lack of notability. Still, those pages have been around for ages and if no one ever cared or could improve the sourcing is not a good sign neither. I will not ask for deletion but I will try to fix the sourcing myself, if I can not succeed I will add templates. but when can you tell that the sourcing can not be improved? for example if in a month no one improved those sources significantly would it be then reasonable to ask for deletion? --AlejandroLeloirRey (talk) 08:36, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

"when can you tell that the sourcing can not be improved?" It's pretty much a judgement call. If you look and didn't find any, suggesting deletion can be quite reasonable. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:19, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Regarding "Bad sourcing can be improved while there is nothing to do for a lack of notability": that is correct. Also, and maybe this is obvious, but sourcing is required for the content of the article, whereas notability is strictly about the topic of the article, regardless whether the article is well-sourced or not, or even whether the article exists or not. For this reason, asking for deletion should not be tied to whether the sources have been improved or not, whether after a month or a year; this is a volunteer project, and there is WP:NODEADLINE. Deletion should happen for one of the reasons listed at WP:DEL-REASON. That said, if you believe that the topic itself is notable and you've tagged the article as needing references and none are forthcoming after some time, you can start to remove content from the article until there is nothing left but an article stub; possibly even only a single, defining sentence. Before you start slashing and burning, though, you might want to notify the top ten editors by {{ping}}ing them on the article Talk page, and let them know about your plans; maybe one of them will step up, and start adding references, and you won't have to cut anything. Work with other editors if possible, to develop a consensus on how to proceed. Mathglot (talk) 09:29, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Augustus Vignos

@Jmcgnh: Thanks for your input about Augustus Vignos. I have made some edits on it, but don't understand everything you said. Is there a "Wikipedia for Dummies" book yet? Nimishillen (talk) 00:42, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Apparently in response to this discussion. Rewrote section title for comprehensibility; technical TPO vio. Mathglot (talk) 00:55, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

How to notify or make it clear that I might not be very responsive to questions?

Hi everyone, I’ve been sick with coronavirus for the past few days so I haven’t edited very much. I’m still doing some here and there, but is there a template or something I can put on my user page or talk page that would make it clear that I’m not avoiding questions or anything? I seem to remember having seen something like that before but I’m forgetting where. Thanks. Woerich (talk) 03:26, 12 April 2020 (UTC) Woerich (talk) 03:26, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Woerich, I'm sorry to hear that you've been infected. You may think about putting the {{User health inactive}} template at the top of your user page. There is also a more specific template that no one has used yet: {{Off wiki Covid 19}}. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 03:31, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Whoa, terrible news! Here is a whole selection of Wikibreak templates. Wishing you a speedy recovery.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 03:33, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Wow, thanks! I’m using it. I appreciate the well wishes. It’s harder on me, with asthma on top of it all. If it wasn’t for Wikipedia I’d be losing my mind stuck here in the hospital. Woerich (talk) 18:55, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

How do you get published on wiki... a story about yourself..

How do you get published on wiki... a story about yourself.. Domtaino (talk) 04:02, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Domtaino, Wikipedia is a place for articles, and is not for stories, resumes, or social networking. Provided you are notable enough to meet Wikipedia's general notability guidelines, an editor with no connection to you may decide to write about you. If you're looking for social networking, consider this directory of altenatives. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 04:30, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

@Domtaino: Please see the User talk:Domtaino#Welcome! section on your user talk page. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 08:23, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Only reference is an old scrapbook of news clippings.

Hi, I've written quite a comprehensive entry for an elderly hairdresser - John Morrey https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:John_Morrey?action=edit - who was quite important in Australia in the 60s and 70's. He has an old scrapbook I referred to with hundreds of newspapers and magazine clippings (most now defunct), and I conducted an interview. My question is how do I reference old clippings? Happy to provide scans of all these stories but will be significant. Ta Danielle!

