Wikipedia:Teahouse

Maproom, 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

Academic and expert reference being disputed

Hi Wiki Editors,

I'm currently having a debate about whether the following references would merit inclusion in the body of an article (note, I'm not trying to start a new article here!) and would truly appreciate your views. The change references a controversy connected to the initial article:

a) One of the references is self-published in the form of a letter, signed by a subject-expert (someone who's won a number of awards in their field and had their work nominated for the top global honour). They've been both academically and professionally published on a number of occasions.

b) Another reference is in the form of a link and reference to a lecture on the controversy, which has been published directly from a respected university website's news page.

c) The controversy has garnered significant public support (videos about it have been seen over 40,000 times, and a petition made in outrage of the controversy has been signed 1,500 times).

However, as of yet the references haven't been cited or used in the mainstream, commercial media.

Given that the article is about a high value product, owned by a corporation who would naturally want to protect it, I have been told that none of the above are strong enough references to merit inclusion of the controversy in the body of an article. I totally disagree, given Wiki's guidelines (I have noted these differ, depending on whether editing an article or starting one).

My opinion is that the article is clearly not neutral without a reference to the controversy in question, and I am concerned that those who are arguing against me may have ulterior motives.

I would therefore really appreciate the thoughts and a fair debate with the wider Wiki community (i.e. with those not connected to the article in question).

Thanks. 78.144.198.67 (talk) 20:39, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

You might find reading WP:ACADEME will answer an element of your question. Experts and Academics have a different view of the world from Wikipedia editors. Fiddle Faddle 20:43, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Timtrent. I've gone through article with interest. The issue here, though, isn't that the person wanting to make an edit is an academic (I used to be!), but rather that I want to cite academic sources and subject-experts on the matter, who have in turn published information about this controversy independently.

I have used this as a reason for doing so: 'with regards to Self-published expert sources (they) may be considered reliable (for inclusion in an article) when produced by an established subject-matter expert, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable, independent publications' WP:SPS. But it's being ignored.

Given that the controversy is already in the public domain (with the video views and signatures of support), alongside the above academic/subject-expert references, is there any other reason why this shouldn't be mentioned in the article?

Help and advice truly appreciated, Thanks! 78.144.198.67 (talk) 20:59, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

I haven't read the huge discussion at that talk page in full, but I think it is correct to exclude this content. Robin Mukherjee (writer) may be an expert in certain things, but he certainly is not a recognized expert in who created the TV series Britannia. (Disputed edit for reference.) He is just a person who claims first-hand knowledge of this fact. So WP:SPS doesn't apply. Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:21, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for response, Calliopejen1. If you’ll allow me to reply with my counterpoints:

You have said Mukherjee isn’t a recognized expert in who created Britannia. However, it cannot be denied that he is an expert in writing for television (see his list of credits on IMDB - he has written for a number of the nation’s biggest shows), ergo he is an expert in this field. Furthermore, if you read the letter he published in support of his former student (Krushkoff), it is clear he is extremely familiar with the script that has allegedly been used by the creators of Britannia to write their show. So, he is an expert in writing for TV, has specialist knowledge of Krushkoff’s script and he has publicly stated that he believes Britannia is too similar to it for it to be coincidental. Based on the advice of the WP:SPS page, his expert opinion on the matter would surely be enough (on its own) for inclusion in this article. However, it's not just him from the university who have publicly supported Kruskoff's claims.

There are a number of other tutors at Bath Spa University (including the Head of Faculty) have supported Mukerherjee’s views. Please note the course was described by an independent assessor as the ‘flagship writing course of its type’ in the country (the UK), at the time. A number of award-winning and well-known writers teach/taught and have graduated from there. So, it is not just Mukerhjee who is saying it looks like Krushkoff’s work has been ripped off. (Annie McGann, wife of TV star and former Dr Who Paul McGann, a highly respected theatre stage manager, has described it as ‘blatant plagiarism’). So it’s multiple academic views who have supported Krushkoff. Some of the referable quotes are on his website.

That 1,500 people have publicly signed a petition in support of Krushkoff’s claims, and that his video’s have been seen tens of thousands of times with almost exclusive positive responses, means the controversy is already in the public domain.

Given the above, I believe the article cannot be described as being neutral without referring to the many people (including a number of experts and professional writers), who all believe it was Krushkoff, and not Butterworth, Butterworth and Richardson, who came up with the original story from which the show’s narrative was based on. 78.144.198.67 (talk) 14:55, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

None of that changes my assessment, sorry. Calliopejen1 (talk) 18:07, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Calliopejen1 Can you explain why, though? It's easy to say 'I don't agree', but until I know the reasons why, how can I change my own opinion? I'm having the same problem on the page itself. I'm presenting what I consider a valid counter-argument, yet it's ignored. FYI Bath Spa University's Creating Writing Faculty, which is where the references come from, was described as 'the flagship creative writing course of its type' at the time. The views of the faculty there must surely be of relevance. SethRuebens (talk) 18:13, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Three comments:

The lead section of an article ought to summarise the rest of the content. There is no mention of any dispute in the body of Britannia (TV series).

The clause which you added leaves it unclear what the dispute is about. Does Krushkoff claim that it was not the Butterworths who wrote Brittania? Who does he claim really wrote it?

You refer to "number of ... sources", but the only source you cited is a private letter, not a reliable independent published source such as Wikipedia requires. Maproom (talk) 22:24, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Maproom, thanks for replying. In response to your three points:

Firstly, the lead section referenced the controversy secion (which was in the body of the article for two months, before it was removed by someone who had written a number of articles about Sky's shows, and very little else).

The controversy section did explain the cause of the controversy: Krushkoff is alleging his academically submitted work was missaprirated by a journalist and adapted (poorly) and used as the source material for Sky's show. Given that his work was submitted to a leading writing faculty, he asked for their opinion and the response was exclusive: Robin Mukerherjee (highly respected screenwriter) wrote a letter of support, another of his tutors Annie McGann (a highly respected stage manager) has published her thoughts on the matter ('blatant plagiarism') and the Head of Faculty has been reported as saying 'we support these views'.

Wikipedia guidelines state the following, which is my issue here:

'Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established subject-matter expert, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable, independent publications.'

This includes writing things on blogs, newsletters, etc.

As I've mentioned, I'm not trying to start an article about the scandal, which would require 'notability' of the controversy (even though I believe 1,500 signatures in support and tens of thousands of video views would make it notable anyway). I'm merely trying to add an edit into the body of the existing Britannia article. Without it, the academic and expert views, as well as those 1,500 people, clearly aren't being represented. Thanks for reading! 78.144.198.67 (talk) 14:55, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

The Teahouse isn't the place to resolve a dispute. The correct place is on the article's talk page. If you can't reach agreement there, read about dispute resolution. --David Biddulph (talk) 18:28, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

David Biddulp ah, ok. Thanks for pointing that out, David. There is already an active discussion on the article's talk page, but I felt my questions were just being ignored (which is why I raised them here). I'll go down the dispute route tomorrow. Kind regards. 78.144.198.67 (talk) 18:36, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Question regarding file license

Should autopatrollers add |image has rationale=yes by themselves in the license template? -- CptViraj (talk) 06:15, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

CptViraj If a previous editor (likely the uploader) has in fact provided a rationale but failed to add the template parameter it would certainly be helpful for a patroller (or indeed any experienced editor) to correct the template. If the reasons for usign the image under fair use are in fact reasonable clear, it would even be helpful to write up and add the rationale, but that is farther than most patrollers choose to go.

By the way i suppose that you mean "New Page Patroller" not "autopatroller". An autopatroller is a user who is experienced enough that his or her edits are automatically marked as patrolled, and do not need to be reveiwed by a member of the NPP. Pretty much all NPPers will have the autopatrol right, but reverse is far from true. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 15:16, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

@DESiegel: No, I really mean autopatroller. As you said "An autopatroller is a user who is experienced enough that his or her edits are automatically marked as patrolled, and do not need to be reveiwed by a member of the NPP", so would it be fine if an autopatroller add that parameter by himself/herself on his/her own uploades? -- CptViraj (talk) 03:53, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

I see, CptViraj In any case, any user, with or without any special rights, may (and indeed should) add that parameter if a proper rationale is present. This is true whether the user has personally written the rationale, or some other editor has previously done so. Is that clear? DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 13:44, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

@DESiegel: Yep, this is helpful. Thanks :) -- CptViraj (talk) 13:55, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Removal of warning notices on page and questions regarding suitable sourcing and citation

Hi everyone.

Recently I discovered someone had created a page on my deceased mother Berrell Jensen. I do not know who created the page. The text was terrible, with multiple factual and grammatical errors so I ventured to fix, and to improve with photographs and so on. I did make a couple of changes when I first saw the page, using an IP, but nothing substantial. It was only very recently, and mostly yesterday, that I made substantial changes, knowing there were more to make.

Given the immediate responses from other editors clearly I made a huge mistake in not doing a ton of research on editing Wiki pages prior. Nevertheless I feel the way everything was approached was unnecessarily heavy handed. To be honest the good feelings I've always had about Wiki are sullied somewhat. I know I went about my editing the 'wrong' way, learning as I went, I knew there was much to fix. I believe it was the increased activity on the page that brought the page to the attention of certain bots and editors. One did write a friendly note on my talk page for which I am grateful.

And, if I had left well alone I am sure the page would have remained in its original state with multiple factual errors. I will endeavour to find citations and so on, but I suspect the page will be deleted by then.

However, I hope this is not the case.

Here are a few issues I'd like to resolve:

1. The notice on the Talk:Berrell Jensen page.

It states that "This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons".

Berrell Jensen died in 2015. How do I have this notice removed?

2. There are two warning notices on the actual page and I'd like advice on how to deal with them so they can be removed.

a) The first warning is regarding notability and that citations are needed.

There are dozens if not hundreds of newspaper articles about Jensen's work, mostly from 50-60 years ago in South Africa and so far I have found none archived online, not unless I pay for a service. Can I upload scans of the articles to wiki commons and use these as citations? I notice this has been done on other pages.

Given Jensen created 22 large scale sculptures in metal, commissions for public buildings, including for Jan Smuts International airport (as it was known then) and the Johannesburg Municipal Library (which I can in fact find a citation for but I don't know if it's suitable - https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=4pe5AAAAIAAJ&q=Berrell+Jensen&dq=Berrell+Jensen&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwizo6Xyz-jqAhXhUBUIHRp2BnQQ6AEwAnoECAYQAg) and 14 of these commissions were created at a time when most white women in apartheid South Africa were absolutely not welding, I am very surprised that such full-on interrogation and opposition has been given to this issue of notability. Some of the South African newspaper articles I have in my possession attest to how unusual her work was at that time by very language used in the article (highly sexist language).

