Wikipedia:Teahouse

PrimeHunter, 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

Where to post/get help with a suspected case of WP:Citogenesis?

What is the right place on Wikipedia to either record or get help with investigating a suspected case of citogenesis? The information in question was added in 2007, uncited. Since then, a number of places have repeated the information in extremely close phrasing to that on Wikipedia, but I cannot find a single source from before 2007 that mentions it.

I strongly suspect citogenesis, but am unsure what the procedure is to "prove" it or add this to a list. There *are* what we would usually consider "reliable sources" that share the information, so I am concerned that the information might end up back on Wiki again, this time cited. Thanks for your help! Ganesha811 (talk) 23:35, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Ganesha811. If this really is a case of citogenesis that's gone undetected for 14 years, it sounds like it's going to be a mess to deal with. For reference, would you mind linking the article and specifying the relevant citation(s)? TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 23:59, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Yes, for sure! So the article in question is Joseph Bazalgette. Earlier today I removed (diff) a paragraph with a story about him planning of London's sewers. Another editor had earlier marked it with some citation-needed tags. The info was added by User:SmokeyTheCat in 2007 (diff), who seems to have been a fairly prolific user at the time, but has been inactive since 2015.

As I said, I cannot find *any* reliable sources that include this anecdote from before 2007. That is not to say that none exist, but I looked for about 45 minutes today using Google Books, JSTOR, and other resources. On the other hand, post-2007, there are sources that seem to have this story included, often using phrasing extremely close to the wiki source. From the Institution of Civil Engineers, from The Spectator, from The Hindu, from the Museum of London (in modified form). There are also several books on Google Books from this decade with the same story, such as these two, both about 'creative thinking.'

There are innumerable contemporary committee reports and whatnot that show up about Balzagette and his sewers, but none of them mention the specific calculation that was given on Wiki. In particular, none of them contain that specific quote, which since it is supposedly a direct quote should be easier to find. This is a long post, but I hope it adequately covers why I think this is citogenesis. Thank you for your help, TheTechnician27 Ganesha811 (talk) 00:34, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

@Ganesha811: Well, I definitely see your point, and it's a worrying one (I also see you likely found it through the r/TIL post, which somehow got 90k+ upvotes for an uncited piece of trivia in a Wikipedia article; classic r/TIL). I found this book from 2001 but, unfortunately, no instance of that quote anywhere. In the meantime, I've placed the offending material on the talk page for ease of access, and I'm going to try to track down an expert from a relevant WikiProject in the hopes they'll be able to provide a pre-2007 source. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 01:06, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

In the meantime, I've been looking for sources, and Aline van Duyn, writing for the Financial Times, seems to have really messed up on this one: their 2009 article "Insight: Accounting for unforeseens" reads: "When planning the sewage system, the engineer “took the most dense population, gave every person the most generous allowance of sewage production and came up with a diameter of pipe needed. He then said ‘Well, we’re only going to do this once and there’s always the unforeseen.’ So he doubled the diameter to be used,” according to a Wikipedia entry. [emphasis mine]" Thankfully, they at least attribute it, but you'd really think that if it isn't cited and you can't find anything to attest to it that you wouldn't even include it in your article. Mercifully, that does tell us something, though: in 2009, the markets editor for the Financial Times likely couldn't find a source for this quote or event, which definitely makes this more suspect. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 01:26, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

@Ganesha811, TheTechnician27: I have located the content in a book, word-for-word, from here (see content started at the very end of page 13, and spilling over through the first paragraph of page 14). However, there were two editions – a first in 1996 and a second in 2009, i.e., pre- and post-dating the addition of the content to the article. So, it could be unattributed plagiarism and infringement of the article, only included in the 2009 edition's content seen at the posted link. A post to WP:RX would seem to be in order, asking if someone can access and is willing to check the 1996 edition.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 06:21, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Fuhghettaboutit, thank you. I was able to locate a version of the 1996 edition online through a friend's academic account and it did not have the anecdote included. I suspect the author plagiarized from Wiki for the 2009 edition. Ganesha811 (talk) 20:49, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

In such a context, I would remove it from the text, and leave a commented-out note explaining what happened. "If you want to restore this anecdote to the article, you must cite it to a source from before 2007." DS (talk) 18:06, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

DragonflySixtyseven, that seems reasonable. Good notion! Ganesha811 (talk) 14:25, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Are these two articles talking about the same subject?

I stumbled across the article Palar River (Kaveri basin) and noticed a disambig at the top to the article Palar River. Upon closer inspection, the one with the disambig "(Kaveri Basin)" has only had two edits: one when it was created less than a year ago by Vijethnbharadwaj, and one when Wolfgang8741 provided the disambig, possibly not realizing these two articles could be about the same subject. The same map picture is even shared between articles.

If they are the same, what would I even do in this case? Merge the content into the main article and then just make the duplicate a redirect to the main article?

As an aside, I had to blank a very obvious case of plagiarism from the main article that had been sitting there since 2015. Is there anything else I should do besides adding this information back in in my own words? TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 04:08, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi TheTechnician27. I have not looked at first issue. As to the second (good catch!), for future reference (since I have taken care of the issue at the article), you would mark the history for redaction using {{copyvio-revdel}}. I wrote more expansive instructions for what to do in two places that might be of interest: Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Reviewing instructions#Step 1: Quick-fail criteria → click show → scroll down to Copyright cleanup instructions → click show; and Wikipedia:New pages patrol#copyvio cleanup. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 05:31, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

@TheTechnician27: Palar River (Kaveri basin) mentions the Palar blast, so I think they're writing about this river: [1]. Some of the references also mention a "Palar River" that forms the north border of Erode. I think it's plausible that they're not the same river. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 05:53, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi @TheTechnician27:,@Wolfgang8741:,@Fuhghettaboutit:,@Ganbaruby:. Palar River and Palar River (Kaveri basin) refers to two different Rivers. Palar River is an independent River which takes birth in Nandi Hills, Karnataka, flows through Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu to get drained up in Bay of Bengal. It flows through Bethamangala, Kuppam, Vaniyambadi, Ambur and many other towns. Palar River (Kaveri basin) takes birth in Northern Part of Erode district adjacent to Kambathrayan Temple in Tamil Nadu, flows through Kadambur covering Guthiyalathur Extension R.F. later forming border between Karnataka and Tamil Nadu states, passing through villages of Ookkiyam, Hoogya, Gopinatham and drains up to Kaveri River near border village of Palar, just before Mettur Dam. Since these two Pages gives info on two different Rivers with same name, I wish to retain both the articles. The same map picture can be used since the attached map did not refer to a single River, but depicts Hydrography of entire Tamil Nadu/Puducherry, 90% of Kerala and few parts of Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh. Entire path of both Palar River and Kaveri River (Palar River (Kaveri basin) is a tributary of Kaveri) can be seen in this Map and hence it is justified to retain the same. Moreover this Map is not a Political/Provincial Map. It is a Physical Map and Hydrography is very much a content of such Maps. -Vijethnbharadwaj (talk) 08:06, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

</nowiki>== Jack the Ripper - story - references needed ==

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_the_Ripper

I wish to request references be cited in this story to the claim that the "canonical five" were prostitutes. This claim has been adequately disputed. Such a claim is hearsay even if it is considered to be part of the historical record. A claim such as this, without references perpetuates a potentially prejudicial stance, whereas it may be what popular journalism at the time claimed as being true, is now considered hearsay and requires references as to the origin(s) of this claim - or at the least, a disclaimer of some kind as to the legitimacy of such a claim. See "The Five" by Hallie Rubenhold, copyright 2019, Mariner books edition 2020.

NOTE: The preview of a request for references by appears to be unsupported. My edits not being accepted due to page protections. BobKat107 (talk) 16:42, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

@BobKat107: Please discuss this on the article's talk page Talk:Jack_the_Ripper RudolfRed (talk) 16:53, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

(ec)BobKat107, try to discuss this at Talk:Jack the Ripper, it's the place to start, and not protected. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:57, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

BobKat107, I found these previous discussions, you may or may not find them interesting: Talk:Whitechapel_murders#Prostitutes?, Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard/Archive_188#Whitechapel_Murders. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:01, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Policies/guidelines about overediting

Hi there! I just wanted to know whether there is any policy or guideline which says something like "in order to prevent the revision history of an article to become clogged up, editors should ensure that all the information they want to edit is done at once". Thank you! EvanTaylor1289 (talk) 21:30, 26 February 2021 (UTC) Clarification - what I mean when I say "at once" is "in one edit as opposed to dozens of minor edits". EvanTaylor1289 (talk) 21:33, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

@EvanTaylor1289: I agree with the comment in the essay Wikipedia:Editcountitis that a person shouldn't make lots of small edits to an article just to increase their edit count. However, there can be times when it's beneficial or easier to make a few edits in a row to the same article. GoingBatty (talk) 21:43, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

GoingBatty thanks! EvanTaylor1289 (talk) 21:45, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Hey EvanTaylor1289. I am betting the germ of this post is an absurdity – and extreme example of this playing out – but "legitimate" reasons that I can think of for "chunking" edits include:

1. Chunking (writing);
2. (this is a big one) making sure that any changes that might be seen as controversial (and thus more likely to be reverted) are separated from any edits that are not, even if closely related in concept/form – so that if and when one is reverted, other edits the same reverter might not object to, are not roped in
3. (in the same vein) any reverts that may be re-reverted ("revert last as ____, and copyedit")
4. (another big one, though I don't know that it's well known) any edits that remove or add line spaces (or swap paragraphs, and similar), for the reason that they make it much, much harder to parse what was changed in the diff view – indeed when doing a copyedit, I will sometimes attempt to make all changes that avoid this in one edit, and do the spacing in the next, for just this reason (I have been reverted on this basis);
5. edits incorporating copied content from other articles, where the edit summary is used to provide the copyright attribution (and when fixing missing attibution) for obvious reasons;
6. when removing copyvios, for separating distinct by copied source, as noted in the separated edit summaries;
7. Where you believe the edit summary is important for listing different tasks, not just for other editors' understanding, but so that you can see what you did, to review later (maybe years later) in an organized and non-haphazard fashion.