DD 05:50, 12 April 2020 (UTC)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Danielledunsmore (talk • contribs)  

@Danielledunsmore: Sorry, but scrapbooks and personal interviews are not sources -- they need to be published materials that someone besides you can access. Ian.thomson (talk) 06:20, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

... but the newspapers themselves, of which you have clippings, may be useful sources. If a clipping shows the name of the newspaper, the date, and the page and preferably column number, then you can cite the newspaper, giving those details. Maproom (talk) 07:02, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank-you. The scrapbook has actual newspaper clippings - but not always the date and/or publication, as well as printed catalogues of results etc. Should I scan these, and where do I store them? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Danielledunsmore (talk • contribs) 07:40, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Danielledunsmore, depending on age, scanning and uploading would probably be a copyright violation. You can try searching archive.org, you may get lucky. For WP:RS-clippings, use Template:Cite news for citing, and fill in the info you have, preferably at least publication (work), year (if you don't have the full date) and a (short) quote that supports what you put in the article. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:12, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

“Case overview”

“Case overview”

Greetings,

When I typed in “the latest on covid-19” on google, one of the first things is see is the “case overview”. If I’m correct, this is a page by Wikipedia. I was also typed in “the latest on influenza” but I do not get a “case overview” from wiki. Does you have one? If so where could I find that info? I ask cuz after looking at the CDC website. They say that in the US there have been approximately up to 62,000 deaths from influenza and up to 56 million cases, although the CDC disclaims that they don’t monitor the flu as closely. Anyhoo, if this info is correct, then mathematically, the flu seems to be just as potentially fatal and possible to contract as covid-19. Yet, c-19 is portrayed as something much worse. Anyway I was just hoping to get a case overview for influenza from wiki so I can gather data for both illnesses from the same sources. I am gather data from multiple sources but seeing as how infamous wiki is, I was hoping to include your data in my research. Thanks for your time. 2600:1010:B10D:6B79:C980:F6E9:B5FE:5583 (talk) 05:58, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Typing that exact string in Google search does not pull up any Wikipedia hits. Can you link to the page in question? If you are looking for influenza I suggest looking up Influenza and its relevant pages. Seeing as you're looking for a case overview you should look up particular instances like pandemics or go through a specific season like the 2017-2018 United States flu season. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 06:06, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Test question

Resolved

 – I clicked the "new section" link and not the button. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 06:35, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi Tenryuu — the preload seems to be working here. I clicked on the main button to create a new section. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 06:17, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Sdkb, I am being a dumb. I clicked on the "new section" link instead of the big button. Never mind! :P Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 06:34, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Published reliable source

Greetings Every one Requesting to address my question?

I am Writing an article in English and some of the Reliable source which i have collected are in local language, can i use it or do i have to provide some more evidence to support it.Thoufiq313 (talk) 07:02, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Thoufiq313. English language sources are preferred when available, but if not, reliable sources in any language can be used. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:05, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Thoufiq313. WP:NONENG has some useful information about citing non-English sources. --ColinFine (talk) 15:57, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Question

How to do the mirror site template Abdullah Al Manjur (talk) 09:14, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Abdullah Al Manjur and welcome to the Teahouse. I am sorry you have had a long wait for a reply. I am afraid I am not clear exactly what help you are asking for. Perhaps Template:Wikipedia mirror and the information page at Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks might be of some help to you? Nick Moyes (talk) 16:18, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Signature

I want to change my signature style permanently. How can I add image, color and different language text to my signature. --Raaj Tilak (talk) 09:33, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello Raaj Tilak! See WP:CUSTOMSIG. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:48, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Some consideration about sourcing

Hallo, I am not sure if this is the right place where to post this so if it is not please advise me where to move it. I would like to discuss with you some thoughts I have about sourcing, more precisely about biography.

General reading purpose biographies of living people (not academic purpose or journalistic investigations) usually are mostly based on interviews (followed by fact checking) but still there is a questionable interaction between the writer and the subject of the bio. Moreover, biographies for general reading purpose (not academic purpose) make up some details: if it reports a not recorded conversation happened years before it is obvious that it is not reporting the exact words (no one could be 100% sure of what the exact word are), the same happens if they describe any detail like a dress, a room, or tell what a person thought in a precise moment. If we consider this level of "fabrication" unacceptable for a reliable source we need to delete 98% of the biographies of living people.