I believe that one of the reasons behind this notability issue is the lack of recent articles about Jensen. The primary thrust of Jensen's work spanned only 13 years, from 1960 - 1973.

b) The other warning is: This article may have been created or edited in return for undisclosed payments, a violation of Wikipedia's terms of use. It may require cleanup to comply with Wikipedia's content policies. I was told by an editor that whoever originally created the page has been blocked. I presume it must have been someone paid by a man who has kept an online archive of South African Artists. He is in his 80s and I can only surmise he was unable to do such a thing himself, probably he hoped to have many artist pages on Wiki and paid someone to do so. I don't know this for a fact but given some of the citations link to his online archive, it seems likely.

Given I have nothing to do with whoever did create the page, how can I have this notice removed or prove that I, myself, am not being paid?

3. COI issues.

I am aware there are COI issues and I have stated this on my talk page and by using my name not an IP. There is no one, to my knowledge, who could update this page rather than myself. They are all over 80 or dead.

All help much appreciated regarding how to deal with the three warning notices mentioned above and if scans/pdfs of articles uploaded to wiki commons are suitable forms of citations and sourcing. Sandra Anne Jensen (talk) 16:41, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

To answer one of your question: content - old newspaper articles - do not have to be available on line to be cited. Scanning to Commons is the wrong way. All you have to do is create a reference that lists the title of the news item, newspaper, date, page, and if there was a byline - the name of the person who wrote it. David notMD (talk) 17:34, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

I removed the PAID tag, which was inappropriately added just recently, and replaced it with a COI tag. Your User page and the Talk page of the article establish what your COI is (article is about your mother). The tags are not so much warnings as article status indicators to readers of the article. If you add valid references, an editor (not you) can decide to remove the first tag. The second tag stays until enough editing is done by other editors. Again, not for you to do. David notMD (talk) 17:52, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

@David notMD Thank you so much for this. Huge help.

@David notMD: I've mentioned this on my user page but perhaps this is a better place to do it. A user has offered to assist with citations. It will take time, but it will be done. In the meantime, another user has edited content in a way that makes notability tag added by Unforgettableid even more concerning by removing two mentions to important exhibitions (citations are needed yes but that was not why they were removed, the reason stated is "unencyclopedic") and has rendered one section of the text non factual, an error made before, and one of the reasons why I originally went in to fix the page up. Ireland is not in the United Kingdom - and the history of the countries makes this a very grave error. This is exactly the kind of thing that if seen by anyone would make them think Wikipedia is totally unreliable. Because of all the attention I've received on this page I'm very nervous about going in to fix it myself. I've let them know on their talk page but no response. It feels to me that there has been a lot of focus on what I have done wrong, and yet users are going in and doing this kind of thing so it is confusing for me quite honestly. I would also like help in understanding why there has been so much focus on this page and my actions on it. Is it because the page is thought to be created or edited in return for undisclosed payments? If so, I can probably find out if this is the case as I can contact the person who would really be the only person to consider making this page due to their years of digital archiving information on South African artists, including Berrell Jensen, and some of the original citations and information on the page refer to his website. SandAJ (talk) 09:46, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Need help

An article name Babushan Mohanty was needed additional citation. And someone added references and it improved. So can anyone help me how to remove the tag Additional situation or can someone remove the tag from there. Myslfsbhijit (talk) 19:43, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Myslfsbhijit, welcome to the Teahouse. Almost everything in the article is still uncited. Per WP:BLP, this is not good enough. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:28, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi , thanks for your review and reply. So can you help me how to remove the tag of additional citation need when the article will completely improve ??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Myslfsbhijit (talk • contribs) 06:33, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Deleting revisions

Another user has been adding copyrighted lyrics to Don't Know Why. I want to use Template:Copyvio-revdel to request redaction of these edits, but this is the first time I'm doing this, so I'm a little confused. I know how to add the revision number to the "start" parameter, but it's the "url" field that's perplexing me: "The url of the site the article was in infringement of, or a text explanation of where the source(s) can be verified". No site was infringed upon. How do I handle this kind of thing for copyrighted song lyrics? Thanks. ResPM ^{come to my window} 01:18, 26 July 2020 (UTC) ResPM ^{come to my window} 01:18, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello, ResolutionsPerMinute, and welcome to the Teahouse.

I have done quite a few copyright revdels. What the reviewing admin needs is some way to see the copyrighted text that has been infringed, so that s/he can evaluate exactly what is and what is not an infringement. Note that the admin must confirm that an infringement exists at all, as well as which revisions infringe. So if the copyrighted text is available online, please link to it. If it isn't online, explain where and how to find it, please. Without this, the reviewing admin has a much harder task. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 03:01, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

@DESiegel: I'm a little puzzled. Because it's a modern song (2002) by a well-known commercial artist, shouldn't we assume that it is copyrighted in the absence of evidence of a suitable license (unlikely)? This search shows it's been reproduced all over the place, but those are probably all copyvios, too (as usual), so we don't owe them the protection so much as the original artist, right? The relevant edits are the latest four: 969526531, reverted at 969528179, and 969533068, reverted at 969534325. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 04:19, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

AlanM1, I agree with you and just did the revision deletion. @ResPM:, I think you're all set. Calliopejen1 (talk) 05:58, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. Pinging ResolutionsPerMinute. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 07:03, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

@DESiegel: Thanks for the clarification. So what you're saying is I need to link to some site that displays lyrics, like MetroLyrics? Does it matter if the site is a licensed lyrics provider? ResPM ^{come to my window} 11:49, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

AlanM1 It wasn't so much a question of confirming that a commercial song was copyrighted -- I would indeed assume that -- as of confirming that the text added to the article was in fact the words of the copyrighted commercial song. For that purpose, any reasonably reliable site, copyvio or not, would do. Yes I probably should have just searched for such a site myself, but I answered the question as asked. ResolutionsPerMinute, Calliopejen1 says the issue is now dealt with. But yes, any such site, licensed or not, would serve the purpose, IMO. While we do not normally link to sites that display copyright violations, for the limited and very temporary purpose of showing what the copyrighted text is, I think it would be OK. If a licensed site is known to you, that would be better, of course. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 13:58, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Could someone take a look at an article?

There’s an article with a lot of misinformation and unsourced information about living persons. I tried deleting the edits but other editors told me not to edit the page because I made too many edits and rolled back all of my edits. I understand this, but there are still many edits on living persons without sources which can be reached or any other form of information. If someone could look and possibly work with me or point me in the right direction, that would be great. Thank you! Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 06:07, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

@Lima Bean Farmer: To which article are you referring? —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 07:05, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Seems to be this. Calliopejen1 (talk) 07:56, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

I don't think so, as a bit old. So, again, which article? David notMD (talk) 10:00, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Calliopejen1 has the right one, it’s the 2016 Trump Endorsements. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 11:45, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

So AlanM1, could you please look at it or point me to someone who will? Thank you. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 23:35, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

@Lima Bean Farmer: The place to find editors interested in the article is on its talk page. If that doesn't work, try the talk page of the WikiProjects mentioned on the article's talk page. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 06:29, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

AlanM1, where do I find the article’s wiki project? Thank you. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 15:44, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

• Link: List of Donald Trump 2016 presidential campaign endorsements

@Lima Bean Farmer: WikiProjects mentioned on the article's talk page i.e., you go to the article's talk page. At the top of the page, there are yellowish boxes with various messages, including one for each WikiProject to which the article "belongs". In this case, because there are several, they are inside the collapsed "This article is of interest to multiple WikiProjects" box. (You don't need to copy my whole marked up sig when pinging me – just {{U|AlanM1}} will do. Thanks.) —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 00:36, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Notability of Individual Passenger Train Articles

Hello fellow editors ! I have a doubt regarding inclusion of individual articles on normal passenger trains (which are approximately 14,000 in India). For example articles like Indore–Ajmer_Link_Express, Rajendra_Nagar_Patna–Indore_Express. These both examples are completely normal trains, which clear fails WP:GNG and their is no other subject specific guidelines for trains (that I am able to find). Most of these articles are unsourced or poorly sourced stubs. I believe that these articles should not be included on English Wikipedia, this may also be a case of WP:NOTTRAVEL. Can someone provide their views about it. Thanks. Zoodino (talk) 06:08, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Zoodino, I would ask this question at WT:RR. Calliopejen1 (talk) 08:10, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Calliopejen1, I was going to ask at WT:INRI, but asked here earlier to get a general perspective from people who were not a part of the project. I would ask there, but if you or anyone else have views about it, you are welcome to comment here. Zoodino (talk) 15:10, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Is this article self-promotion?

The article about Tim Dodd reads like self-promotion to me. Things like bed sheets, childhood toys, ... triggered me. It feels like it abuses references and links to other articles. But I might be completely wrong - I haven't edited much on Wikipedia.

Reference: Identifying_blatant_advertising (Behalf_of_a_person)

Should I propose changes? 176.63.184.197 (talk) 07:45, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

You're welcome to propose changes. If I were you, I wouldn't be worried by the man's bedsheets; however: (i) "In 2019, Everyday Astronaut stickers were taken up to the International Space Station and photographed floating in the cupola." Cited source for this: a tweet by the man himself. (ii) "he released exclusive video interviews [...] that trended on YouTube." Who were or what was excluded, exactly what (if anything) does "trended" mean, and what's the source for the claim of trendedness or whatever it is? -- Hoary (talk) 09:01, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

about the new article

new article

my husband published a book in 2018 we want to share some of the imporptant informations of that book and author, can we create the new article about that book in wikipedia? shall wikipedia approve the article?? Mariyadivya (talk) 09:21, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Mariyadivya Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia is not a place to merely tell people about something, like a book. As an encyclopedia, Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources with significant coverage state about a subject, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability(in this case, the definition of a notable book). Not every book merits a Wikipedia article for this reason. If this book has significant coverage in independent reliable sources(such as reviews or discussion in the news or academic journals, not brief mentions or press releases), it may merit an article.

Furthermore, you would have what we call a conflict of interest(click to review) in writing about your husband's book. Writing a new article is the hardest possible task to perform on Wikipedia; it's even harder to do when you have a conflict of interest, but it is not impossible; you would need to use Articles for Creation to create and submit a draft for review by an independent editor before it is formally placed in the encyclopedia. Please review the conflict of interest policy before attempting to do that. 331dot (talk) 09:28, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

New pages feed backlog

What is with the incredibly long backlog at Special:NewPagesFeed? There are unreviewed articles dating from 2005, and are over 9000 total. I recently created my first article (Ed Currie), and discovered it is pending review. I understand that I just created it and it may take a while, but I am concerned it may take months (due to the backlog). Why is the backlog so long, and is there anything I can do? I-82-I | TALK 09:44, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Don't panic, I-82-I. What looks like an incredibly long backlog of articles from 2005 and 2006 is actually a reflection of very recent changes to pre-existing pages which have brought them suddenly to our attention. For example: Cypriots was a simple redirect page for 13 years until yesterday when this edit converted it to an uncited article. It will now be assessed as if it were a completely new page, but its date of creation is still displayed as 2006. But, yes, it may well take up to three months for a new article to be reviewed. With 9,000 new articles pending review - our volunteers are not going to rush to especially review yours or anyone else's. You will have to be patient. The trick is to make the reviewer's life easy by ensuring you include clear evidence that the topic is notable. If, after 90 days, an article has not been individually reviewed, then it will be released to Google to be indexed. That won't stop someone subsequently nominating it for a deletion discussion - but that applies to every article here. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 10:30, 26 July 2020 (UTC)  

I had recently edited "UNTOUCHABILITY" but it has been deleted after a few days..why is that so ?