Best regards.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:04, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Some articles need so much work that it would be impossible to do everything in one massive edit. As long as Edit summaries identify what parts of the article was being revise, and a description of the edits, multiple edits should not cause problems for subsequent editors. Example: during raising Vitamin K to Good article, I made >100 edits. David notMD (talk) 02:17, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

It is, however, possible to do a great amount in one massive edit (my own most recent example). -- Hoary (talk) 08:19, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Wow! This has received many replies! The reason I asked the question os because I noticed that someone had done >100 minor edits to one page in a row. I THINK this should be covered by David notMD‘s response though

Sometimes I copy a section to my Sandbox, work there, then replace the original with the revised. I would not do an entire article. In the example you mention, if truly minor edits, sounds like someone running up their edit count. To what end? David notMD (talk) 04:15, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Edit count

Is there any way I can view my edit count? LOMRJYO_(About) ^(contribs) 02:21, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@Lomrjyo: Welcome to the Teahouse! At the top right corner of any page, click Preferences. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 02:26, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Lomrjyo, and welcome to the Teahouse! There are a couple ways to do this. For starters, if you're on desktop and go up to your 'Preferences' tab, you can view it under 'Basic information'. Likewise, for more advanced information, you can go to your 'Contributions' page (also up top if you're on desktop), scroll to the bottom, and select 'Edit count'. In your case, that would return this webpage. Hope this helps, and congratulations on 200 edits! TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 02:26, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Warning: once you learn about xtools, you'll never stop checking, it's so satisfying. Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 06:26, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

HUGGLE check HUGGLE check HUGGLE check! Although I've managed to stop it now, thankfully. Giraffer ^{(talk·contribs)} 09:18, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Election?

How is a administrator elected on Wikipedia? ExclusiveEditor (talk) 05:26, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@ExclusiveEditor: see WP:Requests for adminship. WhoAteMyButter (📨│📝) 05:38, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

It's a small group! Only about 500 people with Administrator status are currently considered active (another 600 or so less active or have stopped participating in Wikipedia). David notMD (talk) 08:38, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

References

I am a newbie and I apparently have a problem with references and citing sources in the article named Fred Belloni. I have been reading several times about this subject and cannot seem to get it right. Thank you. Bello239 (talk) 11:18, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

It's not an article; it's a draft. It now has one long section. Within this, two assertions (or not) are referenced:

• "He was the only one"
• Either (A) "in the row of East Indies composers" or (B) "He was the only one in the row of East Indies composers".

However, "He was the only one" is, by itself, meaningless: He was the only one what? "[I]n the row of East Indies composers" doesn't state anything; "He was the only one in the row of East Indies composers" raises the question: Which row?

I don't like to say this, but these two references are, as they stand, worthless.

The rest of the section is unreferenced.

William Walton is another article on a composer. It's much longer, and much better referenced. Length is not necessary; good referencing is. Please examine the article William Walton to see how it's done. -- Hoary (talk) 13:00, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy: draft is Draft:Fred Belloni. As Hoary wrote, ALL factual statements about Belloni must be supported by citations. Equally important, the style of writing is not encyclopedic. David notMD (talk) 15:38, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Self vandalizing and reverting

If a user is vandalizing and then reverting those edit himself then what warning should be given? ExclusiveEditor (talk) 14:24, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

ExclusiveEditor, I would say still the same warning, as they're still vandalizing. Perhaps you could also say disruptive editing. βӪᑸᙥӴ • Talk • Contribs 14:26, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@ExclusiveEditor: Hard to say without knowing the real specifics; looking at the edits, seeing how many and their contours; knowing the user name and studying what's going on. Maybe a tailored warning essentially saying "what the hell is X about" or maybe a block's in order. Can you disclose?--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:41, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Merger deadlock

I recently started my first attempted merge proposal at Talk:Mosaic theory (litigation). It's kind of a complicated one, but it felt important enough for me to try to do it. One of the editors I pinged for comment came back and—they were not happy (and rude). It's only us two on the talk page, and I think we're just going to be deadlocked with WP:NOCONSENSUS. What can I do (without seeming to WP:FORUMSHOP)? —Wingedserif (talk) 14:56, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@Wingedserif: I was originally going to suggest putting in a request for comment, but the RFC pages says to NOT do that for mergers. Instead, as Wikipedia:Merging#Notify involved users (optional) suggests, you can ping others who have edited the page in the past to comment. Good luck - hopefully you can come to an amicable resolution; TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 23:29, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Article regarding historical/genealogical organization

I did some basic editing for an historical group I belong to, and apparently all of the edits were accepted. Then I wrote a brief, original article about the umbrella organization that curates and guides these types of historical groups. It's been in existence since 2002, and has wide breadth within the field of history and genealogy...and certainly does not market or fundraise in any way. I linked it properly...it was tight. (Maybe someone could review it my finite history), and I immediately received a "this article has been flagged for instant deletion" from a wiki editor (Valdemar2018) who appears to be an expert in writing articles on insects...which is all good; but perhaps not the person to vet the nature of my topic. There did not seem to be an explanation about why my article was going to be deleted...not sure if it actually was deleted...but I'm wondering if perhaps I teed it up in the wrong location or something. It certainly has significant relevance in juxtaposition to the many societies and organizations in wikipedia that come under its purview, so it did not seem logical at all...and happened almost instantly. I "appealed" the instant deletion decision and made my case, and received the final note:

"the user page is not for to create articles, also the content is in your sandbox. Regards Valdemar2018 (talk) 05:57, 27 February 2021 (UTC)"

Anyway, just making the effort to add to the corpus of my area of expertise, with content that is not trivial, self-serving or profit-driven...but absolutely appropriate. What am I missing?

Many thanks.

Barry C. Howard Barrychoward (talk) 15:18, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello Barrychoward, and welcome to the Teahouse. Based on what I'm seeing at User:Barrychoward, you have indeed written in the wrong place. That page is for, if you want, to write a little bit about who you are and what you do/want to do on WP. Start a WP:DRAFTS instead. You can just copypaste the current text for starters. Next, in no particular order, you need to get rid of the in-text external links, and apply the art of inline citations, see WP:TUTORIAL, and consider the guidance at WP:NORG. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:31, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Ok, userpage now gone, but if you want, you can ask for a so called WP:REFUND. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:33, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

I see now you made User talk:Barrychoward/sandbox, good (forget the WP:DRAFTS bit). So, if this is to be accepted as a WP-article, WP:NORG is your hurdle. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:43, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Turned one of your in-text external links to a reference. David notMD (talk) 16:00, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

I have draftified the content (and left a detailed message at user's talk page about some relevant nstandards and how to submit to AfC).--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 16:13, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Who is Tikashi6969? + Should I do not vandalize Wikipedia?

When I go to the old revision of "Tikashi6969" of the Emirates on 8 February, there's an title "is the Sh*tiest airline in the world. its overpriced and sucks. end of story." It later reverted at same UTC (22:42). On 10 February, I saw that "Tikashi6969" has been blocked without expiration (also as "indefinite"), as resulting vandalizing Wikipedia. Should I do not vandalizing Wikipedia and getting blocked indefinitely? Lkas123 (talk) 15:55, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@Lkas123: Welcome to the Teahouse! I do not know who "Tikashi6969" is, but they weren't here to improve the encyclopedia. Their vandalism has been reverted, and the user has been blocked. On the other hand, your edits look like you are acting in good faith to improve Wikipedia articles. Keep up the good work! GoingBatty (talk) 16:03, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Well, yes, do not vandalize articles! I reverted your edit to Emirates (airline), as in my opinion, the wording was better before. However, I also consider that your edit was a good faith attempt to improve the article versus vandalism. David notMD (talk) 16:06, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Pre-translation cleanup

The article about my company's product (PolyAnalyst) presently has a cleanup tag. I have done some work to make it neutral, but it is hard for me to judge neutrality with my COI. The thing is, we are preparing to translate this article into five other languages (Russian, Chinese, Korean, French, and German), so I would like for it to be neutral first to aviod multiplying any potential bias problems by five. Is anyone here willing to help with the cleanup or verify neutrality? Sam at Megaputer (talk) 16:07, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@Sam at Megaputer: Since you have a COI, you should not be editing the article directly. In the future, please post your suggestions at the article talk page (Talk:PolyAnalyst) with a {{request edit}} template, and an uninvolved editor can assist you. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 16:14, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty:: Thanks for cleaning up the formatting. You got any comments on neutrality? Those neutrality templates are supposed to facilitate cleanup, and not just hang there indefinitely as a badge of shame, but sometimes it feels like they are used that way. Any comments or edits that you would like to make on this subject are quite welcome. Sam at Megaputer (talk) 18:08, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@Sam at Megaputer: I'm much better at cleaning up formatting than determining what and how to rewrite to resolve the {{Paid contributions}} tag that Theroadislong added a few weeks ago. Maybe Theroadislong will have some comments. (I do wish the template had a date on it.) GoingBatty (talk) 21:49, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Is United's 777-200ER have been retired, like Delta Air Lines?

When I saw the United Airlines fleet, there's something missing, there's no 777-200ER. United has 19 Boeing 777-200 (non extended range) and 55 Boeing 777-200ER, but when I saw, it was combined to non extended range version from 19 to 74 by Realbruno and the Realbruno's describe changes written "United has 777-200 not 777-200er". Please someone fixed it. Lkas123 (talk) 16:30, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@Lkas123: Welcome to the Teahouse! The best place to have a discussion about this article is on its talk page: Talk:United Airlines fleet. If you can, provide a published reliable source to support your suggestion. I hope you and Realbruno (and others) can come to the appropriate consensus. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 16:41, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Removing of red flag From Tess Onwueme page

 Courtesy link: Osonye Tess Onwueme

Most sorry about the Copyright links to the external homepage and any other problematic issues and errors indicated, I am New to Wiki posting and not familiar with your rules. Please, I would like the unacceptable changes I made removed Or revert to the previous Wiki content. Will greatly appreciate your restoring the Wiki page content with your red flag alert removed. Thanks for your understanding. Ginger Weird Man (talk) 16:47, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@Ginger Weird Man: the infringing text has already been removed from the current page revision, we are currently waiting for an admin to delete the infringin revisions. Until then, the red bordered box at the top has to stand. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:38, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

It is done. Please be aware, Ginger Weird Man, that the copyright issue was not the links you added, but the content that was copied from the links. We cite sources to verify information, but the information must be written in our own words (and not just at a surface level). Thank you for understanding.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:59, 27 February 2021 (UTC) P.S. The reverting user did not post a notice giving information on the infringement issue, so I have done so at your talk page using the template {{uw-copyright-new}} (nudge, nudge; wink, wink @ Cabayi).--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 18:09, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