I believe that general reading purpose biographies should be considered reliable (depending on the author and the publisher) even if they obviously made up some details that no one could ever know as the relevant facts are double checked and are not made up. May be telling something happened 10 years ago the biographer might tell what the person felt or thought in a precise moment. This is either made up or based on an interview but to me this doesn't make the biography unreliable. As long as fiction aspects of a biography are not reported in the wikipedia biography that level of "fabrication" shouldn't be a reason to question the biography as a source. Being so stiff would make sense if there was not common agreement on a fact but in such case you can not question a source without reporting other sources that disagree with it. Moreover, when a source reports a conversation not using the exact words is because of two reasons: first, no one could tell what the exact words were unless the conversation was recorded, and second most often the words are not important. If I report a conversation of a person with his mother in a book I might be way more interested into using that conversation to tell what kind of relation they had, rather than being precise. Another example, if I tell in a biography of when that person argued with his mother, is not important what he exactly said but it is important how bad the fight was. So, sometime conversations are simply used to describe a relation or an intimacy and in such case it is obviously unimportant how precisely the conversation is reported.

Finally, I feel that when it comes up to sourcing we need to be reasonable and check also the context where a source is used. Unless there is disagreement among different sources it shouldn't be important what source you are using for facts like: where and when the person was born, how tall he is and general stuff like that. I understand being stiff if someone reports that a person was an actor, a model, an astronaut, a singer but the only sources one can find are his interviews but speaking of not sensible details basically if there is not disagreement any source should be accepted.

Being so unreasonably stiff with sourcing is discouraging a lot of people to write anything. Plus, most of the material on wikipedia was written years ago when sourcing was not such an issue, becoming so stiff not would make it questionable a big part of the biographies you can find on wikipedia now. So, also to make wikipedia a little bit more homogeneous and even please be reasonable.

what do you think about it? please, feel free to agree with me (jocking). I would like to hear your opinions. thank you

--AlejandroLeloirRey (talk) 09:52, 12 April 2020 (UTC) AlejandroLeloirRey (talk) 09:52, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

AlejandroLeloirRey Please read the Biographies of Living Persons policy. It is necessary to be very strict with the sourcing of such articles, mostly for legal reasons. In most countries editors or Wikipedia itself might be put in legal jeopardy if biographies of living people had poorly sourced or unsourced claims. Perhaps we have different definitions depending on where we live, but where I am a 'biography' has no fiction at all. Interviews are considered primary sources and while primary sources are acceptable for sourcing certain information, it must be put in context. For example, many celebrities(especially but not exclusively women) are not honest about their ages, for various reasons. The person themselves is not always the best source of information about them. This is why independent sources are preferred. 331dot (talk) 13:43, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

@331dot: hallo, thank you for your point of view. Don't you fee that if anyone questions one source to determine someone's age or similar issues than he should at least point out another source in disagree with the source in the bio?. I see your point, look at zsa zsa gabor but in those cases you have plenty of sources in disagreement. General agreement on a detail should constitute it self a proof of reliability. While I agree that a biography has to be reliable (an authoritative writer and publisher), I can see that all biography for general reading purpose have a component of fiction, it is impossible to avoid it if you are writing a book, other wise you are not writing a book but filling up a list of things. if you could mention any historical person biography available on internet I would be happy to give you examples of what I mean (a book not one or two pages). If one environment is described or a conversation reported there is no way that the exact words or exact collocation of the forniture are reported but this doesn't make the biography totally useless. Of course the author must have based the description of the clothes and environments on the paintings, and the content of the conversations on some other sources but it is easy to understand that every time you report anything that is not in an official document it is a little bit made up, always. And Also official document can be questionable sometime. A biography of Catherine the Great probably is not reliable to prove what she ate in a particular dinner but it is good enough to prove she was an empress of Russia who died in 1762. This is what i mean when I say that one needs to look at the context where the bio are used. If I am writing the bio of an astronaut it should be not too important where I took the information that he actually was an astronaut as all the sources agree on it and that is not disputable. I feel that such stiffness should apply mostly to questionable facts that do not meet general agreement (you can find different sources that report the fact in different ways). Let me give you one last example, here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Big_Brother_19_(American_season)_houseguests#Mark this bios are written after very poor not third part sources, still they are reliable because of two reason. First they are not reporting anything so amazingly spectacular that you need extra source and second it wouldn't make much sense lying on this kind of information. for legal issue is another things but I am not talking of sensitive information. To make a long story short, I am not telling that any biography is reliable for anything or any biography written by autoritative writers are reliable for anything but that sources, especially books, should be considered on the basis of what you are taking from them and on the context you use them. AlejandroLeloirRey (talk) 14:24, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

