Wikipedia:Teahouse

Eman235, a Teahouse host

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

Ask a question

Question forumMeet your hostsArticles to improveBecome a host

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

Help Wikipedia

Is there a tool/gadget to add projects on a talk page quickly?

Like we use Twinkle and Hotcat?

Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 07:35, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi Nomadicghumakkad, WP:RATER does that pretty well. -Paul ❬talk❭ 07:53, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Request to remove "Multilingual Wikisource" link from Main page template

Hello. On the Main page, there is a template ("In other projects") used on the left column of the page that contains links to other projects. I noticed that this template points to the Wikisource project twice. There is "Wikisource" (which points to https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Main_Page) and "Multilingual Wikisource" (which points to https://wikisource.org/wiki/Main_Page). Seeing as the other project links point to their respective English pages, I would like to request the "Multilingual Wikisource" link be removed, as to improve consistency. Please let me know where this can be properly discussed and how this modification can be done. Thank you for your help! Somerandomuser (talk) 18:55, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi Somerandomuser. I think Wikipedia, Wikisource and Wiktionary are the only projects with a multilingual front page, and Wiktionary is never linked under "In other projects". The links are not decided at Wikipedia but come from Wikimedia main page (Q5296) at Wikidata. Multilingual Wikisource was added by Liuxinyu970226 in [1]. I don't know whether it's supposed to be there. https://www.wikipedia.org is not listed. You can post to wikidata:Talk:Q5296, or maybe Liuxinyu970226 will post here. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:32, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Hmn, {{noexternallanglinks}} can only hide language links, maybe asking at mw:Project:Support desk? Also, removing a valid link on Wikidata is not permitted. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 23:27, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

@Liuxinyu970226 and PrimeHunter: I have started a discussion on the MediaWiki Support desk (see https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Topic:W5776mhi9im7r124). Somerandomuser (talk) 05:18, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

@Somerandomuser: The English Wikipedia could hide the link for itself with this in MediaWiki:Common.css:

.wb-otherproject-sources {display:none;}

It would require consensus and I don't know whether the Wikimedia Foundation would have objections to projects hiding interwiki links. You can place the code in your CSS to hide the link for yourself. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:10, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter: I don't think of this as "hiding" links, but rather just removing an unnecessary one. Otherwise, shouldn't other "Multilingual" links be on the list? Why are both "Multilingual Wikisource" and "Wikisource" on the list? I'm trying to understand why "Multilingual Wikisource" is special. It seems to me that it is likely to be an error or bug rather than an intentional decision. I'd like to find the reason for its inclusion. Somerandomuser (talk) 03:32, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Can someone please help create a copyright violation report at WP:CP?

For context, please see

• The 20th section of WP:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1098
• The 11th section of WP:Help desk/Archives/2021 March 4
• The 125th section of WP:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1098
• The 23rd section of WP:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1099

A large amount of text in the plot summaries at List of Talking Tom and Friends (TV series) episodes (especially newer episodes in Season 5, though earlier episodes may have to be checked) has been copied verbatim from various URLs at a fandom sans attribution. While Fandoms do allow copying of text, they require it to be attributed to them.

Since I am not in a position to fix the attribution issues (lack of time and technical know-how) and WP:CP is semi-protected, I am not able to do anything to proceed with fixing this. Can someone file the report for me?

By the way, the aforementioned list article was actually split from Talking Tom and Friends (TV series) and so, TTaF (TV series) may have had the copied text in some past revisions, though current revisions are free from copied text. Will it be necessary to note that past revisions had copied text or can that be ignored?
45.251.33.251 (talk) 07:20, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

@45.251.33.251: Hi, anonymous editor, and welcome to the Teahouse. This may have to be resolved on a case-by-case basis just to be sure. I went ahead and looked into it, and yes, it is the case that Fandom's version was published on October 30 while ours was published on December 4 by an anonymous editor. This Fandom page is licensed through Creative Commons, so it may still be possible to keep these so long as proper attribution is provided, but I'll leave that to someone who's more familiar with CC attribution than I am. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 13:45, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply, TheTechnician27. I also agree that properly attributing the information should be enough, but as I have said before, I myself am not in a position to do it. Do you (or anyone else for that matter) know of an alternate venue that can be used by IP editors (besides WP:CP) to get this issue raised, or of a user who regularly cleans up CC-BY-SA unattributed information and can be reached? 45.251.33.59 (talk) 08:26, 16 March 2021 (UTC) (I'm on a dynamic IP range so don't ping me as it may be useless and can confuse others on my range)

By the way, i noticed yesterday that Tom & Jerry (2021 film) has a note at the top of the references list stating that some content was copied from a particular URL at a Tom and Jerry fandom. Will a similar note do for List of Talking Tom and Friends (TV series) episodes (though it will need a large number or URLs to be mentioned) ? 45.251.33.104 (talk) 02:19, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

How to link two articles ?

CommanderWaterford How to link two articles from different WP about same topic ? Right now I want to link Ghodasgaon, Jalgaon District article to घोडसगाव article of Marathi WP.Both articles are about same village.It will be nice of you do that for Research Voltas (talk) 20:19, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

As long as Ghodasgaon District Jalgaon doesn't exist, that is not possible. Once the english counterpart exists, one can link the two through Wikidata. Victor Schmidt (talk) 20:24, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Victor Schmidt Take a lookResearch Voltas (talk) 20:27, 15 March 2021 (UTC) The link of Marathi article is https://mr.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E0%A4%98%E0%A5%8B%E0%A4%A1%E0%A4%B8%E0%A4%97%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4%B5Research Voltas (talk) 20:43, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

The Wikidata entry d:Q24930797 says in its English description that it refers to Ghodasgaon, in Dhule District, and is linked to the English article Ghodasgaon and to the Marathi article mr:घोडसगाव. Are you saying that there are two different villages called Ghodasgaon? Is the Marathi article linked to the wrong English article? If so, that link needs to be broken in Wikidata. (I note that there does not seem to be another entry for घोडसगाव in the Marathi Wikipedia). Please clarify the problem Research Voltas. --ColinFine (talk) 21:05, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