 103.208.71.97 (talk) 11:20, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You edited the article to bold a word in the lead of untouchability; typically only the title of the article, or the titles of redirects to an article, are bolded. 331dot (talk) 11:35, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

103.208.71.149, who edited 22 hours earlier, damaged the markup for an illustration (with no explanation) put various sentences in bold (with no explanation) and removed two references (with no explanation). So in the space of 22 hours, two IP numbers belonging to Global Networks Infocomm Pvt Ltd added nothing to the article Untouchability but instead merely degraded it. I note that another user has since appeared, again putting bits and pieces in bold. My thanks to Suneye1 and Kakima minimoto for their work reverting such damage. -- Hoary (talk) 12:13, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

how do i add reference to the content ?

 Rishabhmukherjee.work (talk) 14:05, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Rishabhmukherjee.work. Welcome to the Teahouse. This is a good question, and an essential skill for anyone to learn if they are tying to write an article from scratch, as you are. You will find guidance by reading though this page: Help:Referencing for beginners. Nothing about a living person should be added to Wikipedia unless supported by a citation. These have to be independent, detailed and reliable. See WP:RS for an explanation of what that means. You might also wish to undertake our interactive tour of Wikipedia called The Wikipedia Adventure, and then read Help:Your first article. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 14:16, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Rishabhmukherjee.work Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Information on citing references can be found at this page. I would note that if you are associated or work for the subject of your draft, you will need to read and formally comply with the paid editing policy and the conflict of interest policy. 331dot (talk) 14:11, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Appears to be about Draft:KaySukumar. which is only article Rishabhmukherjee is editing. David notMD (talk) 17:14, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Just so you know, User:David notMD, I had an IRC discussion with this user and they told me that they were associated with but not paid by the subject. They also sometimes need some direct explanation instead of just pointing them to policy. Just a note so you guys can help this user. Ghinga7 (talk) 19:47, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Looking at the draft, Rishabhmukherjee now shows proficiency in creating references. David notMD (talk) 21:34, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Script size

It seems I have changed something in my preferences but I don' know what? My script in the English wikipedia is now smaller than in the Wikipedias in other languages. Before the script in the English wikipedia was the same size as in the other Wikipedias. I have searched for a solution, but it seems I need help. Thank you very much for anyone who can help. Paradise Chronicle (talk) 14:29, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

@Paradise Chronicle: Perhaps you changed the skin at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-rendering? There doesn't seem to be a font size or name setting specifically, but the different skins likely use different fonts, sizes, etc. for some things. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 15:01, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Could it be a setting in your browser? Many browsers let you set size, e.g., Firefox changes size by pressing the CTRL key while using the mouse wheel; change the size, and a percentage figure is displayed near the top of the screen. The size is unique to a url; thus, en.wikipedia.org is treated differently than fr.wikipedia.org . If that's the case, while viewing the English language Wikipedia, reset the size to match your other language Wikipedias. Pressing CTRL plus "0" (zero) will probably reset it to the default size. --Larry/Traveling_Man (talk) 15:38, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

@Traveling Man:thank you very muchParadise Chronicle (talk) 16:03, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

@Traveling Man: Thanks for that. I didn't realize that the magnification was for each site by the browser. Learned something new! —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 19:45, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

@Paradise Chronicle: and @AlanM1: Sure thing. I stumbled across it a while back - and keep stumbling over it! --Larry/Traveling_Man (talk) 20:14, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Deleting birthdate

I have been requested by Mr. Arie Vardi himself to remove his birthdate, which I made several attempts but everytime his birthdate would reappear two days after. Please advise me on how to make this edit permanent. Thank you. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arie_Vardi 47.184.205.107 (talk) 16:21, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

If you are editing on behalf of an article subject, you will need to review the conflict of interest policy. If you are being compensated in any way(not just money) to do so, you must read and comply with the paid editing policy. A Wikipedia article summarizes information that appears in independent reliable sources. Very little on Wikipedia can be made "permanent". If his birth year appears in independent reliable sources, there is not much that can be done to keep it out. If his birth year is not widely published in reliable sources, it may be possible to remove it. You should discuss your concerns on the article talk page, and avoid directly editing the article. You may format your comments as a formal edit request to draw the attention of other editors. One user gave some helpful links in an edit summary here, that you might find helpful. 331dot (talk) 17:00, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Are you the same editor as User:Poonchuifun? Poonchuifun has repeatedly removed the age information from this article, has been warned to stop on Talk page. The year-of-birth information has been in the article for many years. David notMD (talk) 17:24, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

IP editor: I believe you are under the mis-impression that the article Arie Vardi "belongs to" or is controlled by its subject, Arie Vardi, as it might be on a social media platform like Facebook. That is emphatically not the case. Wikipedia is an encyclopædia, not a social media platform. It has articles (i.e., that belong to the encyclopedia) about notable subjects, summarizing what reliable, independent, secondary sources (like books, newspapers, journals, etc.) have said about the subject. What a subject says (or wants to say, or wants to "un-say") about themselves has very little to do with what the article contains, with the exception of provably incorrect or non-neutral point-of-view information. As has been said above, make your case at Talk:Arie Vardi, where editors interested in that article can discuss it with you. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 21:18, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia has a guideline specifically covering situations like this, about the presumption in favor of privacy. It says at WP:DOB "If a subject complains about our inclusion of their date of birth... err on the side of caution and simply list the year, provided that there is a reliable source for it." That is what is currently in the article. So unless there are extraordinary circumstances, it is probably appropriate to leave it as it is. --Gronk Oz (talk) 12:08, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Rumtek

Dear fellow editors, There is a page on Rumtek Monastery but no page on Rumtek. I think there was a page about the city but was merged into this.... Can you please rename the page to Rumtek, so that I can add information about the city... Cheers ... Anupam Dutta (talk) 17:20, 26 July 2020 (UTC) Anupam Dutta (talk) 17:20, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

@Anupamdutta73: Please make this suggestion on the article talk page: Talk:Rumtek Monastery. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 17:35, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Content deletion no discussion

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

I was looking up the National Christian foundation. The wiki article has a tag saying that it reads like an advertisement. There is little content concerning the many controversies that NCF is embroiled in. There is no talk page content.There have been repeated attempts to add a criticism section but the same IP deletes them with no explanation. I am not an editor. I am a user trying to get good information. How do I contact editors to look at the article. Thanks. 2600:6C50:547F:EE05:A9C4:338B:5830:1CB8 (talk) 19:15, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

The next best step is to start a discussion on the article's talk page. RudolfRed (talk) 19:50, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

I've looked at what's happened. I see your point, 2600:6C50:547F:EE05:A9C4:338B:5830:1CB8. I've asked about this at Talk:National Christian Foundation. Please feel free to participate in any discussion there. (You're likely to sound more credible if you register and edit while logged in.) -- Hoary (talk) 00:12, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Draft Questions

When I first started contributing to Wikipedia I attempted to create an article for a small indie rapper called Emay and I ran into a lot of issues because I was new to the rules. The article was flagged for deletion because I cited too many sources and a lot of the content wasn't necessary. I was able to convince the people planning on deleting the article to instead draftify the article and since then I've trimmed down the number of sources and the content. I was curious how I'd go about receiving advice as to which of the remaining sources are acceptable and I figured either someone here would help me with that or I could maybe submit the draft for review, but I wasn't sure if having the article reviewed was the right thing to do yet.

Here's the article:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Emay_(rapper)

Thanks for your help! TipsyElephant (talk) 19:17, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

TipsyElephant, I'd just go ahead and submit for review at this point. Others can chime in with their advice and suggestions, if they have any, though. Calliopejen1 (talk) 20:51, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

There were negative and false statements written about me on a Wikipedia page

 69.112.173.80 (talk) 20:32, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Assuming you are the subject you have edited about- if there is incorrect information in the article about you, please make an edit request on the article talk pages, detailing the nature of the errors. Please understand that Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources state. 331dot (talk) 20:42, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

The page Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Help has information about additional help options for you, as well. Calliopejen1 (talk) 20:49, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

1619 Project

In the 1619 Project citation it is correctly stated that enslaved Africans were in St. Augustine, Fl in the 15th century. I am concerned that this gives the impression that this was the beginning of North American slavery. American Archaeology Mag. Summer issue 2020 indicates the presence of enslaved Africans in what is known today as Mexico as early as 1518. Something to consider. 68.109.38.110 (talk) 20:56, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

If you have suggestions for improving an article, you should start a discussion on that article's talk page. Or, be WP:BOLD and make the change. A note though: 1518 is the 16th century, so it is after the 15th century reference you are concerned about. RudolfRed (talk) 21:04, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Need direction or support with draft

Hi there! I have been trying to add a living person biography for this acclaimed Doctor and realized I am not following the correct formats/templates. The document I was given to work with has the short bio I included, but then an extensive list for each of his accomplishments. I have edited pages successfully but never created a new one and I find myself at an impasse. I either need a ton of guidance or referral to a writer who can do this correctly if I provide the content.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Masood_A._Khatamee,_MD,_FACOG Leslie Mark (talk) 21:30, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

@Leslie Mark: Welcome to Wikipedia, thanks for wanting to add to it. Writing a new article is not an easy task, so you may want to instead just continue to work on existing articles. Some quick feedback: An encyclopedia article is not a CV. Start by cutting out the continuing education, societies, appointments, honors, and presentations sections. Then, you can use the guide at WP:YFA for creating the article. RudolfRed (talk) 21:39, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

SO MUCH OF THE CONTENT needs to be deleted, and then references provided for the rest. For example, a list of continuing medical education programs he has taken part in has no part in the article, and same for the LONG list of presentations. I suggest you find existing articles about academics and model on those. David notMD (talk) 21:56, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

@Leslie Mark: The way you worded your question suggests to me rather clearly that you may have a close connection with the subject, or are being WP:PAID to write the article for them. If so, you should declare any Conflict of Interest and, if an employee or otherwise paid to write this, you are obliged under our terms of service to declare who is paying you. Please read both WP:COI and WP:PAID to understand what to do before continuing to edit. At the moment, what you have written looks just like a self-promotional LinkedIn page, full or trivia, and definitely not a succinct encyclopaedia article about a Notable Person. Nobody cares about all the trivia, and everyone needs references to independent, reliable, published sources which show how this "acclaimed doctor" is noteworthy. This matter should be addressed as a priority. Remember "less is more". Nick Moyes (talk) 22:15, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