​Special:Diff/1009216007 ??? Cabayi (talk) 22:10, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@Cabayi: Sorry bout that. When I scanned the page (obviously too quickly) I was looking for a section header and missed it under the series of escalating warnings for a variety of matters. Of course your notice's "" should have alerted me, even on my hasty look!--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:46, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Having Trouble adding previous teams played to infobox basketball Biography

Hi, Im editing a Basketball player bio page Aaron Pervis Williams and I need help with adding career history/previous teams played inside the info basketball biography template info box. The field is called 'years and teams'. I get an error message whenever trying to add information. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks! Feed2wiki (talk) 17:53, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Feed2wiki, while editing the infobox of Aaron Pervis Williams, you added a parameter named "years1,team1". But Infobox basketball biography does not support a parameter of that name. You can read Template:Infobox_basketball_biography/doc for a list of the parameters that it does support. They include "years1" and "team1", separately. Maproom (talk) 18:10, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Articles of living person without their photo

Why so many articles of biographies of persons are existing without their photos ? 223.178.144.61 (talk) 18:06, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Because no-one has found and added a suitable photo. The problem is often that there's no available copyright-free photo. Maproom (talk) 18:14, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia has a strict image use policy, and images need to be freely licenced. Joseph2302 (talk) 18:17, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

(e/c) Hi person editing from 223.178.144.61. For them to be used in Wikipedia articles, images must be:

1. in the public domain; or
2. released under a suitably free and compatible copyright license; or
3. used under fair use, but only if they meet all ten of the non-free content criteria.

Very few images will meet these requirements. In particular, with some limited exceptions, images of living persons can't meet the fair use criterion of "no free equivalent", because the possibility always exists, while they are alive, that someone can snap a photo somewhere and release it. Please note also that unlike many websites, where someone can license a non-free copyrighted image for use at that site, we don't allow this. For these reasons, many biography articles do not have any image, and many others have a non-professional quality image because the only one we can use was one taken at some random location by an amateur (rather than, e.g., a professional headshot) who then released the copyright of the image under a suitable license. And even this last is restricted – see Commons:Photographs of identifiable people. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 18:21, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Also, for living people, the third criteria mentioned above (fair use) cannot generally be used. Which is why many living people don't have photos. Joseph2302 (talk) 18:36, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

But it is wired and feels like incomplete. when a naive reader like do not see photo of the person related to that article.Many folks paste photos on WP from here and there under fair use policy.But still I don't know how to use this fair use policy and pick photo from somewhere and paste it on WP. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.178.144.61 (talk) 10:12, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

The fair use policy accords with the Wikimedia Foundation's interpretation of US copyright law. Please either (A) make sure that you understand this policy (which is necessarily complex) or (B) don't upload photographs or other images for which you claim "fair use". -- Hoary (talk) 11:58, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Submit a draft for review

Hello, I published an article on Wiki in spanish and now I have translated it into english. There are some differences between the spanish wiki editor that I may not understand. What should I do to submit the article for review here? I can't find a button where it indicates it. Thanks --DianaMTancredi (talk) 18:19, 27 February 2021 (UTC) DianaMTancredi (talk) 18:19, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy link: Draft:Fabiana Barreda.   Maproom (talk) 18:31, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@DianaMTancredi: I have added the submit button to your draft. For future reference, if your draft on the english Wikipedia does not have a submit button, you can place the code {{subst:submit}} (as it appears when viewing this page) to it to submit for review. Victor Schmidt (talk) 18:34, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

WikiProject Banners

Someone recently pointed out to me that the class parameter for a Wikiproject banner is better left blank for Drafts and Redirects because those articles are likely to change in the future and the class is auto-populated simply by virtue of the article being in Draft or Redirect space. I was curious what the standard conventions for WikiProject banners in general, but I'm specifically interested in whether it would be better to have a shortened WikiProject banner for Categories and Files because they are unlikely to change, but would be auto-populated. Would a short banner without a class parameter be best or should the class be included? Or if it doesn't matter, what would you suggest? I would assume that it's best to keep a standard convention across a large number of articles so if I'm making sure it's one specific way for an entire WikiProject what would be ideal? TipsyElephant (talk) 18:33, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

TipsyElephant, please have a look over here, this might help Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikipedia/Assessment CommanderWaterford (talk) 19:14, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@CommanderWaterford: Thank you, but I looked over that page and it doesn't seem to say anything about whether I should include those classes or not. It says "For non-standard grades and non-mainspace content, the following values may be used for the class parameter", which implies that it's optional I guess. Is there a benefit to including the class? TipsyElephant (talk) 02:07, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Oh, never mind. There's a recommendation to ask somewhere else. Thank you! TipsyElephant (talk) 02:11, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

"salt" in the Wikipedia context?

Im involved in my first AfD process. In the discussion, people are referring to "salt", as in "consider salting" as if it's a type of page deletion. So, the stupid question: What is "salt" in this context? Rklahn (talk) 21:17, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Rklahn "Salt" refers to preventing the creation of an article in the first place, as in "salting the earth" to keep plants from growing. Articles are salted if they are repeatedly created and continually do not meet guidelines. 331dot (talk) 21:29, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Makes perfect sense. Thanks for the quick answer. Rklahn (talk) 21:31, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@Rklahn: - See WP:SALT. GoingBatty (talk) 21:58, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Also see Salting the earth for the historical meaning. Given the value of this product in ancient times, salting the land of a defeated enemy may have been more symbolic than functional. David notMD (talk) 22:04, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

GoingBatty I spent a long time trying to find WP:SALT. I think I know where I went wrong. It's a type of page protection, not a type of deletion. Hopefully, this discussion gets indexed, and the next editor has an easier time. Rklahn (talk) 22:20, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Rklahn, here is a useful tip for finding policies, procedures and guidelines on Wikipedia. Type WP: in the search box, followed by a plausible keyword (in this case SALT). Most of the time, you can find what you want very quickly. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:15, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@Cullen328:. Apropos of your post above, I posted Help:WP search protocol last week, and was thinking of creating a short, associated info template for it. Your post struck me as approximately perfect for its text! (Even for including "(in this case ____)" as an fillable, optional parameter for tailoring the template's message.) Thanks.---Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 16:04, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

You are welcome, Fuhghettaboutit. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 16:53, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

How to have custom fonts on Wikipedia?

I want to make Wikipedia display fonts that I want. NOT change the font that other people see, I just want to read it in a different font, specifically Fraktur.

How do I make it so that when I read Wikipedia, I see the German Fraktur font? I have squat computer programming experience. KleinesMurid (talk) 21:50, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@KleinesMurid: I haven't tried that before, but see Help:User style#Samples. GoingBatty (talk) 22:15, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

UV Light is the source of the fields and unifys the forces: Unification and the handwritten imagination of a mind out of time the sea

Extended content

UV Light is the source of the fields and unifys the forces as IT IS THE SOURCE OF ALL THE FIELDS Einstein was wrong in so much that the speed of light is only a constant for large things and can not be applied to very small thigs such as electrons. Action of non local distance and conservation of the strangeness can be conserved at great distance with a rederivation of the Einstein equation so that we can express the need for all things to be translated in space equally including time and the speed of light and in such Cause and effect and planks distance becomes a relativistic quantity. This is easily done using Faradays constant as unit by which can express all things as relative by the inverse of the square of the distance 3 sq root (X2 - 5). I have uploaded some equations Ive jotted down and scanned in and I see you like science so lets see if you are one the 12 people Richard Feynman mentions in the 1964 Messenger lectures that ACTUALLY UNDERSTAND RELATIVITY AND QUANTUM PROPOSITIONS. If we assume by dropping mistaken axiomatic logical and adopt a more Mayan wisdom to our mathematics then we can begin to understand Magnetisms role as a frequency of UV radiation and in such establish a unity between matter at the Faradays constant as this is the only co-ordinate that has any axiomatical mathematical potential to unlock the laws of that which is very small and apply it to that which is very large. My discovery however poses a serious problem however as Im sure you will understand molecular chaos theory and magnetic fields very well. We have removed all lumps of stuff acting on the big lump of iron in the centre of our lovely planet so we can look more lovely as idiots. Oh what fun but here's the kicker....TRIANGLES WILL SWEEP OUT AT EQUAL DISTANCES AT EQUAL TIMES NO MATTER HOW HARD YOU YOU WORK TO PROVE THIS THE NULL HYPOTHESIS. So now the fields are different, what's more is that now the lumps are getting more UV CHARGE than they were and the atoms are now jiggling (as my brother in arms Feynman would say) and niggling wrong ,,,so jiggling wrong in the wrong place. So now the ANGULAR MOMNRETUM has changed and tilted and you and I both know proof of a tilt in angular momentum would be hard to do in line with CAVENDISES weighing of us all so we would need another way to infer this, Lucky are we that you can tell a great deal about the surface tension and behaviour of a sphere by looking at its core. Ours has sped up since the nuclear era by 4.8 mph (or kmh I forget which I appologise)giving us the predicted outcome of a tilt in angular momentum.....CORE SUPER ROTATION Now they are pissin about with Apollo 11 type missions to space in order to drain the val allen belt which is pretty easy but those muppets know nothing of high energy protons or how to calculate G magnetic flux in relativistic terms. Nor to they know how to calculate the Quantum flux of the martian bluberrie using relativistic multhiphase flow equations. anyway Im sending this then Ill write out some equations scan them in and send them, over A Beautiful Mind

Feinsteinium77 (talk) 22:56, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Umm... What language is this? Words look like English... --CiaPan (talk) 23:03, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@Feinsteinium77: If this is about an article, discuss on that article's talk page. Otherwise this may be WP:OR RudolfRed (talk) 23:05, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

I have blocked this editor because they are not here to build the encyclopedia. They are here only to promote their fringe theories. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:08, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Credit discrepancies between album releases

Hello. I am doing some work on the article for the album Operation: Doomsday but there are significant differences in production, writing, and feature credits between the original 1999 Fondle 'Em Records vinyl release, the 2001 Sub Verse Music re-release, and the 2008–present Metal Face Records re-release. I would think that the best thing to do would be to use the writing and production credits from the original 1999 Fondle 'Em Records vinyl release, but I'm not sure if there is a specific way that Wikipedia says you're supposed to handle discrepancies between album credits. Hostagecat (talk) 23:35, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@Hostagecat: Hi there! Posting on the article's talk page was the right thing to do. It may take a few days for another editor to respond, so posting here an hour later was premature. Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Album article style advice#Personnel might provide some guidance. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 00:17, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

I was mostly wondering if there's like a WP: thing for it, like a rule standardized for all album articles. --Hostagecat (talk) 00:27, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

I am a new contributor. I have something in sandbox and not clear on how to get it moved out to start process.