ColinFine Yeah, your absolutely right sir , The article is linked to wrong Eng WP article. In North Maharashtra there are two villages have name Ghodasgaon. One Ghodasgaon is in Dhule district and another one is in Jalgaon district. the article is have to link Ghodasgaon, Jalgaon District article. Research Voltas (talk) 04:14, 16 March 2021 (UTC) talk You can solve this problem. A admin , mistakingly connected Ghodasgaon article to article.

article have to connect to Ghodasgaon, Jalgaon District article.Research Voltas (talk) 06:02, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

OK, Research Voltas, I see somebody (you?) has created a Wikidata item (d:Q105970888) for the Jalgaon one. I have moved the existing article to Ghodasgaon, Dhule District, and turned Ghodasgaon into a disambiguation page. I have also added some properties to the new Wikidata item. --ColinFine (talk) 14:18, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

@Research Voltas: is there a Marathi article for the one in Dhule district? We only have links for English, Arabic, and Hindi. Pelagic ( messages ) – (06:48 Fri 19, AEDT) 19:48, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

draft and duplication

I have a draft article (PEN America v. Trump) waiting for evaluation. I noticed that the topic (PEN America v. Trump) is a red link at the page about lawsuits involving Donald Trump. Clicking on it and simply entering the title did not give any indication that there is a draft pending. It seems that that means that someone else might write a new draft or a new article without knowing that work has already been done on the subject. I think there should be some way of actively telling potential editors that a competing draft already exists, saving unnecessary duplicative effort. Kdammers (talk) 06:39, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Kdammers, in fact, if an article doesn't exist, but an eponymous draft exists, the "does not exist" message also includes a link to the draft. I'm not sure why it doesn't appear: perhaps the names might be slightly different. PEN America v. Trump shows the link to the draft, at least for me. JavaHurricane 07:16, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

At List of lawsuits involving Donald Trump I changed the entry to Draft:PEN America v. Trump so that it now links to your draft. David notMD (talk) 11:53, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Shows directly for me as well. Perhaps it's a browser/caching issue? Definitely a useful/welcome feature! Shushugah (talk) 11:53, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

I did a no-no (listing a draft in a list), so reverted. David notMD (talk) 14:05, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

It still does not show for me. I am using the MS browser (I can't remember its name - the one with a circle of red-yellow-green) on a Windows 7 hp. Kdammers (talk) 03:09, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

area of City of Sydney and Parramatta citation needed

Found area of City of Sydney and Parramatta at Wikipedia in km^2. Would have liked to find an official source for their area, but they don't have a citation. Help about this would be appreciated! Gryllida (talk) 21:55, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi Gryllida. Looks to me like this would be a good source for the first.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:07, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, looks good! Would be interesting to also find for the second one. Gryllida (talk) 22:28, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi @Gryllida, I found 2001 data, but most LGA boundaries have changed since then! That table might be useful for identifying articles that have old info and need updating. Pelagic ( messages ) – (07:25 Fri 19, AEDT) 20:25, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Local government directory says 83.8 km² for Parramatta. Details are probably self-reported by Parra council to OLG. Pelagic ( messages ) – (07:47 Fri 19, AEDT) 20:47, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Nice. Thanks Pelagic. Gryllida (talk) 21:01, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Regarding warnings

Do your warnings expire after a month of having them? Or do they never expire? Thanks!

~Wizdzy [💬 | 📝] 23:21, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Wizdzy, typically warnings start back at level one the month after warnings have been given. However, I think you should be more careful regardless, or you may receive a block in the future. Just to be clear, waiting until the next month to continue disruptive editing will not save you from a block. Thanks, EDG 543 ^{(message me)} 23:45, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

So if you don't cause disruptive editing after one month, the warnings expire? ~Wizdzy [💬 | 📝] 00:03, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

@Wizdzy: They don't "expire", it's just that the automated tools we use to hand out warnings typically ignore the previous month's warnings and start at level one again. That is not an excuse to vandalize after another month, and please don't test this. You still may be blocked if it's clear that you're not here to build an encyclopedia. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 00:12, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi Wizdzy. Just for reference, a user warning is a show of good faith to give an editor (who might not be very familiar with Wikipedia) an explanation as to why something they did was might have been wrong and a chance to avoid doing the same thing again. A user warning, however, isn't required per se and administrator can block an editor without warning if the administrator feels it's necessary to do so (i.e. to prevent further disruption). Finally, just a friendly suggestion since you seem fairly new to Wikipedia. It's easy for new or newish editors to become enamored with editing in the user namespace and doing things like creating customized signatures, userboxes and alternate accounts, etc.; however, those who spend most of their time doing such things often are the ones who find themselves running into problems when they venture into the article namespace. Ultimately, Wikipedia wants all editors to strive to be as WP:HERE as possible, and the main way of doing that is to try and improve existing articles or create viable new articles. That's what it means to be an "average Wikipedia" (a least in my opinion); so, if being an "average Wikipedia" is how you want to be seen by other editors, then it's probably not a good idea to spend almost 70% of your time editing in the user namespace. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:40, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

@Wizdzy: you can remove warnings if you like, there's no such thing as 'expiring'. If you keep doing the same things wrong again and again, expect a WP:CIR block. However, a few warnings for minor issues is not going to be an issue - admins are expected to use common sense in blocking. Elli (talk | contribs) 08:04, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Wizdzy Editors can be blocked for not being here to work on the encyclopedia. As noted above, the great majority of your edits have been to your own User page, most of the edits you made to articles were reverted, and you have created a second account: User:ThreeTimesTheCharm and have been editing that account's Talk page with Welcome notes and Warning notes (and then blanking). Get with the program. David notMD (talk) 02:31, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

FYI, Wizdzy has and is getting with the program. She has been working hard at learning the ropes with The Wikipedia Adventure, was open and frank about her second account (used for testing and has only 5 edits), and has been practicing editing within her own userspace, which is *precisely* what new users should be doing. The reverts are good-faith rookie mistakes, nothing more. Wizdzy is an editor with just 7 days of service, can we all please not bite the newcomers? Thank you, History DMZ ^{(HQ) † (wire)} 03:30, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Where can I talk about what I read in the wikipedia library?