@Leslie Mark: Your User page should declare by name every article you are being paid to edit or create. David notMD (talk) 21:49, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Christi Golden-Clark history

How do I get my name corrected and apart from other people with similar names to mine and a history of myself? 1964 Miss Teenage Detroit, Dearborn High 1965 graduate, shot by my husband Victor Robert Golden, Jr. on December 18, 1969, lead singer in local band, sang at Confetti Lounge in Dearborn 1960s, model 1960s, wrote FAMOUS LAST Words: "If I Can't Have You, No One Else Can" 2015 and FAMOUS LAST WORDS: "I Will Survive" 2020. Founder and Director of Overcomers of Domestic Violence and Asheville Writers Reign. Book signings at Barnes and Noble book stores, Interviewed by WLOS, Asheville affiliate of ABC and 96.5 Magic Radio by Bill Clement. 174.80.249.107 (talk) 21:59, 26 July 2020 (UTC) Christi Golden-Clark

This is a place for Wikipedia-related questions. Are you referring to existing articles with names similar to yours? Because I do not see any Wikipedia articles with similar names. David notMD (talk) 22:05, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

I suspect that the poster is searching, either in Wikipedia or in Google, David notMD, and Christie Golden is coming up. Christi, if there is enough material published about you by people with no connection with you, so that you meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, then we could have an article about you; but you are strongly discouraged from writing it yourself. --ColinFine (talk) 23:38, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Striking a deadname from my user page's edit history

Hiya, folks! I have a bit of an unorthodox question- I'm aware that edit histories are generally permanent, as that's the point of them, but quite recently I re-examined my identity and came to the conclusion that I'm trans-feminine non-binary. As such, I've changed my name to suit this identity, and because of this, I now consider my deadname to be rather sensitive information. This is a big deal for me, and this is the only time in my life I've ever changed my real name, so I hope there's no worry this will become a regular occurrence for me or anything! I understand if there's no way to do this, but I would really, really prefer that the edit history of my userpage doesn't contain any revisions with reference to my deadname. I'm willing to jump through whatever hoops it takes to achieve this! Thank you for your time <3 Mexxmer (talk) 22:28, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

@Mexxmer: Userpages can be deleted upon request. User talk pages can't be. Are you just referring to your user page? If so, do you want all but the current revision deleted? Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:37, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello Mexxmer. I've gone ahead and just done this in the usual manner. If you wish to delete the whole thing you can do that by adding {{db-user}} to the page. User pages (technically, pages in user space) are treated very differently from article pages and you get a fair bit of latitude with them. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 22:38, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you guys so much, this means a ton to me! :D Mexxmer (talk) 22:42, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

NEED HELP TO IMPROVE MY ARTICLE

I have submitted my article but was rejected so i can add more references, i have a few but i recon they are not satisfactory enough, kindly advise how many reference more will be adequate in order to get this article published, just now i have added 2 references (2 and 12), can these assist my article?.

• Draft:Ojay

Bethel Sandius (talk) 23:16, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Not really. Interviews do not establish notability. Nor podcasts. Nor brief mentions on music sites. This may just be WP:TOOSOON in his career for people to have written about him at length. David notMD (talk) 23:34, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello, Bethel Sandius, and welcome to the Teahouse. First of all you should note thatr the draft was declined not rejected. Declined means "this isn't ready yet, try gain." Rejected means "This won't ever be ready, stop wasting your time and ours."

It is not a question oif how many sources are cited as it is of their quality. To pass the general notability guideline and WP:BASIC there must be multiple sources (usually three to five), each of which is independent and reliable, and each of which contains significant coverage] o9f the subject. This usually means several paragraphs about the subject, not a brief p-assing mention. It also means that the coverage cannot be based primarily on an interview with the subject, nor on a press release. Also, links to online searches do not qualify. WP:NMUSIC offers some other ways to demonstrate notability, but but significant coverage in multiple sou7rce is the most commo9n. Let us examine the currently cit3ed sources:

1. Punch Newspapers. This is an interview and so does not count toward notability
2. Soundreloaded This has only trivial coverage, and has signs of being based on a press release. It does not help.
3. Eastern Mediterranean University. This is a site search and so not a valid reference. It should be removed. In any case a page from EMU could do not more than confirm the subject's education, which does not help with notability.
4. Galaxy seems to be an interview, and so of no value.
5. Naijaloaded (2018-09-08) seems to be an interview or a show in which the subject participates, and so of no value.
6. Naijaloaded (2018-12-17) seems to be an interview or a show in which the subject participates, and so of no value.
7. Naijaloaded (2019-06-14) seems to be an interview or a show in which the subject participates, and so of no value.
8. Naijaloaded (2020-02-05) seems to be an interview or a show in which the subject participates, and so of no value.
9. SoundCloud seems to be a recording of one of the subject's performances. This is not independent, and is of no value in establishing notability. It should probably be removed.
10. Soundreloaded "Money Hanger seems to be a video for one of the subjects songs. This is not independent, and is of no value in establishing notability. It should probably be removed.
11. NAIJAOXYGEN seems to be another video of the subject, or perhaps another link to the same video. This is not independent, and is of no value in establishing notability. It should probably be removed.
12. Soundreloaded "Ojay - Silekun". This is yet another video featuring the subject. This is not independent, and is of no value in establishing notability. It should probably be removed.

In short none of the currently cited sources are of value in demonstrating the subject's notability, and several of them should be removed from the draft.

I urge you not to resubmit the draft until and unless you have found three to five sources each of which is reliable, independent, and offers significant coverage of Ojay. Don't have too many sources beyond your core ones, or include a comment saying which are the best three to five. I hope that is helpful. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 00:06, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks so much for the insight, its sure very helpful, i will definitely look at the references again and follow your advise, hopefully will find the right references before the draft gets deleted. Appreciate your help DES

The alternative accounts

Hello fellow editors,

If the main account was blocked (for a certain period), but the legitimate alternate secondary account is still available to edit, Can the user ask a review of that block at "Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents" by this secondary account? Goodtiming8871 (talk) 23:56, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

@Goodtiming8871: Follow the appeal instructions in the talk page block notice of the blocked account. The appeal should come from that account. The block applies to the person. There should be no editing from any alternative accounts. RudolfRed (talk) 00:08, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

@Goodtiming8871: The blocked account is generally still able to edit their talk page to request a block review. Which account is this about? —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 06:47, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

@RudolfRed and AlanM1: Neither Goodtiming8871 nor that user's declared alternative account Goodtiming1788 are currently blocked, and unless I have missed something, neither has ever been blocked. This seems to be a purely hypothetical question, unless there is a third account involved. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 16:24, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

What does "Undo" mean in the page history?

Hi, What does "undo" mean in a page history? Does it mean someone has reviewed it and propose for the change to be undo? E.g. 17:58, 9 July 2020‎ 2001:b07:6442:43f4:4176:e7d:fb06:73ed talk‎ 59,977 bytes +55‎ undo Page: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Homer&action=history Thank you! 2600:1700:E120:9D80:1D68:60AC:94C4:51E5 (talk) 00:34, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

In an edit summary, it usually means reversing/reverting the edit, or series of edits, that came immediately before. -- Hoary (talk) 01:11, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

In a page history, each entry has several (blue-colored) links that are used to perform various actions. undo is used to revert (undo) that particular edit. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 06:51, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

How to reply to "Talk"?

How do I reply to "Talk"? Do I just click edit and start writing? Am I supposed to start writing at the top or at the end of what the other person sent me? Thank you! 2600:1700:E120:9D80:65AB:656:2D26:FA99 (talk) 00:51, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

I am hereby replying to you, within a page that isn't named anything-talk but is structured like a talk page. As you can see, I am replying below what I'm replying to. I am preceding my comment with one more colon than was before the message I'm replying to. As that message had no colons, I'm using one colon. And at the end of my reply, I hit the "~" key four times in a row. Hoary (talk) 01:14, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

I am hereby replying to Hoary. As the message above had one colon, I'm using two colons. And at the end of my reply, I also hit the "~" key four times in a row. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 02:35, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Adding a DISAMBIGUATION page and adding old article link to it, plus my new article

 Jagganath69 (talk) 03:29, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Greetings,

   With so much rules to follow, I do not know where to begin to effect this change. Can anyone give me a link to where I can read the instructions ?

DISAMBIGUATION

  "AT FIRST LIGHT"

-- current article is about Irish music group -- my new article (so far) : 2018 film by Fortitude International productions.

  IMDB link: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt5994166/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_0  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jagganath69 (talk • contribs) 03:33, 27 July 2020 (UTC) 

@Jagganath69: The relevant pages to look at are WP:DPAGE and MOS:DAB. However, I wouldn't worry too much about the disambiguation page yet since you haven't created the article for the movie yet. First, make sure the movie fulfills the notability criteria for films outlined at WP:NFILM. Then, head to the the article wizard to create a draft article. After the draft's quality is checked, it will be turned into a proper article, and then we would create the disambiguation page. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 04:13, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

List of templates?

I am looking for a list of templates and reasons for using them. Thanks! Thx56 (talk) 04:24, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

@Thx56: Well, there's Wikipedia:Template index, but that page is quite hefty and there's probably a lot more templates that aren't listed there. What exactly do you want to do with a template? ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 04:41, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

I have received a spurious comment related to the pages which I have not edited or even I haven't ever come across

May 2020 Information icon Hello, I'm Suneye1. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Dulquer Salmaan have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. Thanks. SUN EYE 1 07:38, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

Information icon Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Remya Nambeesan. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

Who is this Suneye!....Dulquer & Remya?....I do not know any of them...Kindly settle if any there any issue... Argsvdv (talk) 06:47, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

@Argsvdv: You are referring to messages that appear on the talk page of an anonymous IP address (e.g., User talk:192.168.123.45). ISPs reassign IP addresses to users at various times, so if you did not edit those articles, it was someone else who was assigned that IP address at that time. The solution is to create an account and log in, as you have now done, so anything you do is attributed to your username (Argsvdv) and any communication directed to your talk page (User talk:Argsvdv) will definitely be intended for you. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 07:04, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Magazine publication date is not acceptable

I am sure this has been asked many times, but I can't find it - please feel free to slap me with a fish if it's obvious.