 Radicalmoney (talk) 23:47, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@Radicalmoney: I moved your sandbox to Draft:Mara Leveritt for you. When you're ready to submit it (after converting the external links to references, for example), you can remove the <nowiki>...</nowiki> tags. GoingBatty (talk) 00:11, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

How to determine revert rule in articles

Hello. Just recently there have been a few seemingly non-constructive edits at the Khazar hypothesis of Ashkenazi ancestry page. I think that page may be under the 1RR rule (as opposed to the usual 3RR rule) but I am not sure. On some pages there is/has been a notification that shows when you are about to edit, informing you that 1RR is in effect, but on this page there seems not to be. How can I determine what the rule is there? Thank you very much. Skllagyook (talk) 23:54, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@Skllagyook: see the banner on the talk page Talk:Khazar hypothesis of Ashkenazi ancestry. 1RR is in effect. RudolfRed (talk) 23:56, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@RudolfRed: Thank you. I see it. Skllagyook (talk) 00:48, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Notability requirements

Hi There. Because of the rise in interest of Spacial Sound and my direct role in rebirthing Quadraphonic music creation, I have been asked to publish a wikipedia article. I have very cited multiple credible articles and have satisfied the criteria of:

1. Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent of the musician or ensemble itself.[note 1] 7. Has become one of the most prominent representatives of a notable style or the most prominent of the local scene of a city; note that the subject must still meet all ordinary Wikipedia standards, including verifiability.

i'm new to publishing on wikipedia, so any guidance would be helpful. thank you. KamranV (talk) 01:37, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

@Kamranv: Welcome to the Teahouse! I'm curious - who asked you to write the autobiography which is now at Draft:KamranV? In the "Spacial Music" section, I suggest adding a reference for the first sentence and additional references for the second. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 01:57, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Instructions I don't understand

I was curious what the instructions at the top of this article mean Category:Podcast logos and why you're supposed to do it. I looked through the current files and it appears that only a few follow the instructions. So why should anyone follow those instructions if simply adding the category like you would on a regular page does the same thing? TipsyElephant (talk) 01:38, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

I think you intended to say: "I was curious what the instructions at the top of Category:Podcast logos mean and why you're supposed to do what they tell you to do." If this was indeed your intention: Because, I think, doing so not only adds the file to the category but also adds a warning template to it. -- Hoary (talk) 08:19, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Image Question

When uploading an official cover art via "Upload file > Upload a non-free file" there is a required field that says "Author (author / copyright owner of the original work)". I was curious what I should do if I don't know who the author is. Should enter "unknown", "NA", or something else entirely? If I already entered something like "unknown" for an image would that be cause for the image to be removed later? Also, how specific should I be about where I found the image? Can I just say the website or should I provide a link? TipsyElephant (talk) 01:44, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

@TipsyElephant: Welcome to the Teahouse! I would use the record label as the owner, and the full URL of where I found the image. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 02:01, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: What if the cover art is for a podcast? I guess use the network? But what if it's an independent podcast? TipsyElephant (talk) 02:04, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

@TipsyElephant: I would list the podcast as the owner of the cover art. GoingBatty (talk) 02:05, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Non base 10 numerical systems

Non base 10 numerical systems Hello, I am new to wikipedia and want to create an article explaining numbering systems that are not base 10 and how those work and how to change those values into base 10. I searched for it, but I didn't find the thing that I wanted to write about. I'm just worried that I may have missed a page where the topic is written that I didn't find because I didn't put in the required keywords to find that search result. Is there anything I missed? Jsjsjjals83828 (talk) 03:32, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Positional notation and Decimal each have referenced content about systems that are not base 10. David notMD (talk) 03:40, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

@Jsjsjjals83828: Category:Positional numeral systems has more related articles. GoingBatty (talk) 03:44, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

BOXING

Here you list Willard Bean as World Champion' ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Willard_Bean ). Why do you not have his name listed here? ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_world_middleweight_boxing_champions ) PLEASE CORRECT. 69.11.65.11 (talk) 05:47, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi IP 69.11.65.11. The content about this in Willard Bean states as follows:

In 1905, Bean claimed the title of middleweight champion of the world. Although it was not until 1910 with the formation of the International Boxing Union that world title fights were created, until that time champions were generally recognized by public acclamation. The World Middleweight boxing champion at the time was Tommy Ryan.

Perhaps the reason Bean isn't listed in List of world middleweight boxing champions is because he only claimed the title, and wasn't recognized as the world champion at the time. If this isn't correct, then you can discuss this at Talk:Willard Bean or Talk:List of world middleweight boxing champions and see what others might think. You should, however, be prepared to provide a citation to a reliable source which supports such any changes you want made to either article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:25, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

dead link

may I change the dead link to a good one? Rishi1010 (talk) 06:23, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi Rishi1010. Please see WP:DEADREF for more on this, but a dead link isn't necessarily removed just because it's dead. So, if by "good one" you mean that you found an archived version of the dead link, then you can add that to the original citation containing the dead link. If, on the other hand, you mean you find a new source that supports the same content as the dead link, then you can add that as a "new" citation in addition to the dead link one. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:28, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

If by "a good one" you mean a link to healthynord.com, then no you may not. -- Hoary (talk) 08:23, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

no follow backlinks

Sir, may I get a no-follow backlink from Wikipedia. My content is full of information and it is valuable. Rishi1010 (talk) 07:06, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

If you are asking about healthynord.com, you may still not add that to any Wikipedia articles. Please read the information on your user talk page. It contains links (the words in blue) to explanations. --bonadea contributions talk 08:10, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Create page

How do I create a page? Mrcow20069 (talk) 08:52, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Mrcow20069 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Successfully creating a new article(not just a "page") is one of the hardest things to do here on Wikipedia. It takes much time, effort, and practice. You will greatly increase your chances of success if you gain experience first by editing existing articles in areas that interest you, to get a feel for how Wikipedia operates and what is expected of article content. That will help you learn about some of the various policies and guidelines that there are. Users who dive right in to creating articles often end up disappointed and with hurt feelings as something they worked hours on is mercilessly edited and even deleted by others. I don't want to see you have bad feelings so I would recommend that you not dive in just yet. It would be a good idea for you to use the new user tutorial.

If you still want to attempt to create a new article, you should read Your First Article, and then, if the subject meets the Wikipedia definition of notability and you have at least three independent reliable sources with significant coverage, you can create and submit a draft using Articles for Creation. 331dot (talk) 10:34, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

How to request for new article ?

Hello , Many subject and issue do not have articles on WP.I am from India's Maharashtra state.I think many issues about around deserve articles.I think WP is not just place to make article about notable peoples ,film stars and politicians.As WP community we must have to make articles on the issue and burning topics like about farmers bad situation in Maharashtra , Women's rights.I am mentioning , suggesting some title and topics should deserve article - Agriculture in Maharashtra , Farmers suicide in Vidharbha , North Maharashtra (Geographical region of northern Maharashtra) , British rule in Maharashtra , Maharashtra wildlife , Wildlife sanctuaries in India , Rivers of India , Droughts in Maharashtra , Crime against womens in India , Domestic violence against womens in India / Maharashtra , Police corruption in Maharashtra , Corruption in Government offices in Maharashtra/India.If WP community think some of these topics deserve seperate article please create it. 223.178.144.61 (talk) 10:30, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You can request that articles be created at Requested Articles, though there is a severe backlog there, to the point where it will be a long time before your requests are acted on, if ever. The best way to see that an article is written is to do it yourself using Articles for Creation and after you read YOur First Article, but you will want to learn about the process first, and maybe edit some existing articles, to get a feel for how Wikipedia operates and what is expected of article content. 331dot (talk) 10:37, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

331dot Thanks brother for responding all the way from my favourite country England.I did this before reading your suggestion.I created a article about a small village in India - Kothadi but so far it is not live.You can see it : Draft: Kothadi.If it takes so much time I start feeling I'm wasting my precious time.If some educated folks like join me to create these articles it'll be great. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.178.144.61 (talk) 10:55, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Great start on a valid-looking article. Needs ref for the population and the literacy information. David notMD (talk) 12:40, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Drafts don't go "live" automatically. If you think your draft is ready, you can use this link: WP:SUBMIT. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:36, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

How to write successor , previous office holder name in Infobox ?

Hello friends , while editing a article about former office holder Eknath Khadse , politician.I am not able to add his previous office holder's name , Chief minister's name in which cabinet he was minister.Also not able to add governor name.I tried to add by visual and non visual way , but I couldn't.I think Infobox office holder don't have these options.that man was three times minister.Can someone fix this issue. 223.178.144.61 (talk) 10:49, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

In {{Infobox officeholder}}, you can populate the existing |predecessor1= and |predecessor2=, and add |predecessor3= and |predecessor4=. If you would like further help, I suggest you post in the article's talk page: Talk:Eknath Khadse. Please provide a published reliable source for the information you would like added to the article as well. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 14:14, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

GoingBattyHi , I tried what you said but issue still not resolving. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.178.144.61 (talk) 15:17, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

 Fixed I changed |Predecessor4= to |predecessor4=. (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.) GoingBatty (talk) 21:37, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

World Square revision undeletion

World Square revision undeletion User:Sphilbrick (talk) deleted the revision history of article World Square apparently due to copyright issue. It's not copyright and it is all gone all the hard work I put in. Please revert my edits and get everything back except for unintentional copyright is just the Future section of World Square using the article this site. --User:BugMenn(talk) 21:51, 28 February 2021 (UTC) BugMenn (talk) 10:51, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

You should probably discuss this issue on the talk page, first. Please also read the policy document about Copyright violations for more information - Cameron Dewe (talk) 11:13, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

PS: Please check your talk page and follow what you have politely been told to do by User:Sphilbrick, too. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 11:20, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

BugMenn Hi here Kundan Dhayade from India.you said someone deleted your edits.It could probably happened due to you copied lines from some other Websites's articles.copy paste WP don't allow.write everything in formal words in your language , do not copy exactly from website or book it's illegal under copyright law. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.178.144.61 (talk) 11:25, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Bugmenn also contacted me on my talk page. I have provided an explanation of why rollback was used and what the editor can do to restore the non-copyrighted edits.--S Philbrick(Talk) 13:23, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

User:BugMenn Hi , I advise you to never copy paste from any website on WP.The from where you copy paste or write exact lines from their article is like stealing something from someone.You have to read their article , book and then rewrite it with your words in simple language on UK English.Not In American , Australian Eng and after writing site their website by editing their website link in <ref>...</ref>.Then no one will undo your edits.But the websites , books must be well known and famous like - New York Times , The guardian , BBC.These big websites have their reputation they don't write wrong things without research. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.178.144.61 (talk) 15:32, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

IP user, World Square is about a location in Australia, so the preferred variety to use in that article would be Australian English. --bonadea contributions talk 16:08, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

How to create new Infobox ?