@AlejandroLeloirRey: Ha ha, I see your point. Well, there is always the WP:IAR rule, but in my experience, most editors deny that it exists (okay to be fair, they don't deny it exists, they deny that it is ever applicable). But they are wrong! There is a higher rule, and that rule is to do that which will lead to making Wikipedia better. The policies are really intended to act as a basis for arbitrating things, but strict adherence to all the rules (exclusive, of course, of IAR) does not necessarily lead to this desirable end.

Here is a particular example. I came across a case where somebody had deleted some particular claim on the basis that there was no citation to support it. The claim made was (at the very least) plausible. I reverted the deletion, asserting that the editor should instead have tagged it with "citation needed" (and so I added this tag myself). The editor's response was that, according to policy, when content is properly deleted, it may only be re-added if a proper citation is included. My response was that it was improper to delete a plausible claim without giving notice that the citation is needed, but in fact, this was "common sense" on my part, not an actual rule, as far as I am aware.

So let's stipulate the other editor is correct, that every editor may properly delete every unsupported claim they feel like, and that other editors can only re-add the content if they include a valid citation. That would be chaos, but it's there in the rules. Editors who want to insist that rules reign supreme over content may want to watch out. They just might get what they wish for.

I must caution that mine is (apparently) a minority opinion. I don't recall any other editors suggesting that common sense may be considered when interpreting policy. Fabrickator (talk) 18:49, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

There's always the WP:COMMONSENSE part of IAR. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:56, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Re-Creating previously deleted page

Hello, I was recreating a previously deleted page. The draft is available at Draft:Dax Dasilva and now I want anyone to let me know if I should proceed with moving it to the article space. It was deleted by Seraphimblade and I was hoping that he might help me with it. It was deleted for being promotional. After my research I believe that Dax Dasilva is fairly notable and meeter WP:GNG. But having a few other opinions is the right to go about it, I guess. Thanks ElricFullMetal (talk) 11:24, 12 April 2020 (UTC) ElricFullMetal (talk) 11:24, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

ElricFullMetal Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Unless you are extremely experienced in article creation, you should send the draft through Articles for Creation. Briefly looking at it and the sources, I am less certain that the article meets GNG. Most of the sources seem to be routine business announcements or interviews with Mr. Dasilva, both of which do not establish notability. Wikipedia should summarize what independent reliable sources have chosen on their own to write about Mr. Dasilva with significant coverage. This does not include interviews with him, because that is a primary source. 331dot (talk) 11:35, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

331dot Hi, thanks for explaining it so comprehensively. I guess I should use the AfC and see what the experienced people in the community think about it after a detailed analysis. Thanks again, much appreciated! ElricFullMetal (talk) 12:02, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Sara sexual pics

107.77.199.93 (talk) 12:45, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello IP editor. Do you have a question about editing Wikipedia? Just in case you're tempted, please don't link to any off-wiki websites with inappropriate content. Nick Moyes (talk) 12:53, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

IP editor, this is Wikipedia, not a search engine. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 15:16, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Precognition

FYI

 – Header created by Tenryuu. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 15:16, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