I am adding a citation to a magazine which has a publication date of "Feb/Mar 2020". That's what it says on the magazine, and I tried to be accurate in the citation and put it there. But then I get the error message "Check date values in: date=". And looking at the Help, there is no date format which seems to support this. So how can I put the date correctly into the citation? Gronk Oz (talk) 07:18, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

@Gronk Oz: Don't abbreviate months and use an unspaced endash separator: |date=February–March 2020. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 07:45, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you @AlanM1: that is exactly what I needed. I tried lots of permutations, but not the right one (of course!) --Gronk Oz (talk) 08:09, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Anne Kabagambe

Hi there. I've had an AfC submission (Draft:Anne Kabagambe) pending for nearly 8 weeks now; I understand there is a heavy backlog of pending submissions at the moment but there hasn't been any signs of a reviewer looking to pick it up. Davykamanzi → talk • contribs • alter ego 10:49, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

You'll see from Category:AfC pending submissions by age/7 weeks ago that there are nearly 300 pages in that category, but fewer than 100 have had to wait 8 weeks, so hopefully you won't have too much longer to wait. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:57, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

"Strength in numbers, is strictly a material condition" -Carl von Clausewitz-

 74.138.140.251 (talk) 11:07, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Do you have a question about using Wikipedia? -- Hoary (talk) 11:35, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Wanted Help to Review My First Article

Hello, I have created my first article using Afc wizard. The draft Draft:David Friend is pending for review. Please help me review and learn how can I improve my article further. JakePeraltaB99 (talk) 12:54, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

JakePeraltaB99, The first improvement is to understand that a fact, once verified in a reliable source, is verified. "in a $1.42 billion deal.[4][5][14][15][16]" makes the draft unreadable, and is a prime example of WP:CITEKILL. Instead we need one excellent reference per fact asserted. If you are sure it is beneficial, two, and at an absolute maximum, three. A fact you assert once verified in a reliable source, is verified. More is gilding the lily. Please choose the very best in each case of multiple referencing for a single point and either drop or repurpose the remainder.

Things like this prevent readers and reviewers alike from reviewing the draft or reading a finished article in this state. Legibility is fundamental. I anticipate that this will be declined, which means pushed back to you for further work.

I have not been able to make a judgement on Notability yet because I have no idea which references you will redeploy or drop, For a living person we have a high standard of referencing. Every substantive fact you assert, especially one that is susceptible to potential challenge, requires a citation with a reference that is about them, and is independent of them, and is in WP:RS, and is significant coverage. Please also see WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources and WP:SELFPUB which has clear limitations on self published sources. Providing sufficient references, ideally one per fact cited, that meet these tough criteria is likely to make this draft a clear acceptance (0.9 probability). Lack of them or an inability to find them is likely to mean that the person is not suitable for inclusion, certainly today. Fiddle Faddle 13:02, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello Fiddle, thank you so much for helping me out. I will make the modifications to make the article better and then reach out to you when I need further help. Thank you again.--JakePeraltaB99 (talk) 13:10, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

JakePeraltaB99, always keep improving a draft even after you press submit, even when it is an article. Fiddle Faddle 13:13, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello Fiddle, sure. I will keep on working and improving the draft/article. I have removed the excess references as you had advised. Wanted to check in terms of notability, what can I improve here. I read the articles on general notability and biography notability but I am still not completely clear about it.

According to my understanding, if a person is well known and has any significant accomplishment, it makes that notable. Please let me know where am I going wrong. Thank you so much for helping me out. It's helping me a lot.--JakePeraltaB99 (talk) 14:45, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

JakePeraltaB99, notability is an awkward mix of objective and subjective. When I look at this chap though my jaundiced eyes now it is legible I see someone who's made a slew of cash starting companies up. Me? I see those folk as commonplace. They are notable to their staff and those who love or hate them. So there has to be more.

His products do not make him notable because he cannot inherit notability from anyone using them and when he makes them they are his products. It becomes a circular argument.

I can spot one item in here, the huge gemstone collection gift.

But this is me. Others here wil have different views. Some will be more stringent others less so. That brings me to my brief when I review a draft (I'm going to let other reviewers review yours since I've helped you). My role is to accept if I see it having a better than 50% chance of surviving an immediate nomination for one of the deletion processes. I think you can spot that I am at around 48-49% sure at present.

Why would I hesitate?

Because having an article deleted or discussed for deletion is unpleasantly stressful for the creator, and places a strict time deadline on improvements. Even then an improvement may not save the article Fiddle Faddle 14:57, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

JakePeraltaB99, And I failed to answer what would improve it! Something special about Friend would do the trick Fiddle Faddle 14:58, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello Fiddle, Understood. So I have to give and highlight the points which makes him different from the herd of common people who just run the companies and try to make big bucks. In the following case, I tried to focus on the following points:

1. He made donations to Yales Peabody Mueseum.

2. His synthesizer product was used by well known artists and also close encounters and R2D2(I think this is very significant as Star Wars is legendary and R2D2's voice wouldn't have been what it was without it.).

3. Boston Mayor gave delcared David Friend Day.

Should these be sufficient for a person to be notable or should there be something more apart from these. If yes, can you provide some kind of example for me to understand better.--JakePeraltaB99 (talk) 15:14, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

JakePeraltaB99, Examples are too hard to think of right how. You see I'd have to study him to be able to find the key thing. R2D2's voice would have just been a different voice, you know. We have many articles with less than this one. I argue they should not be here. Others argue that everything should be here.

Since I'm starting to waffle I've realised that my own use to you is probably at an end. I hope someone else will chime in, or that the draft will receive a very precise review, or acceptance Fiddle Faddle 15:21, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Fiddle, okay. Thank you for taking the time out to assist me. It was really helpful. I will wait for a more detailed review to understand better.--JakePeraltaB99 (talk) 15:54, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Issues with archiving references in Wayback Machine

Hi, I'm not sure if there is a fix for this, but it would help to know if what I'm seeing with Wayback Machine is common, maybe depending on the websites themselves, or if it's due to some particular setting in my browser maybe.

I try to archive every website URL that use as a source to avoid future broken links, but the process is very hit and miss for me. I have the Chrome Wayback Machine extension add-on and just click on it to "save page". Most of the time (maybe 75% of the time) it works fine and I the archived version opens in another tab from where I can just copy the URL.

However, sometimes it just doesn't work and I would get the message: "Hrm. The Wayback Machine has not archived that URL." Then it gets a bit circular, because it tells me (under the previous message): "This page is available on the web! Help make the Wayback Machine more complete!" with another button to save, which sometimes results in a message of "Done!" but the link generated only takes to the same error message, and sometimes trying to save again results in a message of "This was saved a minute ago" (something along those lines).

The latest URL where this is happening is this one (this happens to be in Spanish, but I've seen this behavior for a variety of websites in English too): https://www.salamanca24horas.com/texto-diario/mostrar/926553/danos-milenario-verraco-estatua-lazarillo-puente-romano

So two questions: - Has anybody seen these kinds of issues with Wayback Machine archiving? - Is there another way to archive source URls?

Sorry for the long rambling message and thanks for the help!

--Alan Islas (talk) 14:40, 27 July 2020 (UTC) Alan Islas (talk) 14:40, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Alan Islas, and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia, of course, has no control over the Internet Archive or its Wayback Machine, and cannot tell when it will or will not successfully archive a URL. However you should knowm that a script User:InternetArchiveBot (IABot for short) attempts to automatically add new sources in Wi8kipedia articles to the Wayback Machine. The prime developer of this script is in fact paid by the Internet Archive and so should know any best metjods for submitting pages for archiving. Its instructions say You can use this bot yourself by viewing the revision history of any page, and clicking on the "Fix dead links" link in the "External tools" section at the top of the page. so that is an alternate method for creating archives of pages used as sources in Wikipedia articles. Other t5han that, just keep trying. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 16:41, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

I've been having the same problem trying to get e.g. https://www.discoveryuk.com/series/wheeler-dealers/?ss=12#episodes archived ... are there any alternatives to the Wayback Machine? Louis Knee (talk) 23:02, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Alan Islas and Louis Knee, I often encounter that same problem with the Wayback Machine. As an alternate archiving option, I use archive.today. I have not had any problems with it. The linked page shows an extension for Firefox. I have a bookmarklet for archive.today, but I don't remember where I found it. Eddie Blick (talk) 00:19, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks DESiegel and Teblick. It's good to know that there is a bot fixing dead links, makes me feel better when I'm not able to archive all sources. On the other hand, archive.vn worked for that website that was giving issues with Wayback Machine! I think that between these two options I will be able to archive most standard websites. The help is very much appreciated! Alan Islas (talk) 01:41, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Seeking reviews on pre-submission page draft.

I have created a draft in the article wizard for Draft:Mary McEnerney Woolley and am seeking additional opinions on reference validity, format, section breakdown, and any other details that would weaken the caliber of the page. Additionally, I have omitted family information because I do not have independent references to corroborate, but see that many pages include this information while it is only partially cited. What is the best practice here? I am currently working on obtaining copyright privileges for a headshot, so it is not yet included. I am a wiki-beginner and welcome the feedback of the experienced community. Thank you. VonEisenMark (talk) 15:03, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

VonEisenMark, I suggest you press the submit button, and simultaneouslylook harder at your references. The first several are primary sources. That's kind of ok as lomg as you are sparing with them.

Are all the awards you quote significant awards? If so I think it is likely to be accepted. if not it will be declined, which means being pushed back for further work.

For a living person we have a high standard of referencing. Every substantive fact you assert, especially one that is susceptible to potential challenge, requires a citation with a reference that is about them, and is independent of them, and is in WP:RS, and is significant coverage. Please also see WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources and WP:SELFPUB which has clear limitations on self published sources. Providing sufficient references, ideally one per fact cited, that meet these tough criteria is likely to make this draft a clear acceptance (0.9 probability). Lack of them or an inability to find them is likely to mean that the person is not suitable for inclusion, certainly today. Fiddle Faddle 15:16, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Mike Peden Biography

This biography has be written about me and most of it is wrong or out of date. The page has been locked for over 10 years. How can I change this can someone help me with this? Mike Peden  Edinburgh360 (talk) 15:39, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Edinburgh360 If you are Mike Peden, please confirm your identity with Wikipedia by following the instructions at WP:REALNAME. Wikipedia articles summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to state about article subjects. If you have independent reliable sources with more current information, you may make a formal edit request(click for instructions) on the article talk page, Talk:Mike Peden, detailing any changes you feel are needed. 331dot (talk) 15:43, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

I have removed much of the unsourced content at Mike Peden as you say it is wrong, feel free to provide correct content with reliable sources on the talk page and it can be added to the article. Theroadislong (talk) 15:54, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Mike Peden Bio

Thanks for updating my bio. Because it is locked and I don't know how to edit this page I have attached an updated Bio. I'd be very grateful if someone can upload this for me. Bio attached.

Mike Peden is a British producer/remixer/composer best known for his work with the Lighthouse Family.