Can someone tell me how Infobox are create on WP. 223.178.144.61 (talk) 11:31, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi IP editor, Infoboxes are one application of templates in articles. As such, you can find instructions on using them in on the template pages, for instance Template:Infobox_person#Usage. --Paul ❬talk❭ 12:18, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

(Resolved) Does removal of promotional information amounting to about half the article require a talk page discussion?

I removed some promotional information from the Wikipedia article about FIITJEE this morning, and returned less than an hour ago to remove some negative information from the article, because the newspapers that were used to cite the information had redacted the negative information and hence I couldn't find evidence that the information was true. I was reverted entirely, and was told to discuss the removal on the talk page. I've started a discussion there, but I want to know whether removal of promotional information like in this case requires a discussion. 45.251.33.44 (talk) 11:42, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello IP, I believe your removal of info was correct. It was reverted because often large removals of text from articles by non-registered users (IPs), are flagged as potential vandalism, and can be reverted as such, as yours was. The text you removed was blatantly promotional, and while I appreciate you removing it, it is generally preferable to remove as little as possible and reword as much as possible. I've added a tag that adds the page to a list of articles that read like an advertisement, so hopefully someone should help clean it up, but in the meantime I suggest you don't try to remove info until Serols agrees. Thanks, Giraffer ^{(talk·contribs)} 12:06, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Resolved

 – This issue has been resolved. I now understand that I could have avoided this issue by not making big changes without any discussion. 45.251.33.44 (talk) 12:25, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia

Hi I'm new to Wikipedia Sho majozi (talk) 13:08, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello and welcome! Do you have a question about editing? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:32, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia

Hi I'm new to Wikipedia how does this work Paris Benjamin (talk) 13:14, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello Paris Benjamin. Try WP:ADVENTURE and WP:TUTORIAL. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:31, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Frustrated

Many, many times I have tried to improve an article someone deletes my hard work. I quit Wikipedia years ago for the very same thing, but figured I'd give it another chance, but it's happening again. I'm about to quit forever! 174.250.246.103 (talk) 13:16, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Since the IP you're currently using has 2 edits in total, it's hard to give any advice without more what/when/where. WP:COMMUNICATION may be of help to you. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:29, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

What is Template:Reviewing request?

Can't find much more info on this template I stumbled across (can't remember what page I saw it on) and just wondering what it's used for and can you still edit an article that has it? Is it requesting review of unpatrolled new page and if not is there a template for that or just something that you wait for until page comes up in page curation queue? -- HistoricalAccountings (talk) 13:31, 28 February 2021 (UTC) HistoricalAccountings (talk) 13:31, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

@HistoricalAccountings: The template is part of a series for standard stuff in discussions on Wikipedia. It is probbably intended to serve as a temporary status notification for request-like noticeboards such as WP:RFPP so that others are aware that somebody is looking into the issue, to reduce the number of times where two admins try to decide on a (very complicated) request simuntaiously.Victor Schmidt (talk) 13:37, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

@Victor Schmidt: Thank you, couldn't figure it out. Is there a template that can be added to a new page that hasn't been reviewed/patrolled yet or may have been overlooked or is that just something you wait out? -- HistoricalAccountings (talk) 13:41, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

@HistoricalAccountings: unreviewed pages end up on Special:NewPagesFeed and can be filtered from there. You don't need to put some special tag on them. Victor Schmidt (talk) 13:47, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia

Hi I'm new to Wikipedia how does this work Rose Bulma (talk) 13:35, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

@Rose Bulma: try Help:Introduction or the Wikipedia Adventure Victor Schmidt (talk) 13:38, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Looking for some help of native-language speakers interested in 1960s/70ies rock

Hello, I am new on wikipedia and wrote an article about the protometal band Poobah from Ohio (rock fans might be familiar with the name). I translated the article into english, but I am not a native speaker. I got a cleanup template message on the article and need some help to get it fixed. People with some knowledge of counterculture, psychedelic rock and similar things would be very welcome. The article is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poobah_(band) GegenkulturForschung (talk) 13:55, 28 February 2021 (UTC) GegenkulturForschung (talk) 13:55, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

@GegenkulturForschung: Welcome to the Teahouse! If you have any conflict of interest with this band, you must disclose it on your user page (preferably with {{UserboxCOI}}). I suggest you read WP:BAND and determine whether Poobah meets Wikipedia's notability requirements for inclusion. Next, gather all of your published independent and reliable sources about the band. Then, summarize in your own words what the sources say, and remove all the sentences that are not supported by a source. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 14:52, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello GoingBatty, I did a lot of research, but I am not sure where to find any source that will be considered to be independent and reliable about any older rock band that is not as popular as the beatles. To be correct; the band I write about is certainly not a common mainstream band, but most of the bands before the Disco invasion weren't. Although lesser known , it is not any obscure amateur band. The band ist still active after 48 years (and the founder played in two bands before that, having produced at least two records), has published 14 albums and is working on the next, and some of their songs have been used in televison serials and hollywood movies lately. I have a large collection of literature, (which wasn't helpful in that case) and I have found the band cited as "Most collectible psyche band" or "Top ten of.." in magacines like The Rolling Stone and metioned as important protometal pioneers all over the internet. Still, I need someone who can point me out a source that I can link here. So I hoped to find someone with mutual interests here in the tea room." GegenkulturForschung (talk) 19:36, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Hampton University Notable Alumni Section Editing Issue

I tried to add a notable alumni under education and now there is an issue with this section. Was wondering what went wrong, how do I fix the education section and how do I avoid this problem in the future? Soulcontroller (talk) 14:36, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

@Soulcontroller:  Fixed - each {{Alum}} template needs to be on its own line in order for the table to be formatted properly. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 14:55, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty I added an alumni again and messed up the table’s format. I created a separate alum template and thought I placed it where it should be alphabetically. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Soulcontroller (talk • contribs) 16:05, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Fixed. David notMD (talk) 16:31, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Article is semi-protected so I can not edit

I am a student working on a class that requires us to edit an article. I chose the article "Feral cat" and I wanted to add an update from the AVMA with citations as well as 3 references for this week's assignment. I will also need to do further edits on the article as the course progresses but it said that the page is semi-protected. Will I be able to work on this article or should I pick another article to work on? Jmm26 (talk) 15:12, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

@Jmm26: Welcome to the Teahouse! If you click on the gray lock icon at the top right of the article, you'll see that a user can edit the article if they are autoconfirmed (accounts that are at least four days old and have made at least ten edits to Wikipedia). You meet both these criteria, and I confirmed your status at Special:UserRights. At the top of the Feral cat article, you should see "Edit" and/or "Edit source" tabs. If you only see "View source", then you cannot edit the article. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 15:22, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

If for some reason you wish to edit an article that you cannot edit, you may make a formal edit request on the article talk page, and write the change you wish to make there, for another editor to review. But as GB says, you should be able to edit that article. 331dot (talk) 15:26, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

talk Hi first time I am seeing this that a people editing on Wikipedia as their class work. I don't think your response genuine. But before editing do research and write in you own words in simple UK English , don't use slang , local Eng words of your place. Because WP is read by folks all around the world. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.178.144.61 (talk • contribs) 15:41, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

It is not at all unusual for students to get an assignment to work on a Wikipedia article. Secondly, the variety of English depends on the article – articles about UK-specific subjects should be written in British English, articles about US-specific subjects use American English, and so on. Articles that are not about a topic that is connected to a particular region should in general stick to the variety the first author used. More information here. --bonadea contributions talk 16:15, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi Jmm26. Only articles which have been the subject of repeated disruption or vandalism tend to get page protected. Usually, page protection is the last resort when all other attempts to try and resolve the problem have failed. There also tends to be a number of editors closely monitoring such articles to make sure someone doesn't try to any sneak in any disruption by somehow figuring out a way to get around the page protection. So, you might want to discuss you desire to edit this particular article with your Wiki-Ed advisor(s) since you might find it a bit harder to edit than perhaps some other article. Well-meaning students often run into problems when they select articles about contentious subjects or articles which have a history of being page protected. Feral cat is indefinitely protected which means that there was some serious disruption going on at least at one point in time. The article has been protected six times since 2012 and each time the protection was removed, the disruption seems to have started up again. So, this might not be the best choice of an article to work on. I'm not trying to discourage you. If you really want to try to improve this article, then go ahead once your account has been WP:AUTOCONFIRMED; this might, however, be an article where it's better to be a bit more WP:CAUTIOUS than WP:BOLD. Just make sure you leave a clearly worded edit summary for your edits and try not to do a major rewrite/reorganization without first proposing it on the article's talk page. If you do those things, your edits are unlikely going to be mistaken for disruption or vandalism. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:05, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

my draft on Michael Koutsilieris was rejected

Kindly send me some advise on upgrading my draft, I cant comprehend why it was considered similar to advertisent. Dr. Koutsilieris is a distinguished scientist and has many requests from people that are doing research on his work for biographical information. Please explain how I can proceed. I have studied wikipedia articles and I cannot locate the mistakes I have made. Kkmk mani (talk) 15:41, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Kkmk mani Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You have done a good job of writing about who Dr. Koutsilieris and what he has done. A Wikipedia article, however, must do more than that. A Wikipedia article about a person must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a person, showing how they meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person. You've cited what he has done, but not what others choose to say about him- that's what the article needs to summarize.