This is all very confusing. You do not make it at all easy to contact you and it is very unclear as to where I might find an answer to my question. I think it might be in the question and answer section, so that is the first place2600:1700:C950:E880:D08D:8182:C70D:500E (talk) 13:48, 12 April 2020 (UTC) I'll look. I am interested in adding to your article on precognition. I have a story that will prove beyond doubt that precognition is real and a predetermined future exists. What is an IP address and how do get one? I hope I will be able to find your answer. I don't know what this "four tildes" signature thing is all about, but my name is Allan Edson. 2600:1700:C950:E880:D08D:8182:C70D:500E (talk) 13:48, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Allan. Thank you for wanting to help improve Wikipedia. Unfortunately, what you are offering is what we call original research, and is never accepted for Wikipedia articles. The problem is that, since anybody may edit most articles, even if the information starts off as accurate, somebody may have come in and changed it later. For that reason we require that every piece of information in a Wikipedia article can be checked by a reader from a published source - and preferably that the article actually cites that source. (It is true that there are many thousands of older articles which do not meet this standard, but generally we are more careful now about checking that information which is added is cited to a published source). I'm sure there are other places where you can share your story, but not Wikipedia. (The "four tildes", as you see, gets replaced by your signature - in your case, just your IP address, because you haven't logged in - and the time and date: mine follows) --ColinFine (talk) 15:52, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Sidebox

how to add sidebox in a an article on wikipedia. Jay2930 (talk) 13:55, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

@Jay2930:, What do you mean by sidebox? Aaqib Anjum Aafī (^talk) 14:31, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Jay2930, I assume you are referring to infoboxes. The easiest way is just to find a page that does what you want to to do, and copy it to your page, changing the data.

Help:Infobox has the details on how to do them, and Wikipedia:List of infoboxes lists all the available templates to use. ~~ Alex Noble/1-2/TRB 14:58, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Revise, rather than re-create a speedy deleted page

Hi Folks. I recently created a page and it was speedy deleted for copyright violation. I understand and do not dispute this claim. However, I would prefer to revise the page, rather than have it deleted. My question is: can I have access to the old page to edit it, or should I recreate it and submit it for review? ThePhantom65 (talk) 15:02, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

ThePhantom65 We cannot restore copyright violations, you will have to start over. 331dot (talk) 15:04, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Would it be better to create it and submit it to AFR or just post it? ThePhantom65 (talk) 15:06, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Phantom65. I would advise any editor, unless they are confident that they can get an article to an acceptable standard on the first attempt, to create it in Draft space first; and anybody who hasn't already created many articles to use the AFC process and submit it for review. --ColinFine (talk) 15:54, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Getting the ping right, ThePhantom65. --ColinFine (talk) 15:55, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

How do you make an infobox?

In most, if not all, Wikipedia articles, there is an infobox that has pictures and little bits of info that helps the reader understand said topic more. The question is, how do you make one? There seems to be no setting in the editor that allows you to make such a box, it would be really helpful if you at least led me in the right direction. Thanks, ArticleMaker456 (talk) 16:06, 12 April 2020 (UTC) ArticleMaker456 (talk) 16:06, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, ArticleMaker456. You should not need to make a brand new Infobox, but are most likely to need to use an existing one and complete the relevant information that summarises the page's content. See Help:Infobox and Wikipedia:List of infoboxes for more guidance on this. Nick Moyes (talk) 16:21, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

an alphabet of words

It has come to my attention that we have disambiguation pages for A_word (autism, adultery, etc.), B word (bastard, Brexit), F word (fuck, feminism), K word (word processor, Christian radio), and various other letters. (And redirects: the "H word" takes you straight to Hell.) I'd like to make these more findable, from one dab page to another. Is there a more elegant solution than listing them as "see also", as T-word does? Carbon Caryatid (talk) 16:44, 12 April 2020 (UTC) Carbon Caryatid (talk) 16:44, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

@Carbon Caryatid: Like maybe User:AlanM1/Template/Navbox x-word, to be transcluded at the bottom of each of those pages? I'll note the articles are not hyphenated consistently, either (I think they should be hyphenated). Feel free to move that to Template:Navbox x-word and modify as needed. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 18:50, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

About DoggoLingo

FYI

 – Header made by Tenryuu.