BIOGRAPHY Born in Edinburgh, Scotland, Peden began his career as a bass player and as a member of The Chimes. With over 25 years experience in the entertainment business. Successful writer and musician went on to become one of Europe's foremost and in demand record producers, producing the likes of Daryl Hall, David Bowie, Estelle, Will Young, Lucie Silvas, and Shakira. Mike was responsible for multi-million selling albums Ocean Drive and Postcards from Heaven by The Lighthouse Family. Mike's career also took him to Warner Records and Jive Records UK as a senior A&R executive director. Mike has recently founded a new Film and Media company, Mike Peden Productions Ltd. Edinburgh360 (talk) 16:38, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

@Edinburgh360: As stated above, the place for suggested improvements is at Talk:Mike Peden, supported by published reliable sources independent of the subject. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:54, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Article for Submission - Dr. Harinder Pal Singh Ahluwalia

Good day,

I submitted an article "Dr. Harinder Pal Singh Ahluwalia" but it was not accepted.

I am a new user to Wikipedia and would appreciate specific guidance in helping revise/rewrite the article so that it is acceptable for submission.

Any assistance which you can provide in this regard would be most welcome.

Thank you! HA1755 (talk) 15:51, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

You presumably haven't read the advice which you have already received on your user talk page. The words in blue are wikilinks to specific advice, so go away and follow those links. The most important is that you have no references, so you have not tried to demonstrate the notability of the subject. Less significantly, you have misplaced bold text, contrary to MOS:BOLD, and misplaced external links. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:09, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

No references = Declined. David notMD (talk) 21:14, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Why my article draft

 Technoto (talk) 16:32, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Technoto Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Do you have a question about your draft? 331dot (talk) 16:34, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

When and how will this draft article be made

 Technoto (talk) 16:37, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

You need to read the advice against autobiography, and you also need to read about notability. If you still want to proceed, you'll find advice at WP:Your first article. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:00, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Listing a new Company on Wikipedia?

Its been a few years since I had to list a company on Wikipedia. Can someone explain the process in a step-by-step fashion? Tbchristel (talk) 18:25, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to The Teahouse. If it is about your own company called "emuso" I strongly suggest you don't. Theroadislong (talk) 18:31, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Tbchristel Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You, like many, seem to have a common misconception about what Wikipedia is. It is not a place to merely tell about or "list" a company. This is an encyclopedia, and as an encyclopedia Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a company, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. Significant coverage goes beyond brief mentions, press releases, announcements of routine business transactions, the company website, or any primary source. Wikipedia is not interested in what a company says about itself. For these reasons, not every company merits a Wikipedia article, even within the same field. In addition, "new" or "startup" companies rarely meet notability guidelines. A company must already be known to merit an article.

Since you say you "had" to list a company, I gather that you work for or represent the company you wish to "list". If so, please review the conflict of interest and paid editing policies(compliance with the latter is a Terms of Use requirement) 331dot (talk) 18:34, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Follow-up to "Editing a page or adding information cant get the format cite right with the arrows Please help I dont know where to put the summary nor the citation"

 Bloopersbetty (talk) 19:40, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Which part of Help:Referencing for beginners, or the pages linked therefrom, don't you understand? --David Biddulph (talk) 19:45, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Bloopersbetty. I don't know how you're managing to do it, but you're putting the reference in the edit summary box. The details of what's happening depend on what editor you're using and on what device. Editing on a computer, I get a popup with title "Save your changes", and buttons "Publish changes" (at top) and "Review your changes" and "Show Preview" at the bottom; it has a field labelled "Edit Summary", where you put a description of the purpose of your edit. That is quite separate (at a different stage) from anywhere you might insert a reference. I mostly simply type the reference out using a citation template such as {{cite book}}; but I have sometimes used the WP:ProveIt tool, which I give a URL to and it works out most of the other parameters, and inserts them. I wonder if you're somehow confusing these two stages? --ColinFine (talk) 20:17, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Publishing an article on a blacklisted name, Aziz Feyzi Pirinççizâde

Hi Teahouse, I have a question. I created a page for Aziz Feyzi Pirinççizade, a minister to the 3rd Turkish Government and also accused of being a perpetrator of the Armenian Genocide imprisoned in Malta and recipient of the Medal of Independence from the speaker of the Turkish Parliament. The article is rather well sourced. The links to other pages already exist, the article also exists in Turkish, but the title is blacklisted. I tried to publish it as a draft for review, but failed. What to do? Paradise Chronicle (talk) 21:34, 27 July 2020 (UTC) Paradise Chronicle (talk) 21:34, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Paradise Chronicle, and welcome to the Teahouse. So far as i can see Aziz Feyzi Pirinççizâde is not subject to creation protection on the en.Wikipedia. ("Blacklisting" is for sites that should not be linked to.) It may be that the name is restricted on the Turkish-language edition of Wikipedia, I wouldn't know. But each project is separate and makes its own determinations in such matters.

You have successfully submitted User:Paradise Chronicle/Aziz Feyzi Pirinççizâde for review through the Articles for Creation process. A reviewer will probably6 move it to Draft:Aziz Feyzi Pirinççizâde, and draftspace is the usual location for AfC drafts, but you don't have to do anything abo9ut that. While waiting for a reviewer to get to this draft, which may take a while as there are many drafts waiting and none too many reviewers, you may continue to improve the draft. Some of the referencing style is no9n-standard, and you may wish to read or re-read Referencing for Beginners. Birth and death dates (or years) if known, would be helpful. The "Biography" section might read better if split into separate paragraphs. All but one of the currently cited sources seem to be by just two authors. Finding additional sources by other authors might be a good idea.

What made you think this title was "blacklisted", Paradise Chronicle? Did you get some sort of message about it? DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 21:54, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi DESiegel, I've tried to publish the page as Aziz Feyzi Pirnççizade and also as Aziz Feyzi Pirinççioğlu. Both names didn't work. Both names were mentioned as blacklisted. I've mainly two sources, but both of them are well known and as far as I know rather respected and often mentioned in the academic world in the field.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 22:51, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

I've tried to send you (DESiegel) an email with a screenshot of the denial of the article, but it wasn't possible. Maybe also due to my fault.I also tried to publish the article on the name you redlinked, and was also refused and shown that an article on this name (mine) was in the draft space.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 23:03, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Paradise Chronicle I did not get any email from you. I don't know what held things up, but I am confident it wasn't because the article name was restricted. Was the message you saw one that starts:

Before creating an article, please read Wikipedia:Your first article. We recommend that new editors use the Article wizard.

If so that was not a notification that the title is protected, it is just the normal "think twice" message, because people creating an article from scratch in mainspace are often gpoing to cause themselves problems, and creating a new article when there is already a draft by the same namr often wastes the time of one or both editors involved.

However, I am glad that you did not bypass the AfC review by just creating the article in the main article space. You can do that, but i8t is usually a bad idea. It can lead to a far less friendly discussion at Articles for Deletion. Instead, IO urge you to wait for the review as patiently as you can. If the reviewer approves the draft, the reviewer will do the move to mainspace, getting admin help if it should be needed, which I don't think it will be in this case. In the meantime you may work on improving this draft, or start another draft if you choose, or both. Finding additional sources for this draft might help, it. You could also work on improving existing articles, which is a good way to develop your Wikipedia editing skills. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 23:54, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Image uploading

Question if a image is copyrighted and you want to upload it is listing the company site and saying that they are the Arthur enough for it be on Wikipedia or do you need permission? BigRed606 (talk) 22:01, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello, BigRed606 and welcome to the Teahouse. Permission for use of a copyrighted image is neither needed nor wanted, unless the copyright holder has released it under a free license acceptable to Wikipedia, such as CC-CY-SA. If that has been done, the image may be uploaded to commons, from which it can be used on all Wikimedia projects.

Otherwise it is a non-free image and may only be used o Wikipedia through a claim of Fair use. In that case all of the non-free use criteria must. This policy is intentionally more restrictive than US copyright law requires, to favor free content. You would certainly need to list the source of the image, but the various other criteria would also have to be complied with. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 22:11, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

How much coverage is required to be notable?

I'm working on Draft:Rishi Kumar. He is a congressional candidates, city council-member, and Democratic Executive Board member who recieved 38,000+ votes in the jungle primary. It was rejected due to notabilty. How much national news coverage do I need to find to meet the notability threshold? PoliticalEddy (talk) 22:04, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi PoliticalEddy. Since this is currently being discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Rishi Kumar, it’s probably better to ask your question there. You might also want to take a look at WP:BIO, WP:SIGCOV, WP:NPOL and WP:TOOSOON since those pages seem to cover the main issues others are having with the draft. I also suggest looking at WP:OWN, WP:PROUD and WP:COI (in particular the section WP:LUC) because if by chance an article is created about Kumar, neither he nor anyone connected to him will have any sort of final editorial control over it and he (or they) might find out the hard way that there can be a real downside to having a Wikipedia article created about you. — Marchjuly (talk) 22:23, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Hello, PoliticalEddy and welcome to the Teahouse. This draft is now being discussed for possible deletion at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Rishi Kumar and that is the place to make any arguments for retaining it.

As a general rule, under WP:NPOL candidates for office are not considered notable simply for being candidates, and campaign-related coverage must be quite exceptional for it to establish notability. Winning am primary election (in the US, other countries have different systems which may be treated differently) is also not considered to establish notability.

Therefore, Rishi Kumar is likely to be found an appropriate topic for a Wikipedia article only if:

1. He wins the election and becomes a member of the US Congress, or
2. He has sufficient coverage, unrelated to his candidacy for Congress, to clearly pass the general notability guideline. This will require multiple high-quality independent published reliable sources, each of which contains significant coverage of Kumar No press releases, supporter's pages, routine coverage, interviews, or passing mentions will count for this. The number of votes obtained at a primary will not be relevant. Note that being a member of a city council or a party official will not automatically confer notability, and routine coverage that anyone in such positions would expect will be of limited value at beat. Purely local coverage is likely to be rejected also. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 22:30, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Redirect / Disambiguation

Hello, All. This is my absolute weakest link here at WP. I just cannot seem to wrap my head around searches, article names, redirects, disambiguation pages, when it comes to moving an article to the main space when there are other names already at play.

For instance, I type in Jake Day and it gives me the page for Jacob R. Day but with a disclaimer at the top: (Redirected from Jake Day). Of course, when I type in Jacob Day or Jacob R Day, nothing comes up but a list of searched words in common. Yet when I type in: Jacob R. Day, it takes me to the original created page. First, how does one make it so that when a name such as this is created for an article (with multiple ways of search entries), that it leads to the page?