When you say "Dr. Koutsilieris is a distinguished scientist and has many requests from people that are doing research on his work for biographical information"; I would ask if you are associated with or work for him? If so, you will need to review conflict of interest and paid editing for information on formal disclosures you may be required to make. If people just want biographical information on him, does his employer not have such information on a website? 331dot (talk) 15:49, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

@Kkmk mani: There is also quite a bit of unsourced information in the draft: his birth date/birth place/children's names, scientific interests, memberships in many societies, and the editorial board section. If the information isn't included in an independent reliable source, then it should be removed from your draft. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 15:54, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

@Kkmk mani: Also, minutia such as his "license no." isn't necessary in the article. Unsourced phrases such as "enthusiastically accepted" and "highly successful" seem like an advertisement. GoingBatty (talk) 16:03, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Thank you so much!! I will try again!! Very helpful. @GoingBatty — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kkmk mani (talk • contribs) 16:16, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Regarding The Daily Express

I know you want to be as unbiased as possible, but The Daily Express makes fake end of the world/world war 3 predictions and they make fake news everywhere with no proof and they even admitted to this in this quote: "[I run the paper] purely for the purpose of making propaganda and with no other motive." And you already blacklisted The Sun (Another fake news site) but the daily express is far worse, I believe The Daily Express should be blacklisted. 98.101.158.202 (talk) 16:22, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

As already noted at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources: "The Daily Express is ... considered generally unreliable."--Shantavira|^{feed me} 16:30, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

I still technically see this on the world war 3 page.--98.101.158.202 (talk) 16:32, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, IP! Could you please state specifically where you see The Daily Express listed on the the World War III article? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 16:40, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello IP, the Daily Express is listed as an unreliable source here. This is a result of this discussion, where it was deemed acceptable for non-controversial topics such as sport and entertainment, but an unreliable source for topics such as politics. Giraffer ^{(talk·contribs)} 16:37, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Well if you could keep the GamerGate Paged biased, why not rewrite or delete that page.--98.101.158.202 (talk) 16:44, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

The Daily Express is not mentioned on the GamerGate page either, so it's difficult to determine what issue you are concerned about. In any case, the best place to raise any issue with a specific article is on the talk page of that article.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 17:06, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

What's wrong with my edit to "Counties of the United Kingdom"?

I edited in a line about "vice-counties" to Counties of the United Kingdom.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Counties_of_the_United_Kingdom&oldid=1009417794

My addition was to show that as well as cereomonial and historical counties, there are also "vice-counties", which are not so well known, a type of geographic area for the United kingdom. There is a page vice-counties, and they are otherwise hard to find out about.

My edit was reverted by an experienced user because "did not appear constructive", and that user deleted my question about this from their talk page.

Have I done something wrong? How should I get my edit restored or improved? -- I don't really accept the argument that this isn't information about types of county in the United Kingdom, or that my edits were anything but constructive.

Kind regards to all. 88.15.26.86 (talk) 16:55, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

I'm a bit puzzled as to why your question of the other editor was removed. Your edit to the article may have been reverted because there was no citation. 331dot (talk) 17:01, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

I have accordingly reinstated the edit, and added a reference and a slight expansion.88.15.26.86 (talk) 17:48, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Hey, IP editor, you did the right thing by adding a reference to Dandy, though the wikilink to vice-county didn't actually make that essential, and I wouldn't have reverted you myself. But I bet I've reverted other editors in areas I was not knowledgeable about, and felt a citation was necessary if it were to remain in. It's great to see you flying the flag for Watsonian vice-counties; I spent much of my working life collating and disseminating biodiversity data from VC57 (Derbyshire). Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 19:11, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

teahouse

what is the teahouse? R3daeret (talk) 20:14, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

@R3daeret: Welcome. As it says at the top of the page: "A friendly place where you can ask questions to get help with using and editing Wikipedia" RudolfRed (talk) 20:18, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

@R3daeret: You have come to a great place here. Wikipedia is a massive (and often confusing) technical edifice, but it is also a massive (and even more confusing) cultural development. Watching the Teahouse is one of the best ways to get a feel for the culture of Wikipedia.--Verbarson (talk) 20:54, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

@R3daeret: I must, however, add a note of caution and say that anyone who makes silly edits, and contributes nothing constructive to this encyclopaedia, or removes good content, soon finds their user rights withdrawn. As you're on your final warning right now for doing a bit of that, do please take care when you next try to help out here. If you aren't sure - please come back and ask. That's what we're here for! Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:10, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

State of the World Liberty Index lists the Star Wars Galactic Empire as Number One in Liberty

On the article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_World_Liberty_Index I saw that someone had that day ADDED the "Galactic Empire" as a nation to the list, even though this is NOT a nation and is a Star Wars reference (a rather trollish one for anyone who knows anything about the Galactic Empire from Star Wars) I saw this as a griefing, I don't contribute to wikipedia but I do sometimes revert articles back to help keep griefers out. This is exactly what I did. I reverted the article back. I received a message from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Le_Deluge stating that:

"Hello, I'm Le Deluge. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to State of World Liberty Index 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. Le Deluge (talk) 14:12, 28 February 2021 (UTC) " https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:2600:1700:CA30:CCF0:E59D:2012:8727:884E&diff=cur

I was directed here to ask questions. My question to wikipedia is do you understand that the Galatic Empire is both NOT mentioned in the source material and is NOT an actual nation in the world? I mean it seems like that should be very very obvious... I am not one to complain to wikipedia but this is laughably inexcusable. 2600:1700:CA30:CCF0:E59D:2012:8727:884E (talk) 20:45, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! Your willingness to revert obvious vandalism is greatly appreciated! Unfortunately, your edit accidentally many instanced of "freedom" to "(filtered)", which was probably the unconstructive issue that Le Deluge meant. I have reverted the Galactic Empire vandalism in this edit. Thanks for letting us know! GoingBatty (talk) 21:08, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

getting this paragraph onto the TARDIS article

can i get help getting this paragraph onto the TARDIS article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TARDIS). it keeps getting rejected due to either a lack of citations or original research, and i can't seem to get it accepted. so can someone please edit my paragraph and photo w/ description to make it acceptable for the article?

Inconsistencies between Props and Real Police Boxes

The prop has almost never been accurate to the real Police Box, its most accurate portrayal was in the Dalek films starring Peter Cushing where it is almost completely identical. the original prop is fairly close, but is noticeably smaller[1]. the free for use of public sign changed doors inconsistently throughout Patrick Troughton's run, starting from Evil of the Daleks (1967). The Shada box, used from 1976 to 1980[2] and inconsistently throughout the early eighties (notably Logopolis and Castrovalva 1981-2) is stockier with a completely flat roof, though it was steeped again for its appearance in Logopolis and Castrovalva. in 1980, a new prop was constructed from fibreglass[2] for The Leisure Hive (1980), and is now larger again with a firmer build, though still smaller than the genuine article. the 1996 TV movie is also slightly larger, and its windows, which normally have six panels with the two in the bottom corners being white or off-colour, this one has some panes in the wrong slots. the one on the right door is in the top corner and some have the off-colour panes directly adjacent to the other one.. the Eccleston/Tennant prop is much larger, and the panels/windows are almost square and take up much more space. This has caused many a joke where a character to comment on how "the windows are the wrong size" with the in-universe explanation being that the TARDIS is so old that the "bigger on the inside" has begun leaking out, causing the outside shell to grow. the original prop was navy blue, though on-screen it was grey as the show was in black and white at the time, and it was repainted to a lighter blue in 1972 which remained consistent (albeit some minor colour shifts) throughout the rest of the run. The 2005 prop is much greyer, with a green-yellowy twinge to it. The Smith Prop is a vibrant navy colour with an intense wood effect, while the Capaldi Prop turns this down significantly, making it a mostly solid blue. The Whittaker Prop returns to the 2005 Prop's colours, but re-adds the wood effect. Since the show's reboot in 2005, the dimensions have stayed identical with only minor alterations. The Hurt Prop, as seen in Day of the Doctor (2013) is essentially just the 2005 prop with sand and grime all over it and a few cracked windows. However, these inconsistencies don't just apply to the Doctor's TARDIS, as in Logopolis, both a real Police Box and the Master's TARDIS assume the Shada Box's proportions and in The Doctor, The Widow and The Wardrobe (2011) The Doctor finds a real Police Box that looks like his. Both of these situations were probably caused by budgetary constraints though, as it would be uneconomical to have many separate Police Box props in storage unused. The roof lamp has changed too, the original was rather accurate, while in season two it was replaced by a cheap plastic cylinder along with the whole roof being less steep. The Shada Box uses a generic lamp, while in its namesake story and a few others before and after it, it has a blue spinning police car lamp. The 2005 Prop uses a cylindrical lamp, while the Smith Prop has one from a ship (boat, not space-ship). None have ever gotten close to the real lamp, which would've been encased in a cylindrical cage with a dome on top.

then add picture named "Dinky Toy Police box" and its description (with alterations for brevity's sake) and add citations and the relevant links to where they are needed, and you're done! thanks in advance for helping me curate this paragraph for use in an article. WombleYT (talk) 22:36, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello, WombleYT. Any content that has been contested must have a reference to a reliable published source, according the the core content policy Verifiability. On your talk page, you concede that you have engaged in Original research, which is forbidden by policy. Anything you add must comply with policy. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 22:47, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi WombleYT. I think you now have the answer (again). It does not belong in its current state; it will not be added while it includes unsourced parts, and original research parts. It appears, though, to include a mix of verifiable hard facts, with citations already provided, that could be included, unsourced facts, without citations that might be sourceable (and thus might be includable if sourced), as well an overlay of analytical content – a synthesis of the facts used to state your own conclusions, as is properly forbidden. So, your path seems straightforward: as much as you want to keep it in as you've written it, accept that it cannot be; remove every part that isn't directly supported by a source. Voilà.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:01, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

removal of template

 Courtesy link: Noel Wood

I have tried, but cannot remove a template on my father's site: Noel Wood, Australian Artist. I have made references to where someone unknown to me put in "citations needed". The citations were about his birth and his mother - ridiculous! Enoneo (talk) 00:15, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

@Enoneo: Welcome to the Teahouse. The issue is that there are no inline citations per Wikipedia standards; please see WP:EASYREFBEGIN for an introduction to citing. If you are related to Wood you must disclose your conflict of interest. Please do so either on your user page or the article's talk page. Your citations must be to reliable sources. On an unrelated note, the article is suffering from a tone issue, which should be expressed as neutrally as possible (that is, not using words like sadly). —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:31, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