• Link: DoggoLingo

Hey! I am wondering why we don't have a longer article about DoggoLingo. Yeetyman123 (talk) 16:45, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

@Yeetyman123: If you have more information about the subject from reliable sources, please add and cite it. It seems that some of the references provided are a little weak, so reliable sources would be appreciated. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 17:40, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, advice on dealing with a redirect

I have an article prepared with the title Fourth Inspectorate-General, Turkey, but now there exists a redirect Fourth Inspectorate-General which redirects to the article Inspectorates-General (Turkey) and in part treats the same subject as the one my article is about. But the existing article treats 4 Inspectorates-General while mine focuses only on the Fourth Inspectorate-General. So, if I publish the article under the planned name, there will be a redirect to an other page, but if I use the name Fourth Inspectorate-General, I think it won't really be correct... maybe a Fourth Inspectorate-General will also exist in another country than Turkey. So what is your advice? Paradise Chronicle (talk) 17:33, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Just re-target it to the new article unless you are able to find a better target. Ruslik_Zero 18:34, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Ahhhhh, thank you. Paradise Chronicle (talk) 18:55, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Cornel Chiriac

 Courtesy link: Cornel Chiriac

I have a big request for you. Please correct in your article about the Romanian announcer "Radio Free Europe" Cornel Chiriac the name of this wonderful person. In the Russian text about Cornel Chiriac his name is incorrectly written - Chiriyak. The English word Chiriac in Russian is spelled and pronounced Kiriyak, not Chiriyak. The letters "Ch" in Russian is "K". just listen to the correct name of Cornel Chiriac in Youtube. Thank you. Vladimir from Russia.Rogers kenny (talk) 18:17, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

@Rogers kenny: This is something that should be asked on the article's talk page. We use WP:COMMONNAME on here for what sources have referred to him as. If it's the pronunciation you wish to be clarified, you can add the {{IPA-ru}} template to the article and transcribe it phonetically (guide for transcribing Russian IPA is here). --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 18:29, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Rogers kenny. I don't see any Russian text in Cornel Chiriac. Are you looking somewhere else? I thought you might have been looking at an article in the Russian Wikipedia: if so, you'll need to ask at ru:ВП:Ф-В, since each language Wikipedia is an independent project. But I can't find an article about him there either, so I'm confused. --ColinFine (talk) 21:48, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Film cast list question

Based on WP:Filmcast it says cast lists arent supposed to contain forced "line breaks" because of accessibility concerns. I have two questions.

1. What are the accessibility concerns?
2. Is this not an example of a cast list with line breaks? Birds_of_Prey_(2020_film)#Cast

thanksToeFungii (talk) 19:07, 12 April 2020 (UTC) ToeFungii (talk) 19:07, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

ToeFungii I'm fairly sure accessibility refers to the ability for those with vision issues or other disabilities to read Wikipedia(either color blindness or outright blindness). I haven't viewed the link you offer, but you may be correct- as this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, it is possible for inappropriate content to go undetected. We can only address what we know about. 331dot (talk) 19:27, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

FWIW, just 222 (0.16%) of the ~136,000 articles that use {{Infobox film}} have a <br /> (or equivalent) tag in their Cast section. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 21:10, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

page declined

I didn't save changes but published directly. Is this the reason for decline? Safetipin (talk) 19:29, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Safetipin Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Your draft was initially declined as blank; it appeared as blank due to what I assume were formatting errors. The text now appears and you successfully resubmitted it. However, I think the odds of it being accepted are low, as it reads as an advertisement for the app. Any article about an app should only summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage say about the app. Things like "mission" and "vision" are impossible to independently verify and have no place in a Wikipedia article(for example). Please see Your First Article for more information. 331dot (talk) 19:42, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