Why I am asking is: I have created an article for main space on the Disney animator Maurice "Jake" Day. Now, I do not want to put in Maurice "Jake" Day, because anyone searching for this subject, will have to put in the exact writing that I put in to move it to the main space. He was known as Jake Day more than Maurice Day or even Maurice Jake Day. So here is the dilemma:

1) Jake Day redirects to Jacob R. Day, but Maurice Jake Day is far more well-known a subject and should obtain the search title (as you can see, there is a template about possible notability on Jacob R. Day's page). 2) How does one go about creating a redirect link (page) for Maurice Jake Day when someone types it in without the " " marks? or some form of the name as a whole? Obviously, I will be placing the full name on the disambiguation page for Maurice Day. But that too is a conundrum to me. 3) How does one even create a disambiguation page?

Lots to ask for in one post; but I should really know my way around these corners by now. Thanks in advance. Maineartists (talk) 22:51, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello again Maineartists. I gather this is about the text now in User:Maineartists/sandbox correct? What article title did you want for this? I will be happy to help move it and create useful DAB and/or redfir pages.

As to your questions:

• A draft can be moved over an existing redirect by an admin (or a page mover).
• A redirect that did not previously exist can be created simply by searching for that titloe, clicking the red link and inserting #REDIRECT [[Target Article Here]] and saving. That is all there is to it.

I hope that is helpful.DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 00:15, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Ah! DESiegel to the rescue AGAIN!!! I would like the text in my sandbox to be moved to a main space as Jake Day. I think the tag at the top should be correct for Jacob R. Day. I just don't know how to make that page its own title (Jacob Day - or - Jacob R Day). Then I will place a link in the disambiguation page Maurice Day. Thank you for the rest above explanation. I'm understanding more now. As always, you are a lifesaver! Maineartists (talk) 00:25, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

I have moved the sandbox, added a hatnote to Jacob R. Day, and added an entry to the DAB page. Only the move required admin rights. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 13:28, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

For Wynford Vaughn Thomas why dif you not include The splendour falls: The story of the castles of Wales Hardcover – 1 Jan. 1973 by Wynford Vaughan-Thomas? :)

 2A00:23C4:8486:A300:81BA:CB7C:BEC3:79F4 (talk) 22:52, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi IP 2A00:23C4:8486:A300:81BA:CB7C:BEC3:79F4|2A00:23C4:8486:A300:81BA:CB7C:BEC3:79F4. It's not really clear what your question is, but from the title of this section perhaps it has to do with Wynford Vaughan-Thomas, in particular Wynford Vaughan-Thomas#Works. Sometimes such sections are not intended to be exhaustive and include everything ever written by the subject of the article; rather, they are only meant to include the subject's most notable works or at least in this case only those works which have Wikipedia articles written about them. I'm not sure what the inclusion criteria are for that particular section, but if you think the The Splendour Falls: The Story of the Castles of Wales should be added to it, then you can be WP:BOLD and do so yourself. Just make sure you leave an edit summary explaining why if you do. If another editor disagrees with the edit and reverts it, please then try and follow WP:BRD and discuss things on the article's talk page. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:33, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Need Help!

So I’m a fairly new wiki editor and I keep stumbling across out of date information/lack of information. I looked up Univ Texas at Permian Basin (UTPB) for my own use and a massive overhaul is needed. As an public college that still exists the most recent info about the school itself (new buildings etc) seems to be something from 2008. I added what I could but I’m not expierenced enough to do it as in my opinion it needs an overhaul and I’m just an editor. I didn’t know if there was someone who could help me walk through how to do it. If so thank you very much! Huskermax5 (talk) 23:04, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi Huskermax5. We are all just editors so to speak which means if you think you can improve the article by updating it, then you can be WP:BOLD and do so. Any mistakes you might make can pretty much be fixed by another editors; so, as long as your mistakes are being made in good faith, things should be fine. If, however, you're not very familiar with editing articles (particularly article format and syntax) or if you want to completely overwrite the article, then it might be best to be WP:CAUTIOUS and propose things on the article's talk page first. You can also try seeking help at a WikiProject like Wikipedia:WikiProject Texas or Wikipedia:WikiProject Higher education since those are two places where you'll likely find editors familiar with the general subject matter who might be able to give you some more specific advice. One thing to keep in mind is that just because article content is a little out-of-date doesn't mean that it's no longer encyclopedically relevant. In other words, article content shouldn't be removed just because it's old. So, if you're adding new content, then also consider ways to revise the existing content so that it better fits it will the most recent version of the article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:43, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

I mean the info still holds true but it needs a lot of more recent additions. Its like talking about a sports team up until 2008. The info is true but it needs more info. But yeh I'll likely try the higher education page. Thanks! Huskermax5 (talk) 03:11, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

​ As I posted above, you can be WP:BOLD and try and improve the article. Just remember any new content you add should be verifiable and properly supported by citations to reliable sources, should be written in a neutral manner and not be undue, and should be something actually relevant to general readers of the article, not just people familiar with the univeristy. As long as you make good-faith attempts to improve the article and are will to follow WP:BRD if someone disagrees with your edits, you should be OK. If nobody says anything than you can assume WP:SILENCE until somebody does. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:05, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

My account appears to keep resetting

I've gotten a congratulations for my first post weeks after I got a similar mail that was actually my first post. More over, my notifications keep getting cleared out and the Contributions link doesn't contain any entries. Any idea what's going on? It's hard to keep track of what you've done when you have no record of it. Any help you could offer would be appreciated. Gettinwikiwidit (talk) 23:35, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

@Gettinwikiwidit: Is it possible you are editing without logging in? Does this Teahouse edit show in your history? You are obviously logged in now since we see your name. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 00:45, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

@Timtempleton: Hmm.. Are wikidata.org and wikipedia.org accounts separate? I don't recall creating two accounts, but I may have. I can see different sets of contributions in both, so I feel less like I'm going mad at the moment. Gettinwikiwidit (talk) 02:46, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

@Gettinwikiwidit: You'll have different editing histories for each, but don't have to log in separately. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 01:34, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

@Timptempleton: Thanks very much. It was very frustrating even finding this conversation when looking through my wikidata.org notifications. Gettinwikiwidit (talk) 02:46, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Archives

How may I archive my talk page. I have around 30 conversations and see no need to have these conversations around anymore. Is their a way of contacting the bot who archives and ask him to archive my talk page?PNSMurthy (talk) 03:51, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

@PNSMurthy: See Help:Archiving a talk page#Automated archiving. I have a working example of lowercase sigmabot III running on my talk page. I wouldn't suggest ClueBot III since apparently it doesn't work well when a lot of pages are linked to it, which is true for user talk pages as a link is generated every singature. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 08:36, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

@Ganbaruby: Thanks man!PNSMurthy (talk) 08:42, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

About hotstar not support android4.4

Dear, sir, I have a question about hotstar is or not android 4.4? Can you help me. 101.32.47.129 (talk) 09:30, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello, IP editor. I'm afarid we can't help you here - this is a help forum for people having difficulties actually editing Wikipedia. You might be better off searching Google for the relevant terms yourself, or perhaps asking at our Reference Desk where a bunch of editors do try to to answer various questions from folk. Nick Moyes (talk) 11:00, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Review of the Draft

Please give me feedback on what I can do to make this page acceptable. I am new to wikipedia. I was trying to follow the format given by you all. I don't know where I have gone wrong. I am very willing to make efforts and changes that will satisfy the editors at wikipedia. Please advice where it went wrong. Thank you. Fazlul683 (talk) 09:57, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy: Draft:Institute of Certified Public Accountants of Sri Lanka. Per the reviewer's comments, the references do not establish notability and most of the content of the draft has no references. David notMD (talk) 11:18, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Fazlul683, and welcome to the Teahouse. The trouble is that you have followed the format, without being aware of much more important issues. Please have a look at your first article — Preceding unsigned comment added by ColinFine (talk • contribs) 13:17, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

PUBLISHING AN ARTICLE

I have made 10 edits, does this qualify me to write articles on a new topic? MayenNelson (talk) 11:17, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

That, and having been a registered editor for four days, so, Yes. David notMD (talk) 11:52, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

@MayenNelson: Could I just add to what has been said, in that that is a minimum requirement before you may put a new article onto Wikipedia yourself. It does not reflect whether you are actually competent to do so. Creating a new article from scratch is the hardest task anyone can perform here. Many, many newcomers fall at that first hurdle and leave utterly disappointed as they simply don't have the understanding of what Wikipedia is, or what its requirement are. (Think of it like having a provisional driving licence. You may drive a car with it, but you might also crash if you set off too fast, or ignore the road signs or what other drivers are telling you) You are better drafting an article via our New Article Wizard at Articles for Creation page, but even better off spending quite some time doing simple editing first to get the hang of things. Do have a go at our interactive tour called The Wikipedia Adventure, and then read this page, too Nick Moyes (talk) 13:23, 28 July 2020 (UTC)  

MayenNelson, I'll echo the advice of Nick S Philbrick(Talk) 13:37, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Publishing Status Please

ReyanshGaur (talk) 14:15, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

I had created an article REYANSH GAUR . I want to know about my article status. please Guide and Help ReyanshGaur (talk) 11:40, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy - draft is in this editor's sandbox, not submitted to Articles for Creation: User:ReyanshGaur/sandbox. The editor's User name is the same as the subject of the draft (a young boy). MANY! of the 'references' are images of newspaper pages, and thus copyright violations (?). David notMD (talk) 11:56, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Oh thanks alot sir, Yes i noticed that admin and article are same "REYANSH GAUR". I by mistake created editor account in the of reyansh ( of which i want to publish article ). i have created my new account. can it be possible to get this article publish from new account (my name shishir gaur). please guide.

please help and short out this — Preceding unsigned comment added by ReyanshGaur (talk • contribs) 13:46, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Question on the Referencing Web-Based Video Game News Outlets

Hi, I'm currently writing an article about a video game website, but my submission was declined due to a lack of proper sources. I was wondering which of the following websites I could cite as a credible source, and how I can check if websites meet the notability guidelines. Here are the websites:

• Eurogamer
• CNET
• Polygon
• NME
• Game Rant
• Launcher, The Washington Post Video Game Outlet
• BGR
• Mashable
• Gamesradar
• Sick Critic
• HappyGamer
• Nintendo Wire

Which of the above can be considered credible, if any? And how should I go about finding credible websites to cite (bearing in mind that this kind of thing isn't present on JSTOR or Google Scholar)?