I've cleaned up Noel Wood and I removed the tag. Possibly (talk) 04:14, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Nice job, Possibly! I looked at it and chickened out as it seemed too daunting for me to attempt. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.125.75.168 (talk) 19:02, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Help resolving a dispute with another author

Hi there, I have been going back and forth with someone re: a biography of a living person. The person is using their wikipedia page which he wrote himself and he keeps exaggerrating things and changing things back whenever I offer an objective assessment. SHould he be allowed to write his own biography? How do I stop it from being reversed every time I make a change that is rooted in fact? Foodprofessor (talk) 01:21, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Foodprofessor Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Please discuss the matter on the article talk page, Talk:Sylvain Charlebois. If that fails to achieve a consensus as to what the article should say, there are dispute resolution channels available. 331dot (talk) 01:27, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Viacom (1952-2006) to Watch

Can someone Add Viacom (1952-2006) to their watchlist, Because some unregistered user keeps on removing Viacom International from the Former names, when it's actually a true former name of the Company. I also recommend blocking the user Indefinitely for causing an Edit war. LooneyTraceYT (talk) 02:09, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

LooneyTraceYT,welcome to the Teahouse - you can report a User for Edit Warring here WP:AN3. CommanderWaterford (talk) 11:12, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Tariq Shah Bahram

FYI

 – Created section header. GoingBatty (talk) 05:18, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Kindly please remove promotional materials and extra links from article (Tariq Shah Bahram). it's very kind of you if you do this to me, cause i don't know what's promotional material in my article. thank you very much. it will be appreciated that my article is published and on public status on wikipedia. thank you very much. Waseem.nasimi (talk) 04:09, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

@Waseem.nasimi: Welcome to the Teahouse! I'm glad you posted your concern on the article talk page. The sentence about his hobbies is unreferenced and could be considered promotional. Also, please use the references and external links to create additional footnotes. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 05:29, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

It's actually Tariq Shah Bahrami. David notMD (talk) 10:36, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Vandalism

Fiona Graham and Fukagawa Geisha

COI: First, I want to disclose that I have no financial or in-kind gain from editing Wikipeida. I will disclose that I am a fan, but these exist on both sides of the spectrum and these are the people who help build Wikipeida.

I am being accused of vandalism on the two pages mentioned, but in my opinion the two editors concerned are the ones doing the vandalism.

• The Fukagawa Geisha house has been featured in several major media outlets, including NHK, CNN, and the Wall Street Journal. There are plenty of other major news outlets writing about it as well. It should not be merged into the Fiona Graham article because it is a non-profit venture established by several local geisha, albeit Fiona Graham is the geisha mother. A lot of the arguments being forwarded by the other side seem to involve other editors that have nothing to do with me. My primary aim is to get a Fukagawa Geisha article up and add more information to the Fiona Graham page, so merging the "Geisha mother" section into [Fiona Graham]] article is fine with me.

• The prominence of the Wanaka Gym case is vandalism and should not be an entire section, in both the Japanese and English wikipedias. It is rarely mentioned in any article about Fiona Graham beyond articles about that court case, yet most of the editors arguing with me seem to have a bone-of-contention on that topic (despite the fact that I included the case in a paragraph myself in my article).

• If you look at the history of Japanese version of the Fiona Graham article, you can see that several non-Japanese editors (Ineffablebookkeeper, IP addresses etc...) repeatedly revert any new information that is added to the article, being unconstructive and reducing the usefulness of the article. Their main aim in both the English and Japanese versions seems to be to increase the prominence of the Wanaka Gym case. Japanese editors always seem to try and change edits back to the original version.

They need to be constructive towards wikipedia:

• Wikipedia is about constructive article building. Fukagawa Geisha has received a lot of media attention in major global news outlets and hence deserves a page on Wikipedia. Fiona Graham has a lot more going on in her life than Wanaka Gym, and not only does the court case not deserve its own section, but there is so much more about her life that should be added but the editors keep reverting.

• Considering a large number of edits (of opposing party) seem to come from IP addresses or English speaking accounts, I consider them to be more resembling vandalism, whereas my role is a fan with no material gain.

Geicraftor (talk) 04:13, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Geicraftor is likely a Fiona Graham sockpuppet. She has been at it for over ten years now; see the talk page of her article for detailed backstory. Also, regarding "Japanese editors always seem to try and change edits back to the original version." -- per WP:DUCK, these editors are most likely sockpuppets of Graham herself. They are all SPAs that push the same point of view on the article; a POV that just so happens to be the same as Graham's. Furthermore, Graham has been on this point about "my trouble with Wanaka Gym is irrelevant!" for all these years, so it's getting super obvious that when a new account, editing in JST, shows up and tries to remove it, it's our friend herself. Finally, the media attention she mentions is usually puff pieces that are designed as promotion rather than appearing to be any serious journalistic in her work. 124.197.54.156 (talk) 07:42, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Marchjuly has told you at Talk:Fukagawa_Geisha, IP, to knock off the name-calling. -- Hoary (talk) 13:03, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Geicraftor, this can be discussed on the articles' talk page. -- Hoary (talk) 13:03, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Pending Changes problems

why do my changes go to pending review, when I'm extended confirmed

there are people with lower permissions that get [automatically accepted] when I have a large number of edits and mine go to [pending review]

this can be seen here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Steve_Smith_(cricketer)&action=history

this new user is reverting my edits while I get put to pending DiamondIIIXX (talk) 05:59, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

I have a theory that will probably get rejected by those that know better than me... but somehow your account skipped over Autoconfirmed and went directly to Extended Confirmed per the user log... I'm wondering if Pending Changes is ignoring the implied Autoconfirmed and hence you are still being caught under PC protection. There is my 2 cents anyway. - Rich^T|C|E-Mail 06:19, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

@DiamondIIIXX: (sorry, I gave a misleading reply just now, related to reviewing pending changes rather than editing a PC protected article. New attempt, with coffee inside me...) There is a problem with pending changes – see this thread at the Village Pump, and this thread at Wikipedia talk:Pending_changes. Those are the places to check to see what is happening with this issue, and maybe report that it's happening to you as well. --bonadea contributions talk 07:53, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

@Bonadea: I was replying to your response when I got a merge conflict and found you removed it, haha. The issue was sent to Phabricator and has been listed as a bug - I raised the error in the wikipedia-help IRC. DiamondIIIXX (talk) 07:57, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Backlinks

how I can get dofollow backlinks from your website? Khus199 (talk) 06:27, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi Khus199. It's not clear what you're asking. What are dofollow backlinks? From your contribution's history, it appears like you've been trying to add links to the "External links" sections of some articles. but that the links you've added have been removed by others. You might want to take a look at Wikipedia:External links#Links normally to be avoided and Wikipedia:Spam#External link spamming for more information because the links you're trying to add do not seem to comply with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:47, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Marchjuly, dofollow may be the opposite of nofollow. If so, the answer is that you don't. It's by design and on purpose. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:43, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

I think Gråbergs Gråa Sång is right, and I wonder if there's some kind of external recommendation to get "backlinks" from Wikipedia articles right now. There's this higher up on this page, and a couple of days ago I noticed this. It's not uncommon for new users to add spam links in good faith, but I haven't really seen this phrasing used. Three instances isn't very much of a pattern so probably a coincidence, but I'm mentioning it here in case others have noticed the same thing. --bonadea contributions talk 12:01, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

If there are "dofollowers" watching, see Google: Links From Wikipedia Does Nothing For Your Site & Has No SEO Value Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:36, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Bonadea, this [2] could be part of such a pattern. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:55, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Lack of response to my contribution made on January 28, 2021

I had made my second contribution on January 28, 2021, after my first submission was rejected. I made necessary changes and additions to the content. But, I haven’t received a response on acceptance or rejection of my later submission. Please look into the matter at the earliest. Evolved nerd (talk) 06:54, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

@Evolved nerd: Draft/article reviewing is done in no particular order, and asking on the teahouse will not "cut the line". I can tell you, however, that your article as it is right now will probably not make it. It's not structured like an article. There are many NPOV issues and the article looks like an advertisement in some lights. WhoAteMyButter (📨│📝) 07:02, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

@Evolved nerd: Also, if you mean User:Evolved nerd/sandbox, you have not resubmitted it for review yet, see the blue "resubmit" button. If you do, see where the template says "Improving your odds of a speedy review". Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:48, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Many sections do not have references. David notMD (talk) 10:21, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

How to submit new created article , draft to review ?

Hello , I created two articles Draft : Kothadi , Draft : Jalgaon housing scam but they still not live or not reviewed , I don't know.Can you tell me how to submit new draft. 106.220.85.12 (talk) 09:03, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Try this link: WP:SUBMIT. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:52, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Kothadi appears to have been created by a different editor? Anyway, not yet submitted for review. Jalgaon has now been submitted. David notMD (talk) 10:23, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Gråbergs Gråa Sång Hello thanks for submitting article created by me. will you submit Draft : Jalgaon housing scam for review. And can explain me how I can send a article for reviewin future. Cheers 106.220.85.12 (talk) 12:43, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

I did not, that was someone else. Did you try the link I posted just above? You can also add this code: {{AfC submission/draft}} at the top of a draft you want to submit. Then check the "Improving your odds of a speedy review" advice in the template. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:51, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi. The housing scam article was an interesting subject. It might have been accepted, but probably not in its prior state but I have done a complete copyedit/rewrite and I believe it's ready for the mainspace. However, I am now "involved" so I would not presume to accept an article I worked on this extensively.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:59, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi again. Since you posted to my talk page, but did so near the top of the page (and are not editing by an account, so I can't ping you), you might not have noticed my response, which relocated your post to the bottom of the page. Please see User talk:Fuhghettaboutit #Jalgaon housing scam. Thanks--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 18:35, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Cite book with two ISBNs

Hello again, Teahousers. I am writing the List of Works in an article, and trying to cite a book that has two ISBNs: one for the print version and the other for online. The Manual of Style says to "provide the ISBN of one or more editions when doing so seems to be helpful", but I just can't see how to do this using {{cite book}}. It only appears to support a single ISBN. Am I missing something? Or is there a preference for which of these ISBNs to use? --Gronk Oz (talk) 09:06, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Gronk Oz, The doc of the template Cite Book refers to "Use the ISBN actually printed on or in the book." You could perhaps add it via Template ISBN. CommanderWaterford (talk) 11:08, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

@CommanderWaterford: that makes sense when using it as a reference. But in this case, it is being used in a list of published works instead. I suppose as you say, I just need to add them manually with descriptions. Thanks.--Gronk Oz (talk) 14:49, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Filmography table request templates?

I know there's a template for requesting an infobox be added to articles. You add the request to the talk page. I haven't been able to find one for Filmography tables? Does one exist or a list of articles in need of one? -- HistoricalAccountings (talk) 09:34, 1 March 2021 (UTC) HistoricalAccountings (talk) 09:34, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

No talk page discussion?

I want to make certain changes to an article (Gimbap), but I was advised by one of the editors to use the talk page. I'd already edited and reverted three times, so to avoid edit warring, I added my proposed changes to the talk page (talk:Gimbap). But, nobody has commented on the proposal, including the person who had reverted my changes on the grounds it violated 'fair balance' three times. It's been 4 days and I was wondering at what point I could edit the article again without being accused of edit warring or for not seeking consensus? NettingFish15019 (talk) 12:31, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Help me to send my newly created article to review

Hi I recently created two articles Draft : Kothadi , Draft : Jalgaon housing scam.It will great if you able to send it for review.And explain how to send a draft to review in in simple UK English. 106.220.85.12 (talk) 12:47, 1 March 2021 (UTC) 106.220.85.12 (talk) 12:47, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

You have submitted your drafts for review and they are pending. 331dot (talk) 12:50, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

You already have a post regarding these drafts, above, at #How to submit new created article , draft to review ?, which has received multiple responses.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 18:51, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Were Nagant M1895 used by the Ottoman Empire?

I have seen some historically accurate tv shows about the ottoman empire where they featured the Nagant M1895 revolver, was the revolver ever used by the ottoman empire and if so why isn't the Ottoman Empire featured in the Users list on the Wikipedia page about the M1895 revolver? Mig Pilot (talk) 12:53, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Probably because none of the volunteers here knew that. If you have sources you can add it. Britmax (talk) 12:55, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy Nagant M1895 7-shot revolver. Made for, and later by, Russia. David notMD (talk) 15:01, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Citations in cast list

How do you had citations in movie pages that have cast lists. Seems like you can't use the visual editors and have to use basic coding. Also, how do you create new sections such as "reception" once the movie comes out Nerdpantz (talk) 14:19, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Nerdpantz, welcome to the Teahouse. You should be able to still add citations through the visual editor with its Cite button. To create a new heading, just go to a new line and on the editing toolbar, change "Paragraph" to "Heading". —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:22, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

For Wikiproject Korea: Contextual use of unreliable source?

Hi! So I'm posting a question here in relation to articles within Wikiproject Korea, particularly in the entertainment field. I noticed that while the website Seoulbeats.com is considered as an unreliable site for this Wikiproject, some articles on Korean music albums and dramas cites this site as a reference, particularly in regards to an album/drama critical review. For example: Ice Cream Cake (EP) and The Tale of Nokdu.

In this case, is context needed for the usage of Seoulbeats.com? Like is it unreliable for main articles regarding a living person or event, but acceptable for album/drama reviews? Thanks in advance! JTan1017 (talk) 15:03, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

• Hi @JTan1017:! While I don't know much about Seaoulbeats.com specifically, an unreliable source like a tabloid or a fanblog generally means that you cannot use that source for biographical information or breaking news. Because a critical review is a matter of opinion and not of fact, certain sources may be included there. For example, the article for the Halestorm song "Uncomfortable" cites the Daily Express, which this list says is "generally unreliable." However, its use in the article is an uncontroversial album review, not a piece of heavy-hitting reporting. Kncny11 ^(shoot) 17:02, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

PARANOID NUMANOID on CHARLES SWAINSON

Sorry: I forgot to add a headline properly and so my question is attached to the previous question (above)! Paranoid Numanoid (talk) 15:38, 1 March 2021 (UTC) Paranoid Numanoid (talk) 15:38, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Can I have an editor look over my draft article please? I've had feedback and tried to incorporate everything, I know I have expanded it and that it may be too long, I know I need more referencing after the first part, and I think having three paragraph headings in the same form may be repetitious (is there such a word?!) but apart from that am I on the right track and how can I shape it to be acceptable in due course? Grateful for any constructive criticism. Paranoid Numanoid (talk) 15:28, 1 March 2021 (UTC) Paranoid Numanoid (talk) 15:28, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

This must be about User:Paranoid Numanoid/sandbox/Rev. Charles Swainson, M.A.. There's a lot of ureferenced content, including the whole of the three sections that follow the lead. Where did you get all that information? If from reliable sources, you'll need to cite them. Otherwise, you'll need to remove it. Maproom (talk) 16:51, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Cut vigorously and reference everything. David notMD (talk) 17:14, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Feedback on potential article contribution

Hi everyone, I am hoping to add a bit of information to the police abolition page, with emphasis on cities that have undertaken the first steps to police abolition. My contribution is in my sandbox at the moment and I would love to hear any feedback on the content. Here is the link to my sandbox: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Evb16/sandbox Evb16 (talk) 15:46, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

OMG. It cites no sources at all. Where did all that content come from? A Wikipedia article needs to be based on the sources that it cites. The (relatively) easy way to write an article is to find all the sources you will need, read them thoroughly, then write the article based in what they say, citing them as you go. Very much more difficult, is to write your own opinions and recollections, then go through what you've written, trying to find a source for each statement. I recommend abandoning what you've written, and starting again from the beginning, using the method I've recommended above. It will save you a lot of effort. But I know from experience that a new contributor is unlikely to take that advice. Maproom (talk) 17:06, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

More than once you have written "occording to the New York Times... Go to those Times articles and use your own words to repeat what was written – but don't add in what wasn't written there, such as your own opinion, or what you heard from someone. Then cite those articles. Use reference brackets, and between those brackets put in the article name, the name of the newspaper, and page number the article appeared on. Find other published sources for what you want to say. If the newspaper articles are online you can add an External Link for those who want to read the entire article, but for Wikipedia articles a condensed version of what was written is often best, for many people feel overwhelmed when seeing a long article.

It's good that you want to edit Wikipedia articles, and that you reached out for help. It takes some practice to know the best way to improve an article. Best wishes. Karenthewriter (talk) 17:48, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Editing My User And Talk Page To Make Them Look More Exciting

Hi, I would like to ask now could I make things more exciting for other users. My User and Talk page look very dull and I just want to make it welcome for other people that's all! I am AestheticDiabetic09 as you said 'DO NOT SIGN with tildes' AestheticDiabetic09 (talk) 15:50, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Hey, AestheticDiabetic09, and welcome to the Teahouse. There are a whole bunch of things you can do to spice your user page up, but my personal favorite is an infobox with userboxes. Userboxes (WP:UBX) are templates that allow you to describe yourself as an editor or as a person. They're always bright and colorful, and they can often be helpful to other editors visiting your page. For example, some describe what language(s) you speak and how proficiently, some describe how many edits you've contributed, some what WikiProjects (WP:PROJECT) you're involved with, etc. Also, check out Wikimedia Commons, our sister project, for great Creative Commons images you can add to your profile. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 16:20, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Talk pages are for functional communications with other editors, about article edits, so my advice is don't dwell on it being 'exciting'. David notMD (talk) 17:17, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

what happens when two articles are about the same subject?

i'm very curious about what happens when two articles are about the same thing, i've never seen this happen before, so thats why im curious (sorry if this was short, im not very good at writing super detailed questions :/) Alex102207 (talk) 16:01, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Alex! Welcome to the Teahouse. Please see WP:CFORK for Wikipedia's guidelines on content forking. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 16:14, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

An example: Vitamin B12 has some information on deficiency, but Vitamin B12 deficiency goes into more detail. And then there is Vitamin B12 deficiency anemia. David notMD (talk) 17:20, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Writing your own story

How do you write your oen story on Wikipedia Rose Bulma (talk) 17:00, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

How do you talk to a person on Wikipedia likea celebrity Rose Bulma (talk) 17:02, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Rose Bulma, and welcome to the Teahouse. We don't have "stories" here, we have encyclopaedia articles. Anybody is welcome to create a draft article about a notable subject by using the articles for creation process; however, creating an article is much more difficult than it looks, and hundreds of attempts by inexperienced editors are declined for rework, or deleted, every day. My advice is not even to try it until you have had several hundred edits to existing articles, that are accepted as improvements (i.e. they don't get reverted by another editor). That way, you are likely to have some understanding of how Wikipedia works before you try it.

If by "your own story", you mean "an article about you", then my advice is not to try it, ever: autobiography is strongly discouraged on Wikipedia, and you are likely to have a frustrating and miserable time if you try it.

Finally, there are no celebrities on Wikipedia (apart from as the subjects of articles): there are only editors. Some of the editors might happen to be celebrities in the world, but here on Wikipedia they are only editors. The only kind of talking to them that is appropriate is when collaborating to improve the encyclopaedia: that is what we are all here for, nothing else. --ColinFine (talk) 17:45, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Washishi

Washishi-1.(noun) to be epic or awesome;to like or worship monke(also know as monkey).2.(verb) to misunderstand someone or something;to be misunderstood(thought to be said sometdifferent).

Pronounced(way-shee-she)and can also be spelled washishied or washishing depending on the situation — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hahatrey (talk • contribs) 17:46, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Hahatrey, do you have a question for us? Giraffer ^{(talk·contribs)} 17:51, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Two-dimensional schematic diagram

I posted the following inquiry at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Two-dimensional schematic diagram, and someone suggested asking at Wikipedia:Graphics Lab, which appears to be service to order custom maps. However, my question is on creating simple do-it-yourself schema diagrams. Could someone here advise me? Thanks. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 18:54, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

I would like to do a two-dimensional schematic diagram to represent a streetcar network of 3 north/south lines and one interconnecting east/west line. I would like to use Template:Routemap but I would want the east/west line to be a horizontal line instead of twisting it into a vertical line. Thus, the schematic would resemble the city street grid. However, I suspect I would have problems indicating and labelling east/west stops. Is there any existing examples of doing this?

My second choice would be to acquire some inexpensive, easy-to-use diagram software to produce a diagram similar in style to this svg example or this gif example. Could someone recommend software to do this? Thanks. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 22:01, 28 February 2021 (UTC)