Why so many articles of biographies of persons are existing without their photos ? 223.178.144.61 (talk) 18:06, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
Possibly because they have the right to refuse to have their picture taken, for privacy reasons. AidTheWiki (talk) 22:25, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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?
I use Inkscape and find that the learning curve isn't too steep, especially if you can find something it can input as a starting point (such as the .svg map you mentioned). In my case as a chemist, I create drawings in a chemical drawing package (which can't do .svg directly) and use metafile formats like .emf to swap into Inkscape for final tweaks and conversion to .svg. Note that Wikipedia has an .svg Help Desk at WP:SVG help where there are real experts. Good luck, TheTrolleyPole. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:16, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
need article edited
Hi, I have an article in my sandbox which I like to see instead of the one at 'Gympie Pyramid'. I hope someone has the time to have a look, edit or change what he doesn't like and post the remains. I could upload, but in my experience even with the smallest and well founded change someone comes along and interferes, does the change himself.
So I need help if Wiki policy is, that no newbie can change anything. Wikigetsme123 (talk) 07:18, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Wikigetsme123. There is already an article Gympie Pyramid, and the best course of action is to make incremental changes to the existing article instead of trying to write a completely new version of the article. That may be perceived as disrespectful to the previous editors who worked on that article. That could possibly lead to arguments with the prior editors. I suggest that you gradually add impeccably referenced new content, and gradually remove content you believe to be poorly referenced, explaining why in edit summaries. That's the best course of action, in my opinion. Cullen328Let's discuss it07:46, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
What's new in User:Wikigetsme123/sandbox is largely unreferenced. As you add material to Gympie Pyramid, Wikigetsme123, make sure that each part of it is clearly linked to a reliable, independent, published source. This is slightly complicated here, because as it stands the article cites what we can politely call "fringe" sources. Articles normally shouldn't do this, but it can be permissible (even commendable) in some circumstances. Certainly the reader shouldn't get the impression from the article as a whole that a "fringe" interpretation is the most convincing one. -- Hoary (talk) 08:13, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks everybody for the input. This a well written article with poor information in it. The photo was wrong and two web links were dead. Nobody cares ... until I change a little thing. So I will add my additions to this existing article and really hope that no one of the experienced editors here reverse it just because of... Lets see. The information comes straight out of online publications, all with references. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikigetsme123 (talk • contribs) 07:08, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
What if the article of of a village already exists and I want to create article with that same name but about village from different district ? 106.220.85.12 (talk) 08:22, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, IP editor. Create it as a draft with a title like "Village, District". I think some Indian states and other areas have local conventions like "Village (District)", but the Manual of Style (here) recommends the style with the comma, for instance Tanur, Malappuram. If and when the draft is accepted, the reviewer might move it to a differently-styled title if that conforms to the local convention, but you don't need to be concerned about that when you create the draft. Regards, --bonadeacontributionstalk08:33, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Gråbergs Gråa Sång Hi and what about if in a district two villages have similar name ? For my instance I want to create a article about my village ' Ghodasgaon' which is present in Jalgaon district of Muktainagar taluka but already a article about different village of same name existing on WP - Ghodasgaon it's a village in Shirpur taluka of my district. 106.220.85.12 (talk) 10:04, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure. Can you add another subdistrict, or east/west/north/south? Perhaps this list of places named Washington can inspire you. But even if you should pick a "wrong" title, that can be changed later. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:17, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello,
Having made all the required changes to my draft, it has been pending re-review now for nearly two months. Is there anything I can do to alert the reviewer, who initially declined it, or another reviewer who can take a look?
Many thanks Ukuser691 (talk) 14:10, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ukuser691 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. As noted on your draft, "This may take 4 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 4,829 pending submissions waiting for review." You will need to continue to be patient. You can contact users who have previously reviewed the draft, their names are linked to in the decline notice) but it may or may not help. 331dot (talk) 14:22, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Draft:Bahman Panahi Declined in January and now Declined again March 2. See comments left by reviewers. My comment is delete the Exhibitions list. Wikipedia articles are not intended to contain all mentions of a person's accomplishments. The text already mentions major solo exhibitions. David notMD (talk) 14:46, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Is it possible to take extra action against someone who is deliberately adding WP:OR (in the form of spoilers for future episodes of a web series I like, which is annoying me)?
There is this IP at 41.58.xxx.xxx who has twice added thousands of bytes worth of (possibly fake or stolen from the production company) episode summaries at List of Talking Tom and Friends (TV series) episodes, and as someone who is interested in the show but doesn't have the time to frequently patrol the article, I am getting really annoyed by that person (to be honest, it's not so bad if the plots added are fake, but if they are real and stolen from the production company, I am definitely going to hate that person more than anyone else for spilling the beans very annoyed). Since it's not just a single dynamic IP range, an IP block won't help, and since this is the second time in 4 weeks, it is also probably a slow-motion vandal. I've warned the address that most recently did this, but I don't want to have to wait till he does it 2 or 3 more times to warrant protection.
Is it possible to have someone either:
add Pending Changes Protection till either:
the end of May (which is when each new season of the web series usually starts)?
OR
add the page to their watchlist and revert anyone suspiciously adding a large amout of unreferenced text to the article?
And by the way, would a revdel be necessary for all the "fake" episodes just in case the plots are real and the production company responsible for the series complains? Ignore the struck-out request, I should have realised that this was overkill.
Thanks, 45.251.33.129 (talk) 16:23, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
First of all, you seem to be getting worked up, which you shouldn't be. Second, please remember to assume good faith. I'm not sure what you mean by "I am definitely going to hate that person more than anyone else for spilling the beans". If they are adding summaries for future episodes then they are obviously fake. Try requesting page protection. βӪᑸᙥӴ • Talk • Contribs17:07, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I guess I did let my feelings get in the way of my reasoning, so I suppose I could have written this in a more polite way... And I personally don't think that WP:GOOD FAITH could be applied when someone adds spoilers for future episodes, since I don't know why anyone would like spoilers. (By "I am definitely going to...", I meant that I hated them a lot (though now that I think of it, hate was definitely too strong a word)). As for requesting page protection, I chose not to directly ask for it at WP:RFPP since this was only the second time that person added the content, while many of the requests I've seen have been declined for more active vandalism. But I would appreciate it if someone here added the protection till the end of May. 45.251.33.24 (talk) 01:33, 3 March 2021 (UTC) (I'm on a dynamic IP range)[reply]
This appears to be a case of good faith, not vandalism - there is no intention to disrupt the encyclopedia. The extra content seems to have come from the Talking Tom Wiki - see this entry for "Roy to the rescue" which matches the text entered into Wikipedia.
Requesting revdel, page protection and blocks seems overkill for what should be a good faith insertion. An accusation of vandalism just because somebody fills in a plot summary when you haven't yet seen the episode is frankly just silly. Nobody has properly reached out to the IP - apart from an L2 vandalism warning left by the OP (which I've struck, because it's inappropriate). Let's also remember that although WP:OR may be viable, there is also WP:SPOILER - a plot summary is expected to tell the plot which by definition means spoilers. There is a very real likelihood that this information will be applicable at some point - before the actual airdate, or certainly before the OP has seen the episodes. Chaheel Riens (talk) 08:46, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
All I want is for someone to either add pending changes protection till the end of May (which is when each new season starts) or to add the page to their watchlist and regularly check and revert if anyone tries to add those unverified plot summaries. 45.251.33.205 (talk) 10:41, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
PS - I just wanted to point out that I struck down my own revdel request already and noted that I realised that it was overkill. I also did not request blocking that IP. I just requested for PCP which will let that person edit and will let that person's edit be publicly visible if it is a proper edit. 45.251.33.205 (talk) 10:45, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Did "SenatorLEVI" reply only to mock the fact that I was trying to get someone's attention to this? Because that is what i interpret his response as. 45.251.33.205 (talk) 10:41, 4 March 2021 (UTC) Redacted after I thought a bit more about what he could've meant. 45.251.33.205 (talk) 11:14, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The fact that the episodes haven't aired has little bearing on the issue. I know we don't consider user-generated forums to be reliable sources, but neither should we automatically consider them to be intentionally deceptive and misleading.
I suggest you re-read WP:CRYSTAL BALL, as your current understanding of it is completely wrong. Crystal is about attempts to use Wiki to predict or make claims about the future. A plot description for a TV show that hasn't aired is a far cry from that. We absolutely do allow plots to be outlined even if the book/movie/TV show/etc has not been aired - although we do also generally require sources for them which is why they can be classed as WP:OR without.
Given that the editor in question has not tried to re-add any of the information, I would strongly oppose any kind of sanctions - especially page protection, where you want 2 months of Pending changes protection just because of a plot summary? That's completely over the top. Chaheel Riens (talk) 12:04, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
106.220.85.12 Teahouse hosts volunteer to answer question on how to edit Wikipedia, but are not here to help improve drafts. You are likely the person most knowledgeable about Jalgoan, Kothadi and Ghodasgaon. The responsibility falls on you to improve these drafts while waiting for reviewers. David notMD (talk) 20:39, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
David notMD Okay , I got it ! I also naive.New to WP , learning by mistakes.But I thought some editors if looking for some article to contribution then they can edit them. Cheers 106.220.85.12 (talk) 20:44, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia does have a place to request articles get written by other editors (see Wikipedia:Requested articles), but there is a HUGE backlog. And, as you can see from above, sometimes a Teahouse volunteer will aid with more than just advice (at times, me too). David notMD (talk) 23:02, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I have written an article about the first episode of Season Four of Stranger Things. It was declined for not having any references (fair enough). I have now added eighteen refrences. When will it be reviewed? And when will it be published? (if you think it is good enough) 146.199.189.161 (talk) 12:39, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. As noted on your draft, "This may take 4 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 4,787 pending submissions waiting for review." You will need to be patient. 331dot (talk) 12:40, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I am just wondering though, because it has been reviewed before, and I have now added eighteen references, if one of the Teahouse editors could review it? Cheers.
I'm afraid that's not how it works. There is no deadline, and in any case, folk are more likely to take a look if you provide a link. I noticed that the first sentence of your draft contains the word "upcoming" which is something of a red flag to reviewers. While you're waiting you might usefully be reading WP:UPCOMING.--Shantavira|feed me13:26, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse volunteers are not necessarily draft reviewers (a few are). The system is not a queue - reviewers select what they want to review. So, could be days, weeks, or (sadly) months.David notMD (talk) 13:51, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
But I can tell you that a draft which suddenly spouts eighteen references, the first twelve of which don't appear to relate the subject, and the next two are to Twitter and Instagram, doesn't inspire much confidence that it is worth a reviewer spending any time on your draft. One of the first things a reviewer does - mirroring the absolutely first thing an article writer should do - is look for the three or four references that are reliable, independent and give significant coverage to the subject of the article (not to the series it belongs to). There may be such sources among your eighteen, but if I were a reviewer, I would probably do what I've just done, and conclude that it wasn't worth my time wading through the rest of them looking for evidence of notability. Note in particular that it is very rarely worth adducing more than one source for a particular point, and when a writer does so it often suggests that they are struggling to find satisfactory references for the rest. --ColinFine (talk) 14:54, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
ColinFine If you look back through the references, the first nine are about the cast of the episode and the next eight are about the season and the title's announcement. I would say these are references to do with the episode. Reading these, you would know the history behind the season and episode, and the cast. But what do you want me to do with the draft, if it isn't worth a reviewer looking through it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.199.189.161 (talk) 15:08, 3 March 2021 (UTC)146.199.189.161 (talk) 09:58, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome to the Teahouse! In my opinion, the draft might be rejected, as Tony Jazz appears to be only notable for one event. Obama's 2012 reelection song is not exactly that notable, wouldn't you think? Basically he needs to have significant coverage to deserve a Wikipedia article. See WP:BIO for details on this. I feel like it's kind of on the border here... Sungodtemple (talk) 13:34, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Partner to publish first Wikipedia Article - How to find one?
I "joined" ~ 3 yrs ago...in retirement... while researching a subject I hoped to "publish." (It relates to lots of existing content.)
I made a couple edits to related Wikipedia subjects while drafting my original article -- but that was my total actual contribution.
Actual "publishing" seemed too daunting. Learning W's arcane language...
So, I simply drafted in plain English, in the "style" of Wikipedia, but never published.
I did identify all links to existing article.
And there it sits in a word-processing format, for two years.
How do I find a someone actually edit/publish?
And where might I go for any reply? (I don't know how to use "Talk" or "Sandbox" or...
Could I just do email? Is there some way to share the content off-line as a PDF perhaps?)
Oh, and the subject is... U.S. Naval history - pre-Civil War (in case that strikes someone's interest)
Save it as plain text (not in a word processing format). Copy this to the clipboard of your computer. Click on this link. Paste it there. Click on "Publish changes" (which means save what you have). Then ask here about it. -- Hoary (talk) 23:03, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I have pictures as well and footnotes. Will convert and post as instructed in the next couple days (it may take that long to convert and purge all the formatting I did to make it "look" like a Wiki document. Appreciate whatever help, advice you can offer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Richard Furwood (talk • contribs) 00:49, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Here, both to fortify you and to demonstrate picture insertion, is a glass of rather good beer. (Apologies for the miscellaneous category confusions.)Good, Richard Furwood, but please do not attempt to upload any pictures until you fully understand the (necessarily stringent) legal requirements. However, you're welcome to insert pictures that are already at Wikimedia Commons. -- Hoary (talk) 02:15, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It's at User:Richard Furwood/sandbox. Well done, Richard Furwood! And yes, it looks interesting. First priority: labeling subheaders as such (I've done one for you), and attaching the references to, well, what they're supposed to be attached to (I've done a bogus sample for you). Don't worry yet about the infobox or the pictures: these can come a little later. -- Hoary (talk) 03:04, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I've converted the remaining headings the best I could (I assumed the order based on the context), correct them manually if they are wrong by adding/removing a =. Don't go below two = (==), and don't go above 5. (=====) Remember that the equals on the left must match the equals on the right! Spacing doesn't matter. WhoAteMyButter (📨│📝) 07:09, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
How do I make and add user boxes. I have seen them on other profile pages and I have been wanting to upgrade my user page. Any help would be appreciated. Gandalf the Groovy (talk) 00:07, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Wikigetsme123: As explained to you last time, we would much rather you improve the current article rather than replace the current one. However, you still need to to put it bluntly, your prose inside the sandbox is not up to Wikipedia's standards. You may try to boldly edit the existing article or propose changes on the talk page. You also mentioned last time that there's another editor that you got into a disagreement with, so please head to the talk page and try to come to a consensus. ◢ Ganbaruby! (Say hi!) 08:50, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, thank you for the feedback. To improve 'this' short article, I would have to add 70% of text, I would consider this a rewriting. I am waiting for feedback on the talk page for weeks now, as it is, there is nobody interested. The other editor who reversed my early small change and then agreed to change it himself (so no 'disagreement anywhere' is saying, he is only part time on Wiki 9what ever that could mean to me), suggesting another editor might help. I contacted him 3 weeks ago, but no response, yet.
That is where we are... in the air. Ok, I will change it, and hope somebody comes up with suggestions without deleting it just because of.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikigetsme123 (talk • contribs) 23:39, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello!
So I would like the option to hide images on wikipedia, I have been using the help page on the topic to replace most pictures with the battenburg pattern until clicked on and turned off article previews in my preferences. Unfourtunately however when using the searchbox images for articles still come up and still do in the "related articles" section on many page, is there any solution for this? Thanks!999ThingsToFix (talk) 07:38, 4 March 2021 (UTC) 999ThingsToFix (talk) 07:38, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
AfC submission and no COI declaratoin
Hi there, I have a predicament and I don't know how to go about this. My last name is Ziade, I have recently changed my user name from Elie plus to my current one. I am afraid now of being accused of COI for that. This is my problem: a while back I noticed that one of the articles on my watchlist was being written over (Philippe Ziade the journalist) I created a disambig page and moved the new page (that of a politically involved entrepreneur / consul) for other users to edit and left it at that. I regularly review articles related to the Ziades (Ignatius, Phil the journalist and May) and I came upon the AfC for Philippe Ziade when I had thought the disambig and overwriting issue was resolved.
I have reviewed the sources for the said AfC and I have created a draft but I am reluctant to edit the AfC submission because of my fear of being accused of COI. I cannot find a tag to declare non-COI and I am here to declare that I don't use Wikipedia to promote any person with my family name. I have interest in these people but I have no relationship whatsoever with any of the Ziade article subjects on Wikipedia. Please tell me how to go about this. I also declare that I am not related to Philippe Ziade (neither the journalist nor the consul) nor affiliated to him, or his business (any of his businesses). I am not in contact with him nor with anyone from his side. I will not edit this article before hearing your counsel. _Elias Z. (talkallam) 07:47, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
There's no requirement that announcements of this kind must be made via template. You might write something on your user page. ¶ I note that both Draft:Philippe Ziade (businessman) and Draft:Philippe Ziade (entrepreneur) are about the same person, and that they use the same photograph: a photograph clearly taken with the cooperation of the biographee. Furthermore, the photograph first appeared for use in Philippe Ziade Real Estate Developer, an article subsequently deleted as unambiguously promotional. (The new "businessman" draft says that Ziade "is the founder and chairman of Las-Vegas based Growth Holdings"; the photograph was uploaded by the user "GrowthHoldingsPZ", later blocked for promotional activities.) There seems to be something fishy about all the activity on Wikipedia surrounding Ziade, whose notability is not obvious to me. -- Hoary (talk) 08:31, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hoary I am not aware of the deleted article's edit history; I was only made aware of the article of this person when I noticed the edit conflict on the journalist's article. If the image is problematic why not delete it altogether? (For the record I don't think it's Wikipedia-appropriate because it looks like a promotional posed corporate shot, I only kept it because I saw it on the AfC page and assumed it was okay-ed). I have written an article from scratch and supplemented every primary source (interview video) with a secondary one. As for the notability issue, the person is notorious due to his alleged political connection with the ruling class, and shortly thereafter for his paradoxical refusal to participate in a cabinet dominated by HA after the liquidation of a regionally influential Iranian general. After that he was targeted by what people here qualify as a vengeful smearing campaign on a political background which (I only included a part of it). Other accusations include his relationships with Lebanese singer Yara (singer) and Najwa Karam, both of which are Arab divas, while being married. I found these bits of information irrelevant and ill-sourced and I did not include them in the article. Ziade is also popular among young graduates for obvious reasons. I am not responsible for paid or edits made by connected contributors (GrowthHoldingsPZ) or others. I raised this subject here because I worked on the article and found that there's a pending AfC. I am interested in Philip's story but I am in no way connected to him and refuse any insinuation of the sort. I have been here for the third of my life and I have never even considered breaching Wikipedia code and mission. _Elias Z. (talkallam) 09:05, 4 March 2021 (UTC)\[reply]
While here I would like to inquire if starting an article for an MP with the same last name as mine will raise COI questions. I am also not related or affiliated with that person (Camil Ziade). _Elias Z. (talkallam) 09:09, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Given your extensive and stellar history of improving Wikipedia articles (Wow!!), I see no reason why anyone would doubt a simple declaration on your User page that you are and will be editing articles about people with the same last name as you (Draft:Philippe Ziade (businessman)), but that you have no COI with any of them. David notMD (talk) 10:12, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Elias Ziade, the image is fine. Its uploading and initial use raised my eyebrows; but now that it's at Commons you're free to use it. And yes, I agree with what David notMD has written immediately above. -- Hoary (talk) 11:51, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I am sorry if anything I wrote was defensive in any way. I am very humbled by your words of encouragement David notMD and Hoary Words don't convey intentions well but I am very impassioned and I take starting and improving articles very seriously. I was afraid that my family name would impede my plans to publish more articles about known Ziades that I am not related to. Now how can I proceed? Is it possible to delete the AfC article so I can publish the draft I wrote? _Elias Z. (talkallam) 13:15, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
There's nothing to apologize for, really. I suggest you just ignore the "entrepreneur" draft. As for the "businessman" draft, unfortunately I don't read Arabic (and don't trust Google Translate) so can't judge whether your man is notable (in the odd sense that the word is used here in Wikipedia). Unfortunately it's past my bedtime and my brain cells are dying even as I type, so I just hope that David notMD (or somebody else) will give you an intelligent response. -- Hoary (talk) 13:34, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
process of providing the copyrights for my company page
what is the process of having Wikipedia copyright for the magazine page? What documents I have to submit and how I have to submit and where i have to submit the documents? please guide me. Sauravgupta7297 (talk) 08:43, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Sauravgupta7297: Is this about File:1 feb 2021 edition cover.jpeg? A magazine cover is considered a non-free image, meaning that we can only use a low-resolution version for identification purposes only, given that a Wikipedia article exists in the first place. This is known as fair use, and you don't need to release copyright for that. However, since no article uses the image, it will be deleted. Also, when you upload a non-free image, do not tag it as public domain or any other license that it is not.
Sauravgupta7297: please don't ask the same question in more than one place. I have just given you a lengthy answer at the Help Desk, and I am irritated at coming here and finding you have posted the same question, and engaged other editors' time as well. --ColinFine (talk) 09:26, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Taking over!
Someone made a wiki page for me. Thanks! How do I take complete control. My name is KOKUMO. Also, how do I capitalize my name all over the page? From the header to the body.
Sorry MommaBaker60. Nobody controls their own page on Wikipedia. We have a style for content which does not include upper case names.Charles (talk) 09:45, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
(NB. I've merged these two sections). KOKUMOTheQueenOfQueerSoul, MommaBaker60 - is there a reason you're using two accounts for this? We're not keen on individuals using multiple accounts without good reason, especially when navigating something like a Conflict Of Interest. --Paul ❬talk❭ 11:55, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That is very unlikely to happen. I suggest you take the time to read WP:BLP and WP:COI carefully, and then make suggestions and provide sources (WP:RS) at Talk:Kokumo, which is the place to discuss changes to that article. If your suggestions are inline with WP:s policies and guidelines, they may be acted upon. You don't control the article (it's WP:s article about you, not your WP-article), but it's possible you can have influence. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:37, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
A few weeks ago I created a page (titled Ran Namerode) and understood it requires several months to be approved. I looked now to check how it's doing, and now I can't find it anywhere, can someone please help me find it? Wikinamerode (talk) 09:47, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Wikinamerode, welcome to the Teahouse! This means unfortunately that your page may have been deleted however it's not permanently deleted and can be restored. Search up the exact name of your article and see if you can edit it then look in the notification bar and see if you can find the user that deleted your article and ask them further questions. SoyokoAnis12:59, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
SoyokoAnis I checked and the page has never existed, deleted or otherwise, under the title given(as well as in the Draft space). Either it's under another title, or possibly on another language version of Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 13:05, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I want to write an Article about the CEO of A company
Hi,
I recently searched for The CEO of Maruti Suzuki India Limited, Kenichi Ayukawa, but could not find any information about him except here.It is stated that he is here that he is the CEO but He did not have a Page dedicated to Him. Can I create one on him? It is written on the creating your first article that I should check for notability of Topic In the Teahouse.
Regards, Wikiedit (talk) 12:11, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Wikiedit01995 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The CEO would not necessarily have a dedicated article(not just a "page") about him, unless there is significant coverage in independent reliable sources about him personally, and not just having to do with his job. If all the coverage about him is just related to his being the CEO, he probably would not merit a standalone article, as he would not meet the Wikipedia definition of a notable person. 331dot (talk) 12:15, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Wikiedit01995:, to determine the gentleman's notability, which must be separate from the corporation's notability you need to find material about him written by others.
He is a living person. For a living person we have a high standard of referencing. Every substantive fact you assert, especially one that is susceptible to potential challenge, requires a citation with a reference that is about them, and is independent of them, and is in WP:RS, and is significant coverage. Please also see WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources and WP:SELFPUB which has clear limitations on self published sources. Providing sufficient references, ideally one per fact cited, that meet these tough criteria is likely to make this draft a clear acceptance (0.9 probability). Lack of them or an inability to find them is likely to mean that the person is not suitable for inclusion, certainly today.
Your approach is a process.
find references
select the facts form those references that you wish to use (you will cite the facts with those references WP:CITE is your friend here
Create a storyboard from those facts
Using WP:AFC use the article wizard to start a new draft. It is not mandatory, but it guides you
Write very neutral, flat prose, citing the references for the facts
Double check your work and submit the draft when happy
While awaiting review, continue to enhance your work
Note that an inability to find references means the draft is unlikely to be accepted (0.9 probability). We want new articles here, and we try hard to maintain high standards. Welcome to a consuming new hobby FiddleFaddle12:22, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
There is an article about the chairman of the company R. C. Bhargava which you could use as a template for any draft, Wikiedit01995. Although that article has been around since 2014, it still debatable whether it passes the WP:BIO notability threshold, in my opinion. However you will see the sort of article Wikipedia expects as a minimum. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:57, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Michael D. Turnbull, Were three of the references not dead links we could probably make a better determination. I am leaning towards Bhargava being a decent gentleman doing his job well rather than having notability. I am currently 50:50 about Bhargava. FiddleFaddle13:09, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I agree but didn't want to go off-topic. Personally I would be pretty certain that article would not survive an WP:AfD but I'm not familiar enough with all the WP:BLP policies to be sure. Go ahead with that if you wish, Timtrent. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:29, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
How can I find red links which are pages that don't exist. I am wondering if there is a list of them somewhere or if I have to seek them out somewhere. Any help would be appreciated. Gandalf the Groovy (talk) 13:42, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Be advised that once you submit it, it likely will take many weeks if not months to be reviewed, due to a backlog. 331dot (talk) 13:52, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Really weird vandalism
I found a really weird instance of vandalism. First he called a user an idiot here, and then he replaced the page here. I reverted it, but do I put two user warnings, or just one? And if the former, which one? Help! MEisSCAMMER(talk)Hello!14:34, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Deleting content on the Talk page of an article is indeed vandalism, so you were right to revert it. The vandalizing editor is an IP address (not a registered account). I suppose you could watch the article and the talk page to see if the editor returns, but otherwise don't bother. IP editors often show up once - edit or vandalize - and then never return. David notMD (talk) 15:32, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Gandalf the Groovy, if you're looking for requested articles you can find them here. If you want to created a draft just create a page in the following format Draft:Insert name of article. You can then submit it to WP:AFC, or move it directly to the mainspace when you're done. For a clearer image you can refer to WP:YFA and WP:DRAFT. SenatorLEVI14:52, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Given that this appears to be your first effort to create an article, I strongly recommend going through AfC versus moving a draft directly to mainspace. And see WP:YFA. David notMD (talk) 15:58, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Search history on Wikipedia app on iPhone
I am using the Wikipedia app to browse through Wikipedia. It really annoys me that it saves your search history. I know how to clear my search history in the app, but I would like to how to prevent the app from storing my search history so I don’t have to keep clearing it. Same goes with the article viewing history. I asked this at WP:VPT 4 days ago, but got no response. Thanks, Interstellarity (talk) 15:28, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@GoingBatty: That link doesn’t help. It just gives a list of Wikipedia mobile applications. What I am looking for is the steps needed to stop the Wikipedia app from saving my article viewing history and search history. Interstellarity (talk) 12:48, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Colonizor48. There's a bit more to this than what The Aafī has posted above, and you can find out more details at WP:NPP. You might also want to take a look at WP:HATS as well since special user rights are usually only given to those that the WP:COMMUNITY feels will not use them inappropriately or incorrectly. Some special rights do have minimum requirements, but most always require that the editors requesting the right have an established track record of making sound edits that shows they have a good understanding of relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines. This doesn't mean that the editors can never make a mistake, but it does mean that the need to clearly demonstrate that they are WP:HERE and are capable of learning from their mistakes. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:02, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Wiki Volunteers,
First, let me say how much I appreciate your hard work and how much I appreciate Wikipedia. That said, I was recently on a feedback board, asking for help with updating my page. I am a dinosaur and was completely confused by the directions I was given. I know it's possible to do, but it is not so clear, nor easy, to make the simplest changes. I, of course was not adding any weird, or libelous information, just updates about me and my career, and of course, since I didn't know how about the protocol of making changes, all my hard work was erased. I don't mind, but I wish I knew how to add info properly. I know I am supposed to go to the "Talk" page, and add sourced backup to any additions, but I have no idea on how and where to do that, specifically. I suppose there's no step-by-step example of how to do this? That would be super helpful!
Any way I could talk to someone about it? I certainly have source press, etc. to back up my additions/changes.
Best, Michael Holman (filmmaker) 2603:7000:4001:E49A:3425:B428:E7E9:83F5 (talk) 17:10, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Generally, editing your own article is discouraged. What you do instead is use edit requests. Go to Talk:Michael Holman (filmmaker). Click "new section". Type the name of the section you want, like "requested edits to a page about me", then at the top of the section include {{Request edit}}, which will include the template. Then, write your request under it, as well as the references supporting whatever changes you'd like to be made. The clearer you are with your request, the faster it will be implemented.
Your question has already been answered above. I would add, however, that you will need to continue to improve and clarify the article for it to stand a chance of being accepted. For example, the first line says he's a "songwriter, musician and writer", but under the heading of "career" it says he's "president of the Economic and Social Development Counci" with no mention of music except at the age of seven.--Shantavira|feed me19:13, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If I understand you question correctly, you can navigate to any user's page, click on the menu item to the left ("User contributions") and then, at the very bottom of the page that appears, click on "Edit count" and you should see a full breakdown for that user. Your personal one is "at this URL". Mike Turnbull (talk) 18:08, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Fanoflionking and Elli:. Not so. The stats (at the URL I linked) say (top left) you have 15,106 edits. The part that says the data are limited to the last 5,000 edits is next to an asterisk that just refers to the pie-charts nearby. Presumably that's not just for processing time reasons but because most people won't dramatically alter the pattern of their editing over time. Mike Turnbull (talk) 08:53, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Michael D. Turnbull I'm pretty sure that's exactly for processing time reasons. Some counts are faster to run than others, I'd assume counting byte size is more intensive than just asking for the namespace totals or whatever. Elli (talk | contribs) 09:01, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, exactly, @Elli:. On any sensible relational database SELECT COUNT * WHERE (condition) is always much much faster than any query that needs to process the individual rows returned. Mike Turnbull (talk) 09:05, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Businessman Category Requirements
Where is a list of notability requirements for people categorized under the businessman category? Is recognition by the United Nations / The White House sourced in a major publication enough to qualify notability? Dannyocean99 (talk) 18:11, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Dannyocean99. I think the guidance that you are looking for is at WP:DEFINING, which says: "For example, a film actor who holds a law degree should be categorized as a film actor, but not as a lawyer unless his or her legal career was notable in its own right or relevant to his acting career."
Similarly, it is very common for highly paid professional athletes to invest in businesses. If the vast majority of coverage of the person is focused on their sports accomplishments and occasionally, somebody mentions "And person Y also owns a business," then that athlete should be added to sports categories but not business categories. Cullen328Let's discuss it18:31, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
What should I do?
It appears that an edit war has been started on the page Daihatsu Rocky. User TheAafi is removing the images on that page, saying that "this is a set-index article, images should be used on particular related articles, not convenient here, MOS:DABIMG backs my argument." However, the same article also backs my argument that if a reader was looking for the F70 Rocky but didn't know the model codes or years produced, an image might help them differentiate between the F300 and A200 series Rocky. How should I go about resolving this conflict. Thanks! Sagquattro2009 (talk) 19:12, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
What action do I need to take at this point for acceptance? This is the comment I received on my draft. I am confused. Should I move forward with creating a hatnote on the primary page? Thank you.
Comment: The title of this draft has been disambiguated.
If this draft is accepted, a hatnote will need to be added to the primary page to refer to this page.
The primary page is Post-industrial society.
Dawnpalmyra (talk) 19:19, 4 March 2021 (UTC) Dawnpalmyra (talk) 19:19, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Cullen,
I am reaching out to you at Wikipedia Teahouse for both advice and help,
I have always loved vintage fashion, automobiles and music because they represent the classics in their own way, and always find a way to come back. I have always been interested in how the stock Market had an impact on color, automobile’s fashions and music and believe that the stock market with its rise and fall had it ‘s impact in these areas but have not been able to prove my theory. I also want to use any articles I might find on Wikipedia and give credit to their contributing editors.
Hi. I made one edit in Investigative Reporters and Editors, adding the History of the organization, at least its beginnings, which was told in one book I reference in the article. I'd like to ask the members of the Teahouse if they could review my contribution, since I'm not a native English speaker, so I might have made some grammatical errors or repeated some words a bit too much. Thanks! User:Tetizeraz. Send me a ✉️ ! 20:15, 4 March 2021 (UTC) User:Tetizeraz. Send me a ✉️ ! 20:15, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Precariousman123. Generally, any editor can remove a maintenance template from which has been added to an article as explained in Help:Maintenance template removal as long as they feel they have addressed the reasons why the template was added in the first place. If someone else disagrees and re-adds the template, then things can be discussed on the article's talk page. For templates added for WP:COI or WP:PAID reasons, however, it's probably not a good idea for the editor who is considered to have the COI or PAID relationship to the subject of the article to remove such templates no matter how good their intentions are. It would probably be best for you to either start a discussion about this on the article's talk per WP:ER, or maybe at a noticeboard like WP:COIN or WP:NPOVN to see what other unconnected editors might think. This might seem a bit unfair perhaps, but it probably best to be WP:CAUTIOUS in a case like this. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:51, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
LightningComplexFire to answer your second question, you should upload it to Wikimedia Commons. If you own the logo you should be able to release it under a free license - making this clear on say, your company website, will prevent the logo from being deleted. Provided your company has an article, uploading the logo is acceptable. Elli (talk | contribs) 21:11, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Elli, that is not helpful advice. LightningComplexFire, Elli's advice is only correct in the (very unusual) situation that the company is willing to license the logo in such a way that anybody may reuse or alter it for any purpose, commercial or not (or the slightly less unusual case that the logo is simple enough that it does not meet the threshold for being copyrightable). For most logos, you do not upload them to Commons, but to Wikipedia itself, making sure that the use meets all the non-free content criteria: more detail is given in Logos. (Note that the criteria require that the media be added to at least one article, and that it be essential to that article, so in practice, this can be uploaded only to be added to a published article about the company, and not for any other purpose.
Uploading the logo and adding it to the article about the company is technically COI editing: in my view it is acceptable, but I don't know that everybody would agree. An alternative approach is to make an edit request on the article's talk page, giving a URL for the logo, and asking somebody to upload as non-free and add it to the article. --ColinFine (talk) 21:43, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
ColinFine if it's your company, then you can license the logo however you want, because you own it. I'd advise them to release it under a free license.
It's like if a person comes here and asks "can I add a picture of myself to an article about me?" Yes, release it under a free license. Elli (talk | contribs) 23:23, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Most people would never want to release their business' logo under a free license. (Many big companies spend huge sums of money on essentially the opposite; zealously protecting their intellectual property from use by others, their logos, trademarks, etc.) On the other hand, by the very nature of what fair use is, a person who owns copyrighted content cannot claim fair use—only a third party can. There is a catch-22 there, of course.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:13, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Trademarks != copyrights. And besides, most photographers wouldn't release their pictures under a free license - but that's what we encourage them to do here, if they'd like to share their images. I don't see the issue with applying the same standard to others. If you'd like your images included, release them under an appropriate license. Elli (talk | contribs) 02:19, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Elli, after mentioning intellectual property, I said "logos, trademarks, etc."; do you see the comma? Anyway, the equivalence you're drawing between photos and a business logo is utterly inapt. It's like saying "people give blood all the time; can we have your liver?"--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:11, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Fuhghettaboutit: yes, I did - my argument is that the copyright status doesn't, or shouldn't, matter to them. Many companies pick logos in the public domain already - like Google - and there is no issue there, they can still go after trademark infringements. Elli (talk | contribs) 03:15, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Google didn't choose to put their logo in the public domain; the logo they chose was too unoriginal for copyright protection. That doesn't imply if they had a logo that met the threshold of originality they wouldn't spend a billion dollars protecting it. But the real point is that you're actually, empirically wrong about how the vast majority of those who have copyright protected logos feel about protecting them, and how that interfaces with your advice. Yes, some small portion of people are willing to release their original logo. The vast majority would say are you f*ing kidding?--Fuhghettaboutit (talk)
Elli, Ok, I would just put it under a fair use license, or if I'm wrong, any license that allows the image to be on WP, but cannot be used except for the subject page. I'm not an expert on copyright, so I mess up which licenses are which. 🔥LightningComplexFire🔥15:58, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Help with questions on Steph Korey article
Hi, I'm the subject of the Steph Korey article and have declared that connection. I was having a productive conversation with @Seagull123: about the content of the article but they seem to be on an extended break from editing. I would really appreciate it if someone had a few minutes to pick up the conversation with me where Seagull123 left off. Stephkg (talk) 21:46, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I please would like to correct some glaring errors in the Wikipedia article about myself - this includes statements that incorrectly portray my beliefs or cause the public to have a mistake notion about myself. In addition, this page has not been updated in ages, and I have written several new books since it was written, released two music albums, and received additional awards and international attention.
My specific question: I have many physical documents, such as an Award from the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts (and letters written to support my claims and assertions). But I do not know how to upload such an item, even I don't know where I would send such an item. But the physical document is part of the evidence that I received this award. Does Wikipedia accept PDFs, JPGs, and so forth? And if so, how would I make them available to those who review such things for inclusion on my page - do I put it onto Google Docs - and if so to whom do I give permission to view such a document?
Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources state about article subjects. If the sources in the article about you are incorrect, please make a formal edit request(click for instructions) on the article talk page, Talk:Laurence Galian, offering independent reliable sources to support your proposed changes. That doesn't include primary sources. Wikipedia does not store source documents, preferably sources that report on those documents are desired. 331dot (talk) 23:28, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
For clarity: this means that we might mention an award if we have a link to the official website, or (ideally) to a respected newspaper which mentioned that you received the award in an article. The same is true of more recent books, albums and other activities you have been involved with. We do not mention information that has not been published, per our verifiability policy. As 331dot says, making an edit request (by following the instructions at the link they gave) is your best way to go about this, and you can ask me at User talk:Bilorv if you are struggling to follow these instructions. — Bilorv (talk) 15:33, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Template main article
I use to put See main article xyz but I see there is a new template
. My question is “ Is this the preferred way now and thus should I go through all my articles and start replacing with this format? GRALISTAIR (talk) 00:16, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Well I did an article Draft:Midland Main Line railway upgrade and in the history an editor did an edit that replaced See main article Midland Main Line with the format
Hi Ganbaruby. Templates are just a convenience. If you've written it out the same way, I see no purpose served in replacing with a template, only seen in edit mode (we have had a gazillion discussions, for example, about the fact that bots who just make these types of changes, cluttering up watchlists in the process, have such little utility for the bother they cause...) As to the slightly different format you've used, it serves fine; I suppose "See" is fairly tacit, but if it's at all burdensome, don't bother. I doubt there's was any grand consensus on the exact way it should look; no involved finding that it's massively superior to some trivially different format. (By the way, the template's been around since 2004.) Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:50, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Fuhghettaboutit: They's referring to this diff: [1]. Though I'm not well versed in hatnote discussions and this is not the place to discuss the template's pros and cons, I've always used hatnote templates because of how it indents + italicizes for you. GRALISTAIR, I'd still encourage you to use the template, even if for consistiency's sake. ◢ Ganbaruby! (Say hi!) 01:09, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Ganbaruby: You refer to [2]. Context is often important. There is a big difference between the start of an article and the start of a section. "See main article xyz" is not suitable for the opening line. {{main|xyz}} with its indentation and italics is better but we actually don't generally use any form of such "main" links in the opening line, only in sections (where {{main}} is also preferred). "main" links are supposed to go to articles with more detailed coverage of the subject of a section, not broader articles. Template:Main says: "This template should also not be used in lead sections." Some areas of Wikipedia do have their own practices, e.g. tennis draw articles like 2021 Australian Open – Men's Singles where {{main}} is used in an "invalid" way while 2021 Australian Open#Men's Singles is the valid way. There are thousands of such tennis articles and it may some day give a big conflict. Don't do it unless it's an established practice in the subject area. You should instead look for a way to link the broader article in the opening sentence or paragraph. Your example already does that so the "main" link can just be removed. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:22, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. I'm trying to understand the rationale of why Draft:Brad_Walls is constantly being rejected based on notability. I have multiple biopic sources (Washpost, CNN, huffpost etc) that make a substantial argument for notability. Please share any insight. Regards. Bradwalls1992 (talk) 01:42, 5 March 2021 (UTC) Bradwalls1992 (talk) 01:42, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome to the Teahouse, Bradwalls1992! From your username, it appears you are creating an article about yourself the reason may be because of WP:COI. Please re-review the comments to insure the article passes. SoyokoAnis - talk02:52, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Bradwalls1992 I think COI editors are generally held to a higher standard than non-COI editors in what is considered acceptable. Do you have any reliable sources giving significant biographical coverage of you, instead of just a project that you've done? Elli (talk | contribs) 03:24, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Elli. Artists press is centered around released work and additionally will dive into biographical details of that artist, and that is the content within the sources listed on the draft. It is confusing as I cover the 4 main points in WP:ARTIST to be notable, and I am not really getting a good enough answer. It seems there is some bias with the editors? Thanks Bradwalls1992 (talk) 03:34, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Bradwalls1992 yeah, I feel like you probably are notable (lucky you!) I'm somewhat busy the next few days but I might see if I can publish your article.
BTW, would you consider uploading a picture of yourself - and perhaps an example of your work - under a compatible free license to Wikimedia Commons? Elli (talk | contribs) 03:41, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Bradwalls1992 as for uploading the image, yes, just make sure you agree to release it under an appropriate license. And yeah, CoI editors are viewed very negatively around here - which is understandable, as most of them are non-notable and write unfairly about themselves, but that doesn't mean that all of them are bad - WP:AGF should still apply.
As for resubmitting, I'd hold off on that - I'll look at it personally soon, submitting isn't necessary for that.
(also, please keep in mind that once your article is published, it's recommended to request any possibly controversial edits with the {{request edit}} template on the article talk page, so it'll be a bit more frustrating to edit it in that case. So if you have more stuff that's received coverage you'd like to add/change, I'd recommend doing that sooner rather than later) Elli (talk | contribs) 04:05, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Also bear in mind, Elli, that citations are there to verify something in an article — usually some fact. We call it WP:OVERKILL when multiple citations are given to back up just one piece of information. Think about the people who have to review your article. They will be much more impressed by a single good reference to a WP:SECONDARY source than they will to several WP:PRIMARY ones that may all have been based on a single press release. I'm thinking of the references 23 to 27 in the career section! Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:42, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Mike Turnbull, I appreciate the feedback. I never received this when submitting the article. The reason I did perhaps move towards WP:OVERKILL, was because I kept getting rejected for the sources not being relevant, hence I added more, which in retrospect wasn't a great idea. Thanks again! Bradwalls1992 (talk) 01:02, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
To add to this, most of these rights are only given to users who have significant experience with Wikipedia, can demonstrate an understanding of our basic policies and guidelines, and have a direct need for these permissions in their day-to-day editing. (The exception is autoconfirmed, which you will receive automatically in a couple of days, as it just indicates that you have more than 10 edits and that your account is at least 4 days old.) — Bilorv (talk) 15:18, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The last thing I said in a thread now archived pointed out that in an environment where publishing is constrained by political censorship, nothing can be published regarding that circumstance in spite is its existence. I am surprised this does not seem to be of concern. I wonder why that is.
On Wikipedia, this phenomenon strikes me as willful ignorance or cowardice. Wikipedia relies on published sources for everything, so a degradation of the publishing world undermines the value of Wikipedia. The logical extreme would be Wikipedia would contain nothing of value if nothing of value is published.Wikoipedia's health is tied to the health of publishing. That would make political censorship something to really hate if Wikipedia is importantDanallenhtn (talk) 03:09, 5 March 2021 (UTC) Danallenhtn (talk) 03:09, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Danallenhtn what would you prefer we do? How do we know anything that we don't directly observe?
Ideally we would just know what's true, but we don't, so we use reliable sources to determine what is true or not. Otherwise, the site would be filled with constant warring as people disagree over every possible fact. Elli (talk | contribs) 03:22, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Danallenhtn If the reliable sources in an article are being summarized accurately, but you believe they are incorrect or disagree with them, you will have to take that up with the sources. Wikipedia makes no claims that its content is "true"; Wikipedia only summarizes what can be verified in reliable sources. The sources are presented to readers so they can be examined and judged by those readers as to their truthfulness or accuracy. Only you can decide what is true for you. See WP:TRUTH. 331dot (talk) 11:47, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Danallenhtn: I think you're wrong to suggest that this is not a concern for us. It's certainly something I regularly think about. However, in order to offer a criticism you need to offer a better solution, because it is often said that Wikipedia cannot work in theory, only in practice. Many users come to this website to maliciously add false information, and it is enormously impractical for us to check whether the information is true or not in every single instance. The site could not exist if the burden were on us to do this. Instead, a rule we can implement in practice is to remove information without a reliable source. So if you think we should not rely on reliable sources only then you need to explain how the site could be rewritten under your new suggestions, and how it would be maintained in the face of day-to-day vandalism without suffering reputational damage or falling into disuse. On the flip side, we have actively opposed some political censorship such as the SOPA initiative or censorship of Wikipedia where it interferes with our mission statement and goals. — Bilorv (talk) 15:27, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Consistent Error in the entries on individual Psalms
I've noticed that many of the pages for individual Psalms from the Book of Psalms has an error in comparing the numbering systems between the Hebrew and Greek texts. Is there a way to do a global fix or do I have to change each one? Here is the text that appears with each psalm beginning with Psalm 9. The wording is consistent but the numbering changes. This example is from the entry Psalm 53, which I have corrected on the WP page.
This article uses Hebrew (Masoretic) psalm numbering. Psalm 52 in Greek (Septuagint or Vulgate) numbering corresponds to Psalm 53 in Hebrew numbering.
Another editor reverting changes back to incorrect data
I got a message from another editor that my corrections to the incorrect numbering between Greek and Hebrew psalms were creating some problem. He has reverted the changes back. It has to do with some links that are embedded. I will stop making changes and hope for some guidance because the numbering is incorrect, it doesn't even match the numbering that is used in the text of the articles. Here is the note I received:
Francis Schonken 05:16, 5 March 2021 diff hist 0 Psalm 63 Undid revision 1010376059 by BCPMyles (talk) no, creates a blacklink, instead of a link to the article on the psalm with this number in the other numbering system. current
I’m looking to change the title of Draft:Norman R. Smith (educationist), which I’ve submitted to AFC. Someone previously submitted a badly sourced page on Norman, and I’ve (independently, not working with whoever uploaded the last thing) drafted a new potential entry for the long time college president. But I’m concerned the title of the draft is weird, as he is a university president, not an “educationist” by nature - which doesn’t reflect the thing he is notable for. Can someone please help? (I am reviewing a stipend for this work). 2605:8D80:502:9A8:4C53:4B9D:C323:4C76 (talk) 05:44, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, IP user. If "reviewing a stipend" is a mistake for "receiving a stipend", then you are a paid editor, and you must familiarise yourself with the page I linked, and make the requisite declaration. --ColinFine (talk) 13:49, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I am trying to cite a newspaper Article in my sandbox article on Author David Alexanian. So I did this [3] I put the reference name - SNAPD1 and then added an external link. Is this correct? Thank you Angelalala222 (talk) 10:48, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You seem to have written little, if anything, that wasn't about this one person. It's very important that you read Help:Your first article. A spoiler: please forget about TVS Chelapaty Rao until you have become at least a little accustomed to, and skillful at, improving existing articles. -- Hoary (talk) 12:29, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
One of the main principles of Wikipedia is neutrality, which means we discourage you from editing about yourself or your friends or family—these are called "conflicts of interest". Most people do not meet the criteria we have for having a biography on Wikipedia, which you can read at Wikipedia:Notability (people), and in the rare cases where they do we need to see evidence of lots of high-quality references. — Bilorv (talk) 15:15, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
ADDA52
This https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ADDA52 page is deleted twice in the tag of [WP:G4] I tried to explain that the page is notable today & created based on 2020-21 news of the ban on it in Few states but people are deleting it due to 2017 discussion. Please let me what to do. To avoid spam I just created the Draft:ADDA52 for the discussion and point of view. Please check my Talk page also, it might be of some help. 1друг (talk) 12:16, 5 March 2021 (UTC) 1друг (talk) 12:16, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The most recent deletion was because it was promotional. As for your current draft, the one sentence The company was incorporated in late 2000 and Delta Corps acquired the company in 2017 has eight references. Why? Please see Wikipedia:Citation overkill. -- Hoary (talk) 12:39, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Hoary: Thanks for the feedback. If someone explained me this I would have improved it till now. Can you please tell me what is the next step? I have modified the entire draft and the links. Others are also most welcome to share the feedback 1друг (talk) 15:23, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Because it's protected to prevent precisely this. The main page can only be edited by administrators. The mainpage is a bunch of transcluded templates and the content in those templates is decided by consensus within the community. CUPIDICAE💕14:37, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Creative Name 420. Such a major change would need consensus among the community. The current front page is designed to highlight reasonably good-quality articles and serve as a reward to editors who have done work to improve a page. For instance, Today's Featured Article reaches "featured" status by going through a very detailed process of peer review to ensure it's the best article it can be, and Did You Know? shows newly-created, newly-expanded and newly-improved articles. A list of most-viewed pages would probably not fit in with the spirit of the current Main Page and would be subject to manipulation by bots or other malicious activity. However, you can see the most-visited pages in the recent week at the Top 25 Report, see a list of the top 5000 most-viewed pages at User:West.andrew.g/Popular pages and find the pageviews of any particular page here. Thanks for the question! — Bilorv (talk) 15:12, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
How to bring attention to potential COI article authorship?
I recently responded to a COI edit request on the Laurel Parmet talk page requesting that an unsourced birth year be removed. As far as I could tell, there was no previous published birth year prior to this Wikipedia article, so I removed it. This request was made by a user claiming to be the subject of the article. Although the identity was unconfirmed, I couldn't find evidence of a birth year being previously published so in light of WP:DOB, removing the birth year seemed appropriate.
However, when I was trying to ensure that there wasn't a previous source in one of the other references, I saw that the entire article was written by a user named Ethan Parmet, who appears to be an established editor. I assume the normal procedure for noticing something like this isn't just "post about it in the teahouse", but I'm not sure what the right forum would be. WP:COICOIN seems to be more about getting someone making repeated edits to stop, but this case might mean that this entire article should be deleted? Putterlace (talk) 17:14, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Putterlace. There are two issues: 1) does that editor know that COI editing is frowned on? 2) is the article partisan? For 1), a message on the editor's talk page pointing this out for future reference (check to see whether it's already been discussed there, or on the article's talk page). For 2) if it's neutral, do nothing. If it's not neutral, or you don't have time to check, stick {{COI}} at the top, and put a note on its talk page. --ColinFine (talk) 19:31, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for bringing this up. I think there are a couple of guidelines to keep in mind here. One is that it would seem likely that User:Ethan Parmet does in fact have a conflict of interest, as you have pointed out, and should mention as such on their user page, article talk page, and/or edit summaries per WP:DISCLOSE. However, as mentioned by the notes at the Conflict of Interest Noticeboard, it is not yet necessary to escalate there, at least before bringing it to Ethan's attention. The other guideline I think is relevant is that on WP:Notability, or in particular WP:FILMMAKER. Given a quick Google I think Laurel is notable enough, since she seems to have won some awards for her work on top of her significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources per the general notability guideline. Given that, the page should stand. --Anon423 (talk) 19:37, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I am trying desperately to update the Oracle CRM, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oracle_CRM, page. All the content is wildly out of date -- not a single product or link is correct. I made a lot of updates but all were pulled off the page from folks that are not familiar with our products. I did not note that I work for Oracle (so think that is "employee" status, but if I note that and try to make updates again -- will that work?
Ghardt13, welcome to the Teahouse. If you work for Oracle, you must declare so on your user page; you may use the {{paid}} template to do so. As someone employed by the subject, it is strongly recommended that you do not edit the article directly, but rather leave edit requests on the article's talk page (Talk:Oracle CRM) and supply reliable sources that support your proposed additions or changes. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:42, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
How long does it take to have someone pick it up and make the updates? Do I have to wait hours, days, weeks? Do you have a sense?
Also, I might get paid by Oracle, but what if I am trying to make an update to the generic, Wiki Page - Customer Relationship Management? Can I not update that as well? Aren't most folks employed by someone? Can anyone that is being paid to have a career never allowed to update a wiki page? Shouldn't a Companies Product Wiki Page be something that could be updated by someone that knows the products? Thanks for all the help and insight. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ghardt13 (talk • contribs) 17:57, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ghardt13 As you have been told, if you wish to make edits that are related to your conflict of interest, you may do so as edit requests. I do not make any edits about my employer here on Wikipedia and I don't even visit its article. Wikipedia content is ideally added by independent editors. We don't want companies to speak about themselves and their products here- they have their own websites to do that. Wikipedia is only interested in what others say about them and their products. 331dot (talk) 18:01, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thanks Tenryuu, If I add to the talk page, could you or others review and pick up the changes? Do you have a sense of the timing to update - is there a general amount of time we have to allot, and if not picked up, is there a channel to escalate? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ghardt13 (talk • contribs) 18:19, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Ghardt13: This is one of the double-edged aspects of Wikipedia: WP:VOLUNTEER, which means that most edits are done by editors who are interested in the subject (but not connected). There are some editors who patrol edit requests, but there tends to be a backlog, so it can be a while before they get to edit requests related to Oracle. (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.) —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:31, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Few questions.
I've been directed to seek help here.
It would be really helpful if you send me few links to the following-
1. Userfication-(Zeyan Shafiq's article was deleted so they have been suggested over email to apply for userfication, i want to know what it is and how it works).
2. The Relevant policies for notability guidelines on wikipedia.
3. Any other important wikipedia policy which might be related and important to Stalwart Esports and Zeyan Shafiq.
Thanks @Cullen328, for the information. I have read the Conflict of interest document and the paid contribution as well. According to the document I surely do have a conflict of interest with Zeyan Shafiq, but my motive to be on wikipedia is that I've been asked by Mr. Shafiq to join wikipedia to monitor our presence on Wikipedia because i am a content writer by profession and i am an active editor at liquipedia so i have experience of wiki markup language and also because there's been many vandal attacks recently, also this was suggested to them via email from wikipedia team and since we weren't aware of the deletion discussion and we were unable to defend the allegations raised back then. So as far as i have had an idea there's been content that has had promotional tone and that's not accepted on this wikipedia. So I'd work on the page and try to trim the promotional content and cite the information that can be verified from primary sources. If there is anything else that you think i should read before i start, please let me know. Warm regards Abhayesports (talk) 18:43, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I know that it is discouraged(not prohibited) to edit pages with a COI and i have absolutely followed this policy. I did not edit the page directly rather suggested it via talk page. But this wasn't my question here as we were already discussing it on my talk page. My question here was to obtain all the relevant policy documents and all the wikipedia guidelines related to Zeyan Shafiq and Stalwart Esports so that i make sure that i am not violating any of them, as for now i have completely read the following WP:COI and WP:RS to understand the sources that can be used to verify statements on wikipedia i will start reading Userfication, living person biography guidelines soon. So if there's anything that you think i should read which is important for me to work on Zeyan Shafiq and Stalwart Esports please share the link to the documents.
Warm Regards Abhayesports (talk) 05:10, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Firestar464 Hi there, yes and that's how i was diverted to here. As far as the wiki markup language is considered so i am familiar with it since I'm an old editor at liquipedia which is based on MediaWiki and is the wikipedia for gaming, haha. So again if you could read my last response you can understand that what kind of policy docs i am looking for.
Hi there! I just had a question about tags. I have looked on the Wiki page about tags to try to get an understanding but it just wasn't helping. I don't know how to use them and what tags to use for what purposes. If someone could help me out I would LOVE IT! Thank y'all. 14thReason (talk) 18:31, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi everyone. Apparently my username, as a veteran editor, was included in the Teahouse invitation delivered to Mikeobrianjr's talkpage. He then asked a question on my talkpage (Why is the logo different in the hostbot invite message then on the tea house itself) but I don't know the answer. Help? Thanks. Rosiestep (talk) 19:47, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Elli. That explains how my name showed up in his Teahouse invite. Hopefully, someone else can answer the question about the logo. --Rosiestep (talk) 21:42, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Rosiestep, nice to see you back here again. How are you doing? I think the answer to Mikeobrianjr's question on your talk page is that the graphic was one of a suite of images originally identified when the Teahouse was designed and developed back in 2012. All these design elements can be seen at Wikipedia:Teahouse/The menu and the graphics and colour schemes here. I think it's fair to say that, after the original paid Teahouse development phase was over, we have been run purely in a voluntary capacity since then. This has inevitably resulted in some drifting away from some of those initial ideas; some elements have been removed entirely (guest book. maitre d' etc), as well as some attempts to bring a degree of coherence and colour matching back again to our headers and our template. I suspect this is just a case that no-one has especially been bothered enough, or astute enough to notice and question that difference, so top marks go for observation to Mikeobrianjnr. Whether there is a need to actually change the graphic, I'm not sure. Personally, I found our main 'tree' graphic a bit wishy-washy, but I'm not going to fuss over changing it one way or another. I suspect many of my fellow hosts would not worry too much, either, so long as the core principles of a friendly, helpful welcome at the Teahouse are actively maintained (see also here). Regarding the list of names automatically added to HostBot invites, I'm not actually sure whether they are taken directly from edits made to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Hosts/Database reports/Automated invites#Inviter_list or if it requires a request on Jtmorgan's talk page if you want it added (or removed, as I see you've just done at the automated invites page). Hoping this helps a bit, Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:01, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Jtmorgan: Just a thought: would it be worth you dropping a note at WT:TH to ask if any currently active hosts would like to add their names to the Hostbot invites? And maybe we could ping and remove some of the inactive editors on your list - I've identified the inactive ones here. Nick Moyes (talk) 14:12, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
WP Twitter Feed
Hi - someone able to point me to the procedure what will be published via the official Wikipedia Twitter Account!? I am aware of WP:ITN but found nothing for the Twitter Posts ... do we have any policy/procedure for this? CommanderWaterford (talk) 20:40, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I made changes to a persons page which included adding birth_name and other information. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Gardenhour Once I saved the changes the picture that was on the page doesn't display now and all of the personal information now reads in paragraph form at the top instead of on the right side of the page with the personal details below the picture. How can I fix this and get the picture back? I was working in Visual Editor on my computer.
Thank you in advance! TruthPR (talk) 20:58, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
An editor reverted all of the changes you made. Rather than starting over, I suggest you start a discussion on the Talk page of the article. Minimally, none of the content you added had references (but then, the prior version had no references, either). Naming music videos he worked on adds nothing to his notability. David notMD (talk) 21:17, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Can someone make an article about web animation?
I know the web animation section on the computer animation article isn't enough, I want someone to an main article about web animation, The history of animations on the internet on the 1980s and 1990s and the popularization of web animations on the internet.
Can someone make the main article of web animation for me? — Preceding unsigned comment added by AmberLovesEverything (talk • contribs) 21:27, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, This question might sound very awkward but i've come across two profiles User:Anjumaafi- Who has proclaimed to be here to create Shafiq's article and is a pretty new account so is another attempt to impersonate Zeyan Shafiq.
Another Is User:Jeelanishafiq- who claims himself to be Zeyan Shafiq, while as he isn't. This issue has been reported by Shafiq to the wikipedia via email.
So I'd like to ask what policies to follow for impersonation and how do i request protection for Zeyan Shafiq so that no new editor could harm it because i am currently reading all the policies regarding biography and notability and after I'm done i will be working on that article.
Warm Regards Abhayesports (talk) 22:48, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Update Take a look at this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Alyo#Help , this person is trying to prove as if he works for stalwart and most probably by mentioning "Paying" part he wants other's to realise that Stalwart Esports is violating wikipedia's policies. Definitely something that is unethical and hasn't been sent by us (Stalwart Esports), definitely part of some campaign. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abhayesports (talk • contribs) 23:31, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Anjumaafi is blocked because of misusing my name. Also, there's huge SP farm associated with this article. Experienced editors shouldn't entertain any such request. Thanks. ─ The Aafī on Mobile(talk)06:23, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Actually don't worry, I've worked it out. Just thought I'd write something here, but in the few seconds since asking I've found the answer. Thanks anyway. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ButterCashier (talk • contribs) 23:10, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Lovin'Politics: I assume you're referring to edit summaries. While not required, it's good practice to do it because it lets other editors know what you are doing without having to actually check the diffs between edits. When you go to a long edit history page, the edit summaries help us find the revisions a lot easier. Edit summaries can also be used to provide a short explanation for a change (longer explanations should go on the talk page). ◢ Ganbaruby! (Say hi!) 02:52, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Paranoid Numanoid: The structure seems a bit odd. There are four sections about books that mention him, but no section on his book. I get that you are trying to demonstrate notability, but I'd like to see his book a bit more prominently. TimTempleton(talk)(cont)01:42, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The draft in your sandbox does not appear to have been submitted to Articles for Creation, for a review. If you believe it is ready, someone here will explain how. David notMD (talk) 02:47, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
PS there's a "warning" (on the "Article Submitted" box) to move it to Draft:Rev.Charles Swainson, M.A. Should I press that button? I'm inclined to leave it as I know you editors now know where it is! Paranoid Numanoid (talk) 09:45, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Discretionary sanctions
hi. I just got a message from my talk page about me writing things about post-1992 US politics which I am very much interested in. However, I don't know why I was prompted with it Lovin'Politics (talk) 01:32, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Where you have <ref>{{citation template}}</ref>, use <ref name=":0"> at the front (autogenerated label from Visual Editor) or <ref name="Meaningful_label">. Reuse a citation by simply inserting <ref name=":0" />, or <ref name="Meaningful_label" />. --Anon423 (talk) 02:03, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
In https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consolidated_B-24_Liberator:
"A total of 177 B-24s carried out the famous second attack on Ploiești (Operation Tidal Wave) on 1 August 1943. This was the B-24's most costly mission. In late June 1943, the three B-24 Liberator groups of the 8th Air Force were sent to North Africa on temporary duty with the 9th Air Force:[13] the 44th Bomb Group joined the 93rd and the 389th Bomb Groups. These three units then joined the two 9th Air Force B-24 Liberator groups for low-level attack on the German-held Romanian oil complex at Ploiești. This daring assault by high-altitude bombers at tree top level was a costly success."
The raid was a costly FAILURE. 30% of the attacking force was shot down, and another 30% was damaged. Oil production was nearly unchanged after the attack. The article should reflect that fact. While wartime propaganda depicted the raid as a success, neither side's leadership considered that to be true. Brucelucier (talk) 03:29, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Brucelucier the Teahouse tries to help with issues with regard to wiki-related problems. we don't work with factual errors. you could help edit it. (talk) 06:07, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If you dispute the accuracy of sourced content in an article, start a discussion on the article talk page. You'll need to provide reliable secondary sources that back your position, and attempt to form a consensus for what to say based on what all sources say. Ypu may or may not succeed. Content is based on a consensus view of how to treat the applicable sources. 174.254.198.242 (talk) 06:12, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Brucelucier I agree with Brucelucier. The article in question Wikilinks to Operation Tidal Wave - about this specific mission - which clearly states (with references) that oil production was not significantly impaired. A ref or refs can be copied from there to justify a change to "costly failure" without a need to discuss at Talk first. David notMD (talk) 08:58, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
27.57.240.61 first of all they did not say that you needed big copy-editing. under the Jalgaon District Court draft that you submitted the reason for which it was rejected was because it was copy and pasted for the most part, under my understanding Lovin'Politics (talk) 06:11, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
To recycle the section header directly below this one, Lovin'Politics, "what are you talking about"? The chief draft they are here about, listed and linked by the person, says in its decline: "Major copyediting required" and having looked at this person's various drafts (having worked at great length with one of them), there are no copyright violations whatever, so seriously, why would you invoke something like that, when not present? We have enough real copyright violations. Yes, 27.57.240.61, you have done a great job in all the drafts I've seen of citing your sources, but they all require a copyedit by a native English speaker. Per your request at my talk page yesterday, I will try to do a basic copyedit pass, if no one else does, but it may take me a fair while. Having said that, please don't expect me to do what I did at the housing scam draft. I decided to do a deep dive on it, and did, burnishing it to a high level. I expect on these others I would do something much more basic. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 08:51, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Fuhghettaboutit Thanks sir , Your editing at Jalgaon housing scam draft was great. I learnt lot from your editing. I didn't did any copy paste. I am not that new ON WP. I know rules and regulations of WP. Infact at my one Draft: Maroti Temple of Shirsada I added a photograph of Idol. Which I took in 2020 by my smartphone camara. But problem was that I uploaded that photo on Google maps. Yesterday I took screen shot of that photo and uploaded ON WP commons and uploaded on that draft. But I thought Is I'm doing some copyright breach. B'cause the photos , I think Google maps property.so I removed that photo from that draft. I do whatever do with good intentions and it takes lots of time to do. Lots of research , understanding of subject. If someone interested feel free to edit. 106.195.7.13 (talk) 09:49, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
IP editor, you have contributed using several different IP addresses over the past couple of weeks; have you also had a registered account with a username in the past? --bonadeacontributionstalk10:08, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
contributions Nope , What is copy-editing can you explain?Is that mean I copied somewhere and pasted on WP? You can check citations I added and decide your self , Is I copy pasted? Cheers106.195.7.13 (talk) 10:20, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
under my understanding Lovin'Politics Hi , I think your speaking without looking my Draft: Jalgaon District Court , the reviewer clearly saying that "The draft need major copyedit" thy did't mention anywhere that "You copy pasted in this draft" .I think Copy paste is different thing & Copy-editing is different thing. Do not mis lead new editors. At least now take a look , these drafts. 106.195.7.13 (talk) 10:57, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Copy editing is basically proofreading written content and making corrections. Most of the time it's spelling and grammar mistakes, but it can sometimes involve some rewording to make the sentences read better and sound more natural. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 11:14, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Maharashtra-based IP editors! I spent a few minutes working through the English at Draft: Jalgaon District Court. The English in the original source was so badly written that I ignored it and simply tweaked it and removed a small amount of irrelevant information. I hope this helps. I have only ever once (out of desperation) attempted to draft an article in another language, and don't think you did too bad a job on this one. It's never an easy job. I will leave a welcome on your talk page, and recommend you register for a free account, which makes communication and editing so much easier. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk)
Mr.Moyes if you're mentioning about Eng then you have to see , thousands of articles made by Indian editors and about Indian places,Film stars , Cricketers and politicians majority of them looks like they're written by their fans.The article just glorified them.Not mentioning their arrest , frauds and loan defaulting or crime conviction about them. Ex.Suresh Jain - He is a big Shiv sena politician in Jalgaon district two times minister of state.He was convicted in 1996 Housing scam.Dhule court sentenced him seven years of Jail & 110 Cr.rupee fine.But no Indian or outsider editor wrote about that on his WP article.Why? Why? why? . District Court's conviction in 110 Cr scam is a small thing.He looted public money.But no one wrote about it.I created a article about that scam Draft: Jalgaon housing scam.It these article are WP standards. If you are talking about WP standards and Eng in them. I link some articles see them, watch their writing style , wordit Gulabrao Devkar,Raksha Khadse,Devendra Fadnavis ,Amitabh Bachchan. 106.195.7.13 (talk) 13:16, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not exactly sure what point you're hoping to get across to me. Yes, I am aware that many people use Wikipedia to promote their favourite people or companies. I, like all volunteers, have to choose which of our 6.2 million articles I work on. I felt it would be helpful to assist you on that one draft. I am sorry if I am unable to address the myriad of other outstanding issues you are rightly concerned about. These are matters you can, and should, flag up yourself by adding appropriate templates to the pages, or by posting your concerns and links on the articles' talk pages. Criminal convictions, if supported by Reliable Sources (and if not irrelevant or UNDUE) can also be included in articles. You will certainly find it easier to automatically watch edits to articles you're interested in if you create a free Wikipedia account. That way you can even choose to get an email to notify you of changes to any page on your WP:WATCHLIST. Nick Moyes (talk) 14:20, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again. Regarding your post above, it seems to me, 106.195.7.13, you're just not taking into account the volunteer nature of Wikipedia and its lack of any central authority – and all that that implies. We each essentially write about what we're interested in. Gaps in coverage of all topics are filled because some volunteer decided to get busy in filling it in. Here, the gap on coverage of this scam, to round out the coverage on the government authorities involved, happened because YOU saw a gap and decided to not leave it unfilled. That's the way everything happens. On the other hand, because a large portion of our editors are from the US, UK, Australia (etc.) and far less from India (and India is huge), India topics get less coverage, on balance, I think. Do you think I, as a U.S citizen, ever saw any coverage of the Jalgaon housing scam to spark my interest, before I saw your draft? It's just the nature of the beast.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:00, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Fuhghettaboutit Yeah , I completely understand what your saying. But like you mentioned in housing scam article. Their is lengthy info under Infobox. Similar situation I saw in highly traffic articles like Amitabh Bachchan article. Amitabh Bachchan sir is biggest movie actor in India. But look his WP article. So much info under Infobox. Everything is looking stuffed in small place. And check language of Indian articles. I am sure you will not feel satisfied by seeing them. 106.195.7.13 (talk) 15:42, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
What are you talking about.
I received an email saying my posts re: Darbyville had been removed . WHAT POSTS ???? I have never posted to Wikipedia . I live some miles from Darbyville, Ohio? but have never posted anything. What the H is this all about ??????? Who are you people ??? I don't know anything about URLs or whatever you want me to reference. I have no ida what is going on here . Have you hijacked me??? 74.113.40.72 (talk) 06:56, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello IP editor. You are using an IP address that can be shared among multiple people in your area. On February 1, 2021, someone using your same IP address engaged in some minor vandalism of Darbyville, Ohio. It probably wasn't you. If you want to avoid these messages, you may want to register a free, anonymous Wikipedia account. Cullen328Let's discuss it07:18, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
ForeverBeach has been editing that article - and pretty much only that article - for years - and then removed a COI tag, I agree 100% with your restoration of the COI tag. David notMD (talk) 09:07, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Furthermore, the article is utter promotional crap of his businesses and books. Most of the references are to stuff written by Teitelbaum or interviews. The science support for his treatment theories appears to be one clinical trial, conducted by him and published back in 2001 (https://doi.org/10.1300/J092v08n02_02). Clearly not WP:MEDRS. Whether he is noteworthy is debatable, but his 'science' does not meet Wikipedia standards. David notMD (talk) 09:22, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, that content was flagrantly inappropriate and clearly malicious. I've blocked the editor indefinitely. DS (talk) 18:59, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
My article was rejected. Really need some help!
My write up Draft:Bangalore Sisters was rejected and I really need some help. I have edited the draft again to sound neutral. I dont mean to promote the musical duo. I have included citations from the newspapers and independent sources. The only other sources I have, to prove the content are promotional music streaming websites or Youtube. All their performances have been published online by the production houses for purchase however that comes under unreliable sources as per wiki standards.
I have read the help options and also visited many other wiki pages of musicians to learn. I am just not sure where else I am going wrong. I request help in reviewing my article and pointing out exactly to what needs to be changed before i request for re-submission please. ShravanthiRK (talk) 08:53, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
ShravanthiRK Ola , Senior I am not admin nor I am a host on WP: Teahouse. But I want to suggest you read first how WP works. Your article is not even close to WP standards of article. You have to look articles about international music artists like Michael Jackson understand this article and then rewrite on WP: sandbox.Read how to write a article on WP :My first article106.195.7.13 (talk) 11:23, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I have included citations from the newspapers and independent sources.
Do they provide significant coverage of the sisters? If so, they may help show the subject meets English Wikipedia's inclusion criteria. Do they merely mention the sisters in passing? If so, you can only use these to support statements in the draft. Those sources do not show that the subject meets inclusion criteria.
The only other sources I have, to prove the content are promotional music streaming websites or Youtube.
The suggestion that you compare this with the article on Michael Jackson seems extraordinary. Jackson was at the centre of an international business; and various, increasingly bizarre aspects of his "private life" became more and more salient. The sisters' fame seems to be local and there's no suggestion that they keep pet chimps, run private fairgrounds, alter their noses, or worse. ¶ The draft looks interesting. However, there are various oddities. Here's just one matter. "They have rendered over 10,000 songs in different languages for private music albums": what is a "private music album"? The "discography" is long, but contains far fewer than 10,000 items. What are these? (What's the format, publisher and year of publication of each?) -- Hoary (talk) 12:14, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
On top of this, there are some administrators willing to block accounts on request, which would prevent you from editing with that account, but I think the answer to your question hinges on the reason you would want the account to be deleted. — Bilorv (talk) 14:06, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Article Rejected.
I'm very old and very baffled. Submission was rejected for no references - but I did provide a reference - an INDEPENDENT Reference to an Oxford University Press book - that, needless to say I did not write......!
Hi, and thanks for the question. The first and simplest reason articles need references is to show that the information is true ("verifiable"). Alright, I'm sure the OUP book does that. The second reason is to show notability—Wikipedia-specific jargon meaning "evidence that the topic is substantially discussed in serious literature enough for us to hold an article on the topic". Articles need multiple independent references for this purpose. The one you have provided looks good to me, so what's needed now is a few more. — Bilorv (talk) 14:02, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
See WP:RSP for a list of some common sources and summaries of the community's latest position on them. Forbes has two different editorial processes for its staff articles and its contributor articles (you'll see "Contributor", "Senior Contributor" etc. in the byline of the article in the latter case). Bloomberg is generally reliable. However, I gather that net worth is a somewhat amorphous concept which can generally only be estimated rather than measured exactly, in which case providing both figures—and mentioning in prose that they are estimates from Forbes and Bloomberg—or giving a "range" of net worth estimates (e.g. $50–100million) could be the best outcome. — Bilorv (talk) 14:09, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I came across this Season 15 in the uncategorised articles list. I think the name is far too generic, and I wanted to move it to Bigg Boss (Hindi season 15) instead, so that it's also in line with the previous seasons. However, there's already a redir at that name, pointing to the parent article of the programme in question, and I didn't want to go ahead and remove the redir as there's been some to and fro regarding it already. In any case, the Season 15 is just an unsourced stub, so I'm not sure it's quite good enough to replace the redir. Any ideas? Thanks, --DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:06, 6 March 2021 (UTC) DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:06, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I've moved this to draftspace because it appears that the season has not begun; rather, it was just announced after the recent season 14 finale, and there's no real production that has started. In this case the usual outcome is to find the topic non-notable per WP:CRYSTAL. If this were a season that had begun, I might still move it to draftspace due to a lack of sources (though the program looks big enough that sources should exist when the season begins, and the ideal would be to find and add those sources), or move it to Bigg Boss (Hindi season 15) and then redirect it to Bigg Boss (Hindi TV series). — Bilorv (talk) 14:15, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi BFP1. I attempted to see which article you tried to add this to, but a quick look at your contribution shed no light. I am betting the problem is that you didn't use "thumb". Here's the basic markup for placing an image (used outside an infobox): [[File:Name.jpg|thumb|Caption text]] To force a different image size, you can add a px parameter: [[File:Name.jpg|thumb|100px|Caption text]] See more at Help:Pictures. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:15, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) @BFP1: It seems to be working here; feel free to go into source editing and copy the syntax. I suspect that you're using the wrong kind of brackets. Images are added using square brackets just like normal links, while curly brackets are for templates. Template:Tlx shouldn't be used here; that's for linking to other templates, not images. ◢ Ganbaruby! (Say hi!) 15:18, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
What is required to learn to be a good Wikipedia contributor?
also, what are the things one needs to learn to write a good article on Wikipedia.
Please guide me on these questions. Cancersign (talk) 15:10, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Cancersign: Welcome! For beginners, I recommend going through The Wikipedia Adventure, which is an effective tutorial about editing. Help:Getting started is a helpful directory of links to read if you're lost. Help:Your first article is a guide for writing new articles, though I would not recommend trying to write a brand new article yet; rather, you should try to improve existing articles and gain more experience editing around here. Remember, Wikipedia is a collaborative project, so always try to reach a consensus if you're in a disagreement with another editor, and also assume good faith. Don't hesitate to ask another question here if you hit a problem. ◢ Ganbaruby! (Say hi!) 15:25, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Is it possible to count my contributions to Wikipedia, and other Wikimedia projects, by a certain timeframe?
For example, if I wished to know how many contributions I did during February, 2021, is there a tool to see how many contributions I did during that particular time? User:Tetizeraz. Send me a ✉️ ! 18:04, 6 March 2021 (UTC) User:Tetizeraz. Send me a ✉️ ! 18:04, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Help on Reliable Sources When Your Topic is Somewhat Obscure
Hi,
I recently submitted a draft for a new article about a somewhat-obscure so-cal rock band from the late 1980s to the early 1990s, and thought I had a good article submission with two newspaper articles as verifiable sources... but my submission was denied by someone for reasons of needing more verifiable sources.
I am not sure what to do because there is a dearth of "official" sources for this band online... there are plenty of commercial sites with discographies, there is someone managing a "legacy" kind of page for the band on Facebook, there were two articles from the L.A. Times that I had as external links, and one magazine interview.
I really want this page to be published: is there anything that I can do, anyone who could give me some pointers in this regard? Ramborose (talk) 18:56, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Ramborose: I took a look, and Decibel and LA Times are reliable sources and seem to me to provide enough coverage of Tender Fury to support an article. (I note the lead singer, Jack Grisham, already has an article.) It might be that the LA Times links were missed because they were in "External links" and not "References" (with Decibel). I would just raise the question at the reviewer's user talk page and see if they missed the LA Times links, and maybe they think it's a pass on a second look, or maybe there is some other issue with the sourcing. Levivichharass/hound19:04, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Courtesy link: Draft:Tony Jazz TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 19:40, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
Done! GoingBatty (talk) 03:31, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
Courtesy link: Jacob_Teitelbaum