I learned about the wikipedia library and downloaded What Is Several Complex Variables? by Steven G. Krantz. (Thanks to jstor and wikipedia). Based on what I read does mentioning the scope of complex analysis on the wiki project page, as well as being readable in the wikipedia library, fall within the scope permitted by the wikipedia library?--SilverMatsu (talk) 00:23, 17 March 2021 (UTC) SilverMatsu (talk) 00:23, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Unfortunately I don't fully understand your question. However, as I look at your recent edits, I guess that you have slightly misunderstood an amiable and helpful comment that you received in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics. The point was that you seemed unfamiliar with the markup conventionally used for discussions on talk pages -- note for example that this reply of mine is indented from the left, and that I've accomplished it with a single colon -- and that if it seemed hard to understand, then asking about it here ("Teahouse") would be a good idea. "Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics" is for the discussion of articles about mathematics, not for discussions about mathematics (other than what's necessary to produce good articles): many new editors are gently chided for using talk pages for article-unrelated discussions; but you weren't, because you didn't do that. As you discuss potential improvements to maths-related articles, of course you can (and often must) mention the relevant maths. -- Hoary (talk) 02:21, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

@Hoary: Thank you for the advice. To be a little clearer, I'm discussing the article name of several complex variables, and if we're an editor editing an article with some passion (of course I need to calmly accept the advice), I noticed that we can access the wikipedia library. I thought that the content I read could be reflected in the article space with some moderation ( i.e. With the same standards as books on sale), but I am wondering if the content can be used for discussions on the talk page based on the same criteria as the article space?--SilverMatsu (talk) 08:07, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library (TWL) seems to be something of an abstraction; I suppose you're talking about its "Library Card Platform". As I now understand it, you were able to access Krantz's paper (doi:10.2307/2323391) thanks to TWL. The paper was published in The American Mathematical Monthly, a well-respected source. In common with the huge majority of Wikipedia editors, I am not competent to read papers published there. If you can understand this paper (which I haven't looked at), then you are welcome to employ it in articles. The fact that you were able to access it thanks to TWL does not affect this in either way. If you believe that insights in Krantz's paper should persuade Wikipedia to retitle one or more pages, you're welcome to suggest the retitling (or "move", as it's called), of course citing Krantz, on the talk page(s) of the relevant article(s). If you find Krantz's paper and the mathematical issues it raises fascinating, you suppose that the people who look at the talk page(s) are far likelier to be able to discuss the issues than are other people you can think of, then no, please don't attempt to start a discussion on the talk page(s), because the talk page for odious number, for example, is not for discussion of odious numbers or number theory but instead for discussion of how to improve (or retitle or merge) the article "odious number". When you signed up for TWL's Library Card Platform, you undertook to observe various restrictions (for example, that you must not send your friends or others the PDFs that you obtained there). But I see nothing in the "about" page about any distinction between articles and their talk pages; rather, "The Wikipedia Library provides free access to research materials to improve your ability to contribute content to Wikimedia projects", and in my view the intelligent citing of material on talk pages would be part of the work of contributing content. (Note by the way this is about "Wikimedia" and not "Wikipedia" projects: Wikimedia projects are listed here and you'll notice that Wikipedia is one of them.) -- Hoary (talk) 09:49, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Can I have two wikifana's?

I'm Wikiotter and WikiPrairieDog. Also... Happy Saint Patrick's day. JennilyW (talk) 02:54, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

JennilyW, you can put whatever wikifauna boxes on your userpage that you'd like, or you can create them if they don't exist currently. Just remember that the purpose of a userpage is to help other editors understand your editing, not just an outlet to display your personality. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 03:50, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Yes, whatever you do DO NOT make your page anything like mine. EEng 08:31, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

User Names

Hi, How to make designed and customized username like these?

• WhoAteMyButter (📨│📝)

• Novem Linguae (talk)

• PrincessPersnickety (talk)

Wikiaddictcommo, see WP:CUSTOMSIG. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:32, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

@Wikiaddictcommo: Please do not go overboard with this; overly-elaborate signatures clutter up talk page syntax, is distracting, and is generally frowned upon. Please also do not imitate other users' signatures. Either use a simple, original design, or no design at all (which is perfectly fine). ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 08:21, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

@Wikiaddictcommo: I'll just add that the first and third example are almost illegible to me on a tiny mobile screen. There is insufficient colour contrast, and many users with visual impairments will struggle even more. Nick Moyes (talk) 09:08, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Wikiaddictcommo! User:Gråbergs Gråa Sång already gave a link to a section describing how you can change your signature. Please also see this link: WP:CUSTOMSIG/P. It provides some important notes about what you can have and what you should avoid in your signature. --CiaPan (talk) 09:34, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Wikiaddictcommo, you could always just do a simple signature by just changing the font, as I have. Thanks, EDG 543 ^{(message me)} 12:07, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Source reliability

I was trying to edit West Bridgford F.C., specifically I was trying to source the ground and its capacity. I found this source:https://www.footballgroundmap.com/ground/regatta-way-sports-ground/west-bridgford, and was looking over WP:RS, and wasn't quite sure if it would be considered a reliable source or not. Thanks for your help! AnApple47 (talk) 06:44, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

AnApple47, welcome to the Teahouse! Based on [2] it seems a bit selfpublished, then again, it doesn't seem like very controversial info. In this particular case, try asking at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football (or WP:RSN if you prefer), perhaps they heard of it or know a better alternative. Or you can be WP:BOLD and see what happens. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:30, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Contentious information BLP