I fixed the hidden text, which was due to a formatting error. The user name is identical to the organization that the article is being written about, so WP:COI applies, and the username should be changed to be that of an individual rather than the organization. WP:UPE may also apply. @Safetipin:, do you work for the organization?ThatMontrealIP (talk) 19:51, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

I blocked this editor indefinitely for the username policy violation before I became aware of this conversation. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:27, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Your Talk page describes the step necessary to apply to be unblocked (process includes selecting a new name and promising that intent at Wikipedia is not to promote that company). David notMD (talk) 20:43, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Rejected draft

 Courtesy link: Draft:Border pairs method

Draft:Border pairs method My personal opinion is that subject "Border Pairs Method" (BPM) is worthy of publishing on Wiki. So I have written draft which was sadly rejected. It is true that I am at the same time also author of the BPM Method. So my opinion is not objective and so I am searching for help of other people. Verifyable Facts:

• BPM is my PhD thesis
• BPM is published in original scientific paper in the Elseviers scientific journal before almost ten years and was after that allways cited by other scientists in positive light.
• BPM is published in two scientific books
• BPM is published in college text book
• many invited talks about BPM have been done

One of invited talks was for example at IBM Reseach in Zurich where works some nobel laureats.

Can sombody help me please to publish somehow my subject on wiki? Maybe not as an (whole) article. Some ideas? Thanks Bojan PLOJ (talk) 20:47, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Your draft wasn't rejected but merely declined. That means that the reviewer believed that the subject might be notable if references to independent published reliable sources can be provided. Hence you need to cite where other reliable sources have written in depth about the subject, rather than what you have written. --David Biddulph (talk) 20:57, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

The page ... has been reviewd.

Hello, From time to time I've received notices that state 'The page [name of page] has been reviewed. When I look at the watchlist I can see (Page curation log) time, name of user, and marked [name of article] as reviewed (Tag: PageTriage). For some time now I've been curious of the meaning of this. I can not see any tags on the articles. Thank you! LorriBrown (talk) 21:08, 12 April 2020 (UTC) LorriBrown (talk) 21:08, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

LorriBrown, this has to do with curating new pages. This is done with new page reviewers who use the tool to evaluate new pages and lets them improve it, suggest improvements to it, nominate it for deletion, among other things. If you would like more info refer to Wikipedia:Page Curation/Help. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 22:40, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Page of an Indian Cybersecurity Expert rejected

 Courtesy link: Draft:Rahul Sasi

I have submitted about an Indian Cybersecurity expert and a well renowed Infosec speaker who has travelled across 14 countries and gave speaches. He has tons of News sources citing his works. Yet it failed the review. Kindly help me where it went wrong ? SahilZAC (talk) 21:49, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

SahilZAC, welcome to the Teahouse. Reading the AngusWOOF's comment it seems that he would prefer your best three sources to consider for the review. I suggest leaving a message on his talk page or on the draft's talk page to start a correspondence with him. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 22:04, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Correcting an article

Hi. I've never edited a Wikipedia page before. But I saw an error, an incorrect date, on a page.

I created an account, and tried to correct it, but got all kinds of "citation error" notices. Thus it appears that I don't know what I'm doing. I would appreciate your help (or someone else correcting the error).

The page in question is this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1992_Landers_earthquake

The website talks about a foreshock that happened in Joshua Tree, but it lists the date as April 23rd. This is wrong. This Joshua Tree quake happened on April 22nd, and I have several sources to back me up. It happened just after 11pm on the 22nd, and thus a lot of news stories might be dated April 23rd. However the actual quake happened on April 22nd.

Thanks for any help you can offer.

Russ Rwflash (talk) 22:48, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Too many citations on 'startpage.com'?

startpage.com

"Startpage is a web search engine which highlights privacy as its distinguishing feature.[2][3][4][5][6][7][8]"

Does this strike anyone else as too many? I read a wiki article about it a long time ago. Disoff (talk) 22:51, 12 April 2020 (UTC)