The article I'm writing is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Nookazon

Thanks in advance. Squid45 (talk) 11:54, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Squid45, and welcome to the Teahouse. This isn't field I know well. I am sure that CNET is a generally reliable source, and I suppose that the site affiliated with the Washington Post would be. One way to tell is to look in a sites "about us" page (or whatever the site calls such a page) and look for an editor and indications of separate reporters supervised by the editor. This may indicate editorial control. You also want to consider the reputation o0f the source, and whether its coverage seems to repeat PR from the subject. If multiple sources have near-identical coverage, that is a red flag that all of them are based on the same statement from the subject. You can also ask at WP:RSN. But remember that you don't just need reliable sources, you need significant coverage a passing mention in a reliable source does not help with notability, although it may support a particular fact.DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 15:15, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. I did some looking around and I found that the Video Game Wikiproject had a "Sources" section that was able to link me to various helpful websites, so I have now managed to find a list of generally notable and reliable websites. Thanks for the assistance :) Squid45 (talk) 15:27, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

concept mapping

I need help with concept mapping for the steps in the assessment process and the evaluation process for Individual and Community Health Assessment, Communications, and Interdisciplinary Collaboration for Improved Outcomes

 Doliverdell (talk) 12:18, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi Doliverdell, unfortunately the Teahouse is for answering questions on how to edit Wikipedia. We have a seperate page at Wikipedia:Reference desk for asking factual questions. However, since the question is phrased like one from an assignment, I doubt that you'll find much help there either as the question requires you to think the question through and draw connections on your own. That's the point of drawing a concept map in the first place. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 12:39, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Caedmon College

88.108.161.172 (talk) 13:19, 28 July 2020 (UTC) The Viking was the school's magazine when it was named County and the Grammar. I have a copy of one of the magazines NUMBER 68 and the year is 1956/57. My question is ---- what was the NUMBER of the last Viking issue? The 50 year Jubilee edition was printed in 1962 and I have a copy of this. Thanks 88.108.161.172 (talk) 13:19, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello IP editor. The Teahouse is a place for asking questions about the processes editing Wikipedia. We cannot help you research sources. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:24, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

The Wikipedia referenece desk might be able to help with this question. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 14:58, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Problem with citation format

In Joseph Rockwell Swan (politician)#Writings you'll see that the first reference is messed up. There's another one messed up in Joseph Rockwell Swan (politician)#Ohio Supreme Court.

I've looked at Wikipedia:Citing sources and still can't figure it out. I don't use this citation style. }}< Please don't just repair it, but explain where the mistake is, or I'll do it again. Thank you. deisenbe (talk) 13:59, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

@Deisenbe: the article has <ref name=rand/>[[#rand|Randall 1912]]: 138</ref>. I'm not sure what you were trying to do there, but <ref name=rand/> is complete, so the end tag </ref> is unmatched. I tried <ref name=rand>[[#rand|Randall 1912]]: 138</ref>, but this defines the ref named "rand" more than once. Peter coxhead (talk) 14:22, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

I took out </ref> twice, but it's still not right. The problem is the page numbers. deisenbe (talk) 14:34, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Deisenbe could you explain more precisely how what now displays i8s different from what should display? The "ccite error" message is now gone. I see that the ref to "Randall 1912:" is used several different times (six at the moment). Did you want different page numbers on the different uses? If so {{RP}} can be used for this purpose. Or if that was not the issue, please explain what is still wrong. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 15:07, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

What I want to do is make references like the system I know and have always used. Please look at the code for this:

In other words, how do I cite the item plus the appropriate page reference? deisenbe (talk) 15:36, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

References

As you've shown in your example, use {{rp}} for the page numbers. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:50, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

I NEED HELP WITH ADDING MY COMPANY ON WIKIPEDIA

 MayenNelson (talk) 14:12, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi MayenNelson. Please stop posting in all capital letters. Please also read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest, Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) and Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything for reference. — Marchjuly (talk) 14:23, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

@MayenNelson: Wow! Did you genuinely mean to release for free the Sujimoto logo for anyone to use or modify as they wish, just as you've done here and here? Nick Moyes (talk) 15:52, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Discussing splitting a article

I have proposed splitting the article Political history of the United Kingdom (1945–present) and added a notice to the page, as rfc pages are not for discussions about splitting articles and the article's talk page isn't very active is their any way I can draw greater attention to the proposal? Llewee (talk) 15:51, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Greetings, Llewee, and welcome to the Teahouse. By placing the notice on the top of the page, you have already added the article to both Category:Articles to be split from July 2020 and Category:All articles to be split, which are maintenance categories watched by other editors. Another thing you can do is post a notice on the discussion pages of the WikiProjects this article falls under, all of which appear to be at least reasonably active. CThomas³ (talk) 20:02, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

@Cthomas3: Thanks, will do :)

Company page Sadas wih new references

Hello, I would like to create a company page for Sadas, an Italian multinational computer technology company. I created a trial page in my sandbox: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Giuseppe_Ardolino/sandbox and I am following some suggestions received in previous topics. I kindly ask for some feedback before the publications in order to respect Wikipedia best practices. In meanwhile I keeping updating the trial page with new references for each paragraph. Thank you for collaboration }} Giuseppe Ardolino (talk) 15:58, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

@Giuseppe Ardolino: It rather looks like your employer and CEO has already most of the work for you over on Italian Wikipedia (see https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utente:Roberto_Goglia/Sandbox), and that you've simply copypasted a translation into your own sandbox without crediting him. You've even left in some of his original Italian headings, wrong bold formatting and promotional bullet links. Which three sources do you feel will best meet our notability criteria outlined at WP:NCORP, and why isn't there yet an article on this company on Italian Wikipedia?  Nick Moyes (talk) 16:32, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Table: Centre align text for just a single column

Hi

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Dave_F63/sandbox

I wish to align the text for the 'CRS Code' column to 'center'. I know how to align it for the whole table & each individual cell, but is there a 'this whole column has this style' option? Could you provide a link to the page I must of missed, which specifies it. Thanks Dave F63 (talk) 16:41, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Greetings, Dave_F63, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm personally not aware of any wikimarkup that does this, but you might take a look at {{Aligned table}}, which may provide the functionality you are looking for. CThomas³ (talk) 19:45, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Edting page names

How do I edit page names? 2601:248:681:25A0:D89C:4ACE:8E7A:1298 (talk) 16:51, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

To change a page name, you would have to ask for a requested move. If you follow the directions on that page, it will start a discussion about it. It will then be closed when the discussion is done, as either rename or keep at current name. Hope this helps! Ghinga7 (talk) 16:56, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Needed help with review of new article

Hi, I wrote this article about this Indian television show Draft:Dil_Dosti_Dance in June and it's been more than 6 weeks now that the article is still pending review. Will any of you kind folks please help out with the review of this article so that it can get published?

Many thanks! SarahR2 (talk) 17:25, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

On the draft it says "Review waiting, please be patient. This may take 8 weeks or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 3,047 pending submissions waiting for review." Is there any good reason why the review of your draft should take priority over the others? While you are waiting you can address points such as reference punctuation and reference reuse. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:35, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello - got a welcome and mad message with it

Hi I am a higher graduate from INCORE with a distinction in The Troubles. I got this message when I was trying to add senior academic (Professor/Author) level text and back it up to wiki standards, and so Im totally bemused. Can anyone explain in plain English and politely what it means. I certainly didnt "threaten" anyone, let alone "other editors" but some tabloid journalists, agenda-writers and Irish republicans are making the Ulster Defence Association page well, censorship of the UDA's true nature and history. What I add is academic from the world's number one Conflict University in NI Troubles, there is no agenda but to add what I learn. I have worked on the peace process 20 years, I dont think its right that editors come on and accuse me of "threatening" when I am chilling out in my spare time for free, trying to help improve wikipedia which in my community many say reads like one group mainly tabloid writers' propaganda of good, legal until the end of the war, people. I am trying to be the editors' friend not threaten them, by improving a page and pages. Please explain, for I am baffled and have no sides or agenda but to explain the truth about the past. Thanks.

Might be an idea to read this before issuing meaningless threats to other editors -----Snowded ^TALK 14:37, 28 July 2020 (UTC) 2.28.135.179 (talk) 17:46, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

@IP you aren't exactly better. Please dont run to the admins yust because you didn't get your way. There are other methods to come to an agreement first. @Snowded: for your notice Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 17:54, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks - This editor is warring against three other editors and has ignored the 1RR Troubles warning notice - no engagement on the talk page. This edit summary contains the meaningless threat -----Snowded ^TALK 17:57, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Creating first article

I'm sure you've been asked this a zillion times. I've created my first article. It's in my sandbox complete with all references, links etc. Nothing controversial. No copyright problems. I'm getting lost in the process for uploading. Derekguthrie (talk) 18:13, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, I have moved your draft to Draft:Alastair Little and added a submit button for you, I have also edited for style per WP:MOS, before submitting it will need some editing for neutral tone. Theroadislong (talk) 19:32, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Derekguthrie: welcome to the Teahouse. Although I'm sure the subject is certainly notable, as has just been said, there are quite a few problems, not the least of which is a combination of copyright and/or extraordinarily close paraphrasing. You need to write the content entirely in your on words, not just change a few words here and there in some bits. Also, it reads like a promotional chapter in a book, and definitely not like a neutral encyclopedia article. By way of example, it drops all sorts of random quotes from newspapers for no apparent reason, such as this classic: He is well-educated and studied social anthropology and archaeology at Cambridge: "about as common as a footballer with A levels". But, that said it's not a terrible start, and I would urge you to continue working on it, cut out the unnecessary stuff (less is more on Wikipedia!) and also to look at other articles here to see the style of writing used within them before you do submit it for review at Articles for Creation. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:35, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Question

subject where is my 53 deleted videos and emails

I will get a suppeno if I hath to I want my 53 deleted video and email back with sofialynnadkinsrobertson from jimsnedegar 184.13.62.145 (talk) 18:17, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello, IP editor. This is a forum to help new users edit Wikipedia; I'm afraid your question is incomprehensible to me. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:12, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Their 53 deleted videos are on Comet Neowise, and will not return for millennia. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:57, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

My explanation makes as much sense as the question. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:58, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

LOL Nick Moyes (talk) 21:33, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

I suspect that "suppeno" is "subpoena", and what we see above is technically a legal threat. Maproom (talk) 21:50, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Blocked Edit

Hi, This is new to me. I just created an account and was given a suggested page to edit. When I add info, I found a list of villages and so I added the section, and then added the names of the villages. Then after a while, it says that the bot has detected something that no longer allow me to add info. I'd appreciate some guidance in this matter.

This is a page suggested by wikipedia that needed editing, and I did the research and found some info.

I don't want to be considered a violator of your rules just as I am starting out. Any pointers or explanation would be very helpful. Thank you! Bcdone1112 (talk) 21:48, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Bcdone1112, your edits to Bada Malhera are still there. I can see no evidence that you've been given a warning for anything - there's nothing on your talk page, which would be the normal place for a warning. Why do you think you are no longer allowed to edit articles? Maproom (talk) 21:56, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

What edits does ClueBot NG revert?

What types of edits does ClueBot NG revert because I have gotten 2 edits on Fremont,California and Devon Island reverted by ClueBot NG?

Hurricane Gert

Hurricane Gert was a Category 3 But it says 2. It Should say 3

(Lolasaffy (talk) 22:41, 28 July 2020 (UTC)) -->

}} Lolasaffy (talk) 22:41, 28 July 2020 (UTC)