Hello everyone, a public figure is complaining that their Wikipedia page contains wrong information about their age. The article about them contains multiple contradicting info from multiple sources, some of which are from the yellow press and are not supported by any evidence. Can they provide a legal identification document so that the information is corrected? If this is possible how to do so without compromising their personal information? Disclosure: I am a close acquaintance of this person but I am not related in any way to their field of work or their representative. I have edited arabic and french Wikipedia without registering because I wanted to stay anonymous given my relationship with a politically engaged family in a conservative country. Mohamed watdi (talk) 10:02, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Mohamed watdi There is no central location to send legal documents to, and in any event you should not send copies of personal identity documents to anyone, to prevent identity theft. If any information is sourced to a poor source and not based in evidence, that should be removed and, if challenged, discussed on the article talk page. If reliable sources are contradictory, probably no information about the person's age or birthday should be in the article until more sources have the same information. If this individual has a verified social media page with their correct age on it, that could serve to support the use of independent sources with the same age. 331dot (talk) 10:07, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi Mohamed watdi. Given they way you've described your relationship with this other person, I suggest you take a close look at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest since it seems like it will apply to your situation. Then, I suggest that both you and your friend to take a look at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Relationship between the subject, the article, and Wikipedia because it relates to this type of thing. In addition, unless you're willing to at least provide the name of the article you're referring to, it's going to be really quite hard for other Wikipedia editors to try and help you and your friend sort things out. Finally, each Wikipedia project has it's own separate policies and guidelines as well as it's own editing community. The advise you're receiving here pertains primarily to editing on English Wikipedia. Other Wikipedia's may do things similarly to English Wikipedia, but there might also be some things that are done very differently. So, if the problem you're describing is also an issue on the Arabic Wikipedia and French Wikipedia, you're going have to try and resolve it on those Wikipedias. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:47, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Is Minecraft@Home notiable enough for it's own article?

I have make an article about Minecraft@Home a long time ago, when I think they have good reasons to be included to Wikipedia. However, it got deleted by (A7: Article about a club, society or group, which does not credibly indicate the importance or significance of the subject), and it is quite reasonable when I think about it for a while. However, it has been the pioneer in many areas of volunteer computing project, and after read many guidelines, I think that although little coverage is made in this part of the project, but I think it is worth it for inclusion. These reasons are:

• First noticiable non-scientific project, which meant to promote and spark intrest in volunteer computing, similar to SETI@Home, however in gaming category
• One of the few projects that gain substancial publicity
• Many articles are written about the projects, many of them tell about the project itself

Would it be a good inclusion to Wikipedia, or it still lack significance/notability/too specfic? DrifAssault (talk) 10:13, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

DrifAssault, you won't establish that Minecraft@Home is notable enough to warrant a WIkipedia article by listing bullet points about it here. The only way is to find several reliable independent published sources with extensive discussion of it. I've had a quick look, and haven't been able to find any such sources; others may be able to do better. Maproom (talk) 10:29, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

I don't see any article discussing about Minecraft@Home, so I don't think it should be added to Wikipedia too. Thank you for telling me that! DrifAssault (talk) 10:37, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

My first article content

Hello Dear Moderators, My first article content was deleted "under CSD G11, as unambiguous advertising." Now I want to know can I create the same content in a new and innovative way? Because I have researched a lot about this org. Kindly help me to know how to proceed now ButlerJan (talk) 11:10, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

ButlerJan You may try, using articles for creation, but it will need to be radically different from your earlier submission. That was sourced almost entirely to press release-type stories or announcements of routine business activities. Wikipedia articles must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a company(in other words, no press releases, interviews with staff, the company website, or other primary sources) showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. I might suggest that you read Your First Article and use the new user tutorial to learn more about Wikipedia.

If you have an association of some kind with this company, please review conflict of interest and paid editing for information on required formal disclosures. 331dot (talk) 11:36, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

ButlerJan, it might help to note that Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources. --ColinFine (talk) 12:16, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

@ButlerJan: I have no access to a deleted content, so I can't judge on what you wrote. But for all cases of "unambiguous advertising" it might help to look at the problem from my (i.e., a random reader's) point of view.

• I live in another country, and possibly even on another continent.
• I have never heard about the described company, organization or society; probably I will never purchase or use their product, service or social achievement.
• I am also not likely to donate to it or promote it elsewhere.

So I do not need to learn how wonderful it is; I'm not going to get in touch and I don't care about their internal magnificence. If I am to spend my time on reading, I would like to learn why it is important – for economics, politics or humanity on some non-local level. How it influenced or influences our world. Not what the subject achieves for itself, but rather what it does to us. What we all get or loose due to its existence and activity. --CiaPan (talk) 12:43, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

How can I add a good article icon?

I was just done reviewing Woodrow Wilson, and I think the article looks good. How can I add the icon? Blue Jay (talk) 12:31, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

@The great Jay: You need to take four steps:

1. see what a Good Article is at Wikipedia:Good articles,
2. see how they are nominated for the 'GA' class at Wikipedia:Good article nominations,
3. see detailed instructions at Wikipedia:Good article nominations/Instructions,
4. ...and follow them.

(Be aware step 4. consists of its own several steps, described in 'Instructions'...)

Good luck, I hope the article passes the review and gets its 'GA' badge. --CiaPan (talk) 12:52, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) The great Jay, hello, friend! You cannot just add a GA icon. You must nominate the article so it can be thoroughly reviewed against the good article criteria. You can view the instructions here. Thanks, EDG 543 ^{(message me)} 12:54, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Actually, Woodrow Wilson has been nominated, and The great Jay is the reviewer. David notMD (talk) 13:00, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia Library

Why is Wikipedia library have such tight control. I have found material related to a draft I'm working on but couldn't read it because of paywall. I thought I could use Wikipedia library but I have to have 500+ edits and 6 months. Why is this? Gandalf the Groovy (talk) 12:33, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Gandalf the Groovy I'm not certain, but I think it's to prevent the general public from simply using Wikipedia Library to evade paywalls- to make sure that people are legitimate Wikipedia contributors. If you have a specific need for the permission early, you can request it at WP:PERM. 331dot (talk) 12:41, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

What would be a specific reason to request access to the Library without meeting all requirments? Gandalf the Groovy (talk) 12:46, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Gandalf the Groovy I cannot tell you what your reason is for wanting the permissions. If you have a reason, use that in your request. That reason should be related to how giving you the permission before meeting the requirements would benefit Wikipedia. If you have further comment, please edit this existing section, instead of creating new sections. 331dot (talk) 12:51, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Is vandalism good

 CupOfTeaRBXReal (talk) 13:01, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

No. Victor Schmidt (talk) 13:16, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

CupOfTeaRBXReal, vandalism on Wikipedia is defined as "editing (or other behavior) deliberately intended to obstruct or defeat the project's purpose, which is to create a free encyclopedia." So, no, vandalism is in no way good. Not only does it discourage or confuse readers, it also wastes a tremendous amount of time as editors like myself have to constantly monitor for it. It also hurts the vandal, as they end up wasting their own time making a funny edit on Wikipedia instead of doing something useful with their life. Please don't vandalize. Thanks, EDG 543 ^{(message me)} 13:29, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

You vandalized Independence twice, and put misleading descriptions in the Edit summaries. You created a draft that was speedy deleted as an attack article. You replied "I hate you" in response to a Warning. Continue on this path and you will be blocked. David notMD (talk) 13:36, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

David notMD This editor - CupOfTeaRBXReal is non stop doin Vandalism. I saw his recent edits on Independence I suggest to block his account from editing. Research Voltas (talk) 13:51, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Research Voltas, I believe this user has been given sufficient warning—there is no need for an immediate block. Thanks, EDG 543 ^{(message me)} 13:58, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Edit Count

Where do I check to see my total edit number? Gandalf the Groovy (talk) 13:45, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Gandalf the Groovy, just go here: xtools.wmflabs.org/ec/en.wikipedia.org/Gandalf%20the%20Groovy Thanks, EDG 543 ^{(message me)} 13:52, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

@Gandalf the Groovy: It is also visable if you click the "Preferences" link at the top of the page. RudolfRed (talk) 15:20, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Identifying and removing portions of a page that appear to have a COI

Samswee (talk) 14:00, 17 March 2021 (UTC)The paged was flagged portions appear to have been written by someone close to the subject. No indications of which portions and consequently no easy way to correct. How do I communicate with the monitor to determine exactly which protions are offensive Samswee (talk) 14:00, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Samswee, and welcome to the Teahouse. If you look at the history of the article, you should be able to see who the editor was that added that tag. You can either ask on their User talk page, or it might be better to open a discussion on the article's talk page (assuming they didn't) and ping that editor. Note that the notice says that they have reason to think that somebody with a COI has edited the article: it doesn't necessarily mean that they have seen anything in the article which is suspect, just that they think somebody should check it. --ColinFine (talk) 14:46, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

How to report vandals and about vandalism

I came across a article where user:2A00:23C7:9F1E:1401:958E:2969:7B80:4B54 did Vandalism, it's vandalism is reverted but this account must be blocked.And how to report such bands ? Research Voltas (talk) 14:30, 17 March 2021 (UTC) Look at this user vandalism User:112.203.14.190 he edited parents & teachers deceiving childrens by saying them education is key to success. What a joke ! Research Voltas (talk) 14:35, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

The first IP address you mention was fixing vandalism, Research Voltas. In any case, the article has been restored. In general, see WP:vandalism. --ColinFine (talk) 14:49, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

One problem with vandalism from IP addresses is that the activity may be from a computer that multiple people have access to, such as at a library or school library. I suggest reverting obvious vandalism, but don't bother with a warning unless there is repeated activity. David notMD (talk) 15:17, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

HiUser talk:David notMD ,ColinFine I found a strange editor , who in past did vandalism , and used wrong means to increase his edits by editing on his user talk page. Some admin warned him but he's deliberately replying them in Malyalam language and mixing this local language words in you must warn him for doing this or block from editing.previously he was block and now someone unblocked him.he's account is User:AARYA SAJAYAN Research Voltas (talk) 19:29, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello User:Research Voltas, I am the user that you mentioned User: AARYA SAJAYAN. Actually I was not familiar with the policies only when some senior editors talked to me and gave me a warning I was aware of the issues that I committed. Thanks for your concern over me. I would be a great editor, as I have thoroughed all polices and terms and conditions. Now currently after the warning I have been a good editor. not committing any problems. Thanks AARYA SAJAYAN (talk) 17:03, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Page Creation

Is there a place where I can hire/enlist the services of an accomplished editor to create a page for me? I want to create a page for my book series. 4-5 pages in total. Mojarra69 (talk) 14:37, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

You have to read WP:COI and WP:My first articleResearch Voltas (talk) 14:41, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Mojarra60, and welcome to the Teahouse. I fear you have a very common misconseption, that Wikipedia has anything at all to do with telling the world about your activities and creations - that is called promotion, and is forbidden on Wikipedia. If your book series meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability - roughly, that several people wholly unconnected with you and not primed by you, have chosen to write at some length about your books and been published in reliable sources, then we could have an article about your books. It will not belong to you, you will not control the contents, and it will be based on what those independent accounts say, not on what you say or want to say. You are discouraged from creating such an article yourself, but not forbidden; however, if your books do not currently meet the criteria for notability, then the article will not be accepted, and any and all work you put into creating it will be wasted.

If you are convinced that the independent sources exist which will establish notability, then you may post at requested articles, but in truth the chances of your request being acted on are very low. You may, as I indicated, try to write it yourself, but creating a new article is extremely difficult for inexperienced editors, even without a conflict of interest. As for hiring somebody: we can't stop you doing so, but I would advise that it is a prime way to waste your money. If the series is not in fact currently notable, then nobody can make an article be accepted, and somebody who represents that they can is either ignorant about Wikipedia or lying.

I realise that this advice is not what you wanted to hear; but I would sum it up by saying, please find other channels for your promotion. --ColinFine (talk) 15:01, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

I agree 100% with what ColinFine wrote. Your attempt - Draft:The Search For Synergy has been declined twice because of lack of references that convey what Wikipedia considers notability. Hiring someone would also fail, as references do not exist. Wikipedia articles about books (and book series) do exist, but that is because people with no connection to the author or publisher have written about the book. David notMD (talk) 15:24, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

what is appropriate to send to wikipedia?

i did post couple of post's which was what i though relative to content like on page with pokemon=mewtwo i put link mewtwo.co.uk after that owner of that site changed site content and wikipedia blocked /deleted my content so i want to know if content what i post has to be relative at all times or also how will i know if content i post is correct to post and why some content is not correct or what makes content correct to post. thank you Fortniter2728 (talk) 14:38, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

You don't need to do anything for WP.Before learning what's WP is WP : Wikipedia , WP : My first article ,WP: Sandbox ,WP : Notable.Research Voltas (talk) 14:59, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Fortniter2829, and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia is a collaborative project: we work by consensus, but sometimes it takes some work to get to that consensus: see BRD. When another editor reverts your edit, it means that that editor thinks that your edit was not an improvement. Sometimes this will be because they can see that you are not editing according to Wikipedia's policies; other times, it will be just their personal opinion that your change was not a good one. Either way, if you want to know more, or you are sure your edit was for the better, the thing to do is to engage that editor in discussion, as explained at the link I gave above. In this caese, I haven't looked at the edit specifically, but it sounds as if you added an external link, and those are not allowedin the body of articles: see external links. --ColinFine (talk) 15:06, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia

How does your page be archived by Munninbot Ima Jewels (talk) 14:54, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

At Teahouse, new questions come in so fast that the older content, sometimes just a week or so older, gets archived automatically, whether it was answered or not. If, by "your page" you meant your own Talk page, that content does not get archived unless you set up an archiving system. David notMD (talk) 15:29, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

@Ima Jewels: This archiving is done by a bot, an automated computer program, which is why they did not respond to the question you asked on your talk page. Thanks, EDG 543 ^{(message me)} 15:33, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

(e/c) Hi Ima Jewels. I am not entirely sure what you are asking (or more properly, the words you used seem to be asking for a description of the methodology Muninnbot (notice the reversed en's) uses to do its archiving of this page, which I kind of figure is not really what you're looking for. If you're asking about how you can have your talk page automatically archived, please see Help:Archiving a talk page. If that guess is wrong, can you please go into a little more depth as to what information you're seeking? Thanks!--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:32, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

confirming my article

hi good evening Mr heaphy . i found your profile on wikipedia as a mentor and volunteer in helping new editors on wikipedia . i need help in this procedure . can you please help me finish my article . my article is: about a person = masoud shafaghi best regards neda sajedi Neda.sajedi (talk) 14:56, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy Draft:Masoud Shafaghi. Teahouse hosts are here to advise, but not to become co-authors. Improving the draft is up to you. When you think it is good enough, submit it to AfC. Please do not reach out to individual editors to ask for help on your article. Everyone here is a (busy) volunteer. David notMD (talk) 15:32, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

In the draft, you claim that all of the images, spanning a five year period, are your own work. Is this true? David notMD (talk) 15:39, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

@Neda.sajedi: While I am too busy to co-author, I did help you out by doing some general cleanup and expanding the references on the draft. Thanks, EDG 543 ^{(message me)} 15:42, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

The draft starts by claiming that he's an inventor, but makes no mention of his ever having invented anything. Maproom (talk) 17:46, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Is this source reliable?

Moved to Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard § Is this source reliable?

What is a cute error, tag. Is missing the closing

 134.41.46.92 (talk) 16:20, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

I'm not quite sure what you mean by "cute error." If you are doing something that requires a closing tag, like citing a source or producing a strikethrough, that means that you need one tag at the beginning and another at the end. For example, when citing a source in its most basic form, you would do this: <ref>example.com</ref> . Notice that the first tag is just <ref>, but the second one has a slash: </ref> . You need to remember to add the slash in the second one, or it won't work. I don't know if that is what you were trying to ask, but there you go. Thanks, EDG 543 ^{(message me)} 16:31, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

@EDG 543: Cute = Cite (or at least I would lay money down at 100 to 1 odds on it). Whenever you see that red error message, 134.41.46.92, it always contains the following: "(see the help page)", with "help page" in blue color, indicating it's a link to a page attempting to explain how to address the error message.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 20:18, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

How to re-confirm my e-mail address?

Hello.

I joined Wikipedia about ten hours ago. I confirmed my e-mail address just now, but then stupidity un-confirmed it by clicking on a different link on the same page (because I didn't read the instructions well enough).

I tried to confirm it again, but got a message saying, "The code has expired".

How can I go about re-confirming my e-mail address?

Thanks, Username: "Kisevalter Was Nash" (trying to change it to "Was Kisevalter Nash?"). Kisevalter Was Nash (talk) 16:37, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

@Kisevalter Was Nash: You have to request a new verification code. The link is in the email section of Special:Preferences. Victor Schmidt (talk) 18:30, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Question

Can you create an another account if you forgot your Wikipedia password? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:CA:4000:44A0:7474:7C90:6DFF:1518 (talk) 17:14, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Yes. Wikipedia:Sockpuppetry § Legitimate uses says: "Compromised accounts: If you are unable to access your account because you have lost the password or because someone has obtained or guessed your password, you may create a new account with a clean password. In such a case, you should post a note on the user page of each account indicating that they are alternative accounts for the same person. If necessary, you should also ask for an admin to block the compromised account. You may want to consider using a committed identity in advance to help deal with this rare situation should it arise later." Kleinpecan (talk) 17:21, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Also on your new account if you go to preferences and add an email address it becomes possible to ask for a password reset in future. ϢereSpielChequers 17:42, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Note you can use help for resetting password if your account was associated with an e-mail address that you still have access to. It is obviously sensible to set up accounts with associated e-mail addresses so you can get various notifications. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:45, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

WE HAD IT COMING

I am trying to add the official page for WE HAD IT COMING, which is a film I wrote, directed and produced. It is in the sandbox right now waiting on approval. what else is there to do. Wolrdpress2021 (talk) 17:34, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Wolrdpress2021, follow this link: WP:SUBMIT. Also take the time to read WP:COI. If this is accepted as an article, it will be WP:s article about this film, not "the official page". Good luck! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:10, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: user:Wolrdpress2021/sandbox TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 18:20, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Also per WP:COI, please stop editing Paul Barbeau. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:30, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Here you state that it is your film, but on your Talk page you state that you are an unpaid acquaintance of Paul Barbeau. Pick one. Either way stop editing the PB article, as COI exists. David notMD (talk) 21:01, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Assistance with Neutrality of the page

Hello Teahouse Guests, I was creating a page for a religious leader that I have been working on the documentation for as of last week. I finally compiled it and laid it out in the manner I thought most suitable for the encyclopedia and my page was rejected. I have since gone through and done more editing, but I am concerned it will get removed again because it is not neutral enough. I have read the guidelines and I believe I followed them but was wondering if I could get an experienced set of eyes to read through the page and see if they find any glaring issues? I know its a big ask as the page is quite long, but any and all assistance is helpful. Thank you for your time. 35.137.153.242 (talk) 17:47, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Which page? Your IP address has no other edits. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:10, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Company Profile

I am looking to publish about a company (skincare brand recently launched under notable parent company. How can I get this profile to not be deleted immediately? Wikipedia says it judges notability by at least 3 high quality sources. Any other advice? Shikobeautycollective (talk) 18:18, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

You were just blocked because WP:ORGNAME (not uncommon). Take the time to read WP:NORG and WP:COI. If you still want to give it a go, WP:YFA is next. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:27, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Shikobeautycollective: Several things. First, your user name can’t suggest a company, due to promotional restrictions. See WP:USERNAME Second, read WP:COI about writing about yourself or your company. Thirdly, an option is to add the info as a section to the parent company article. The notability guidelines (WP:GNG and WP:NCORP) for that option are not as high. If there are more reliable sources, a content “fork” with a new standalone article might be possible. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)}

Hi Shikobeautycollective. Yes, three high quality sources is an oft-mentioned rule of thumb, but that are entirely unrelated to the company, and that treat it substantively (not mere mentions) on which a verifiable article can be based. A "recently launched" anything might be written about by third parties in substantive detail, but most of the time? No. I suggest reading Wikipedia:Common sourcing mistakes (notability). If the right types of sources don't exist, with suitable depth of treatment, don't waste your time. And if they do, after you choose a better user name, you must comply with Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure first. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk)

And note, Shikobeautycollective that what you create will not be a "profile". In particular, it will not in general report what the company wants to say about itself, but rather, what independent commentators have published about the company, even if the company does not like what they say about it. --ColinFine (talk) 21:21, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

First submission

Hello! I recently submitted my first article regarding my grandfather and his career as a renown salsa dancer. I've come to learn that not only writing from a biased point but also writing about a relative, becomes a conflict of interest and goes against the guidelines of Wikipedia article writing. My question then would be who could I resort to in order to write this article, it is his wish that his accomplishments and story lives on this page where people may find him after he is gone. I'd like to understand the proper way to go about this without causing any conflict.

Thank you. Ddsaso 7 (talk) 18:56, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Ddsaso 7 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. A Wikipedia article is not meant to be a memorial to the subject. It should summarize what independent reliable sources have chosen on their own to say about (in this case) the person, showing how they meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person. You did proceed in the correct way by submitting a draft for review; please look at the advice you were given there for more information on how to proceed. If you just want to tell the world about your grandfather, there are places like social media or other alternatives with less stringent requirements and would allow you to have a more personal touch when writing about him. 331dot (talk) 19:06, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Ddsaso 7. You did the right thing to submit a draft for review, and you're welcome to keep working on that despite your conflict of interest. However, please note that Wikipedia articles should be based entirely on what published, reliable sources say about the subject, so you can't include anything that's based on your personal knowledge of your grandfather (unless it can also be supported by a published source, such as a book or newspaper article). Please see WP:VERIFY on this. Cordless Larry (talk) 19:09, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Articles Rejection

Hello, editors.

I don't know what I am not doing right, like every article I tried creating on Wikipedia always get reject; either they say it is promotional or something and it is not true as I don't have any connection with the subjects I tried creating the articles on.

Please help me out or is there a pattern in writing articles that I am not following? Horlaseun (talk) 20:20, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Draft:SuperWozzy was deleted last year. What other articles have you tries to create, as you Contribution history does not show any others? David notMD (talk) 20:59, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi Horlaseun. Promotional writing is about content, and not necessarily anyone's relationship with the subject of the writing – though a connected relationship highly correlates with promotional sounding content. Looking at Draft:SuperWozzy, it reads like you are casually blogging about a friend and how much you like them, with unsourced evaluative turns of phrase that only an insider could even know to write about (and uses very informal language). No encyclopedia article would ever say anything remotely like "he never allowed this exposure to influence his character ... with ... wisdom [the subject has a] "balance in his life that many of his childhood peers were missing" – I can't even come up with a suitable replacement as an example, because there's no factual content here to even transform; it's completely unecyclopedic material. Here's what I suggest for any topic you want to write about:

1. compile a list of reliable, secondary, independent sources that treat the topic in substantive detailTemplate:Z21;
2. if you can't make that list with at least three entries; write nothing;
3. if you can, write only what those sources verify (without copying the words used);
4. cite the verifying sources as you go; and
5. include only "hard facts" from them – no evaluation whatever; try to avoid adjectives.

Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:04, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

I just discovered that the draft was a copyright violation and plagiarism. I will be leaving a note about this on your talk page, Horlaseun. Don't ever do that again.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:10, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

templates

I am copyediting articles and don't know how to verify information in a template. Where do the writers get their templates? Is there a library of templates or do they make up their own? OodFloo (talk) 21:48, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi OodFloo. Please see Wikipedia:Template index. Here's a tip for finding relevant policies, procedures and guidelines, and most anything else you hear mentioned by regular editors, or come across in Wikipedia's interface. Type "WP: (an easier-to-type alias of "Wikipedia:") into the search box, followed by the word or phrase you heard (in this case "TEMPLATES"). Most of the time, this will quickly locate a targeted, behind-the-scenes information/help page, or how-to guide. See more at Help:WP search protocol.Template:Z202 Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:52, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Links

Is it ever appropriate to include dozens of external links in the body of an article like this: Tiny Desk Concerts TipsyElephant (talk) 00:01, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

@TipsyElephant: Per guidance at WP:EL, no. Converting them into references should be fine. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:08, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

The problem dates to May 2020, when User:Rshdobbin started inserting what are now more than 100 hyperlinks into the article, all to the concert performances at NPR. David notMD (talk) 00:21, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, I kind of figured. I was just wondering if there was an exception I wasn't aware of yet. TipsyElephant (talk) 00:25, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

@TipsyElephant: Dozens is understated. There are around 1100. Some corners of Wikipedia do use external links in the body against point 2 at Wikipedia:External links#Important points to remember. List of MeSH codes (D02) has around 2500. But that seems more reasonable when the MeSH codes cannot be wikilinked. The musicians in Tiny Desk Concerts#List of concerts would normally be linked to their articles. External links will surprise many readers who don't know the icon. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:49, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

The site has an archive with the links at https://www.npr.org/series/tiny-desk-concerts/archive. There is a suggestion at Talk:Tiny Desk Concerts#Links to link them on the date instead but I don't see a good reason for Wikipedia to index an external site by basically copying their own index. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:57, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Possible copyright violation

I'm not quite sure about this (oh, perhaps that's why I'm bringing this up) but at Wings of Fire (novel series) there appears to be prophecies copy-pasted from the series. (Prophecies within the series, that is.) So I thought I'd bring this up.

Oh, and here're some links to the offending sections:

• Wings of Fire (novel series)#Arc 1: The Dragonet Prophecy
• Wings of Fire (novel series)#Arc 2: The Jade Mountain Prophecy
• Wings of Fire (novel series)#Arc 3: The Lost Continent Prophecy
   MEisSCAMMER^(talk)_Hello! 00:17, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

@MEisSCAMMER: It's been tagged for RevDel (thanks Vami IV). You seem to be somewhat active on that page. If you've read the series or are familiar with the storyline, could you work on trimming down that page? MOS:PLOT is a good read. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 02:29, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

I will admit it needs a good rework. I will try trimming it down. MEisSCAMMER^(talk)_Hello! 12:26, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

I might need help with this... MEisSCAMMER^(talk)_Hello! 21:44, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Advice on sudden and systematic reversion

Today something happened to me that never happened before in the ~5 months I've been active here. A new IP editor showed up who systematically started to revert edits of mine, some recent and some much less recent. Their first seven edits were all reverts, and all of their 28 main space edits were directed against my edits. It seems they are concerned that I may have some kind of anti-Iranian bias (see the edits at Abu Musa), but then their first three reverts were on articles with completely different topics. I'm currently trying to explain myself on their user talk page and various article talk pages (here and here).

My question: how often does this happen, and should I consider this a normal part of Wikipedia editing? Any advice on how to best deal with this would be very welcome! Apaugasma (talk|contribs) 00:35, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

IMO happens more frequently when you edit in areas that are amongst the most disputed ones on Wikipedia. As far as I am aware, it is part of the usual buissnes in DS / WP:GS covered topics. Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:11, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Vandalism

Do we ever ban ip addresses for vandalism? A bot caught someone who blanked this article and wrote random stuff instead: Religion and spirituality podcast TipsyElephant (talk) 00:45, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

@TipsyElephant: Yes, IP address and ranges of IP address can be blocked. See WP:BLOCK for more info. If you see persistent vandalism from an IP you can report it at WP:ANV for an admin to look at. RudolfRed (talk) 01:08, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion

Hello, an article written by me is nominated for speedy deletion. Reason: Previously Deleted. Is there is any way to keep the article? Prashanth Nair (IAS), this is the article. The subject is about an Indian Administrative Service Officer. Who was the District Magistrate of Kozhikode. He is very famous in Kerala and is the man behind Operation Sulaimani. Please help me. Thank you ProudMallu (📨│📝) 01:05, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Not just "previously deleted", but previously deleted as the result of a deletion discussion, specifically Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Prasanth Nair (2nd nomination) (in fact the third nomination). Please read about the purpose of "deletion review". Read it very carefully. Look through when "Deletion review may be used" and remember that this means what it says, not what you (or I) would like it to mean. If you can can argue convincingly that one of these five cases applies, and can avoid every one of the nine cases where "Deletion review should not be used", then you can apply for deletion review. This aside, no, the article can neither be kept nor be recreated. -- Hoary (talk) 01:25, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

How to get my article published?

Can you please inform me on how to get my article published? It said that I didn't have enough reliable sources or independent sources. Can you help me identify which sources are causing this to be ineligible for publication? Here is the url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Wayne_Oquin_(composer) Thank you for your help, and I look forward to hearing back! Wayne.oquin123 (talk) 02:00, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi Wayne.oquin123. Assuming from your username that you're trying to create an article about yourself, I suggest you take a look at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest, Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not, Wikipedia:Autobiography, Wikipedia:Ownership of content and Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing before proceeding further. If after reading those pages, you still feel a Wikipedia article can be written about you, please take a look at Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything and Wikipedia:Notability (music) for some more general information. You also probably should take a look at c:User talk:Wayne.oquin123 because the photo of yourself you uploaded can be previously seen here attributed to someone else. When it comes to photos, it is the photographer who takes the photo (not the person being photographed) who generally owns the copyright over the photo which means you cannot upload someone else's work as your "own work" without their consent and this consent needs to be verified by Comomns. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:35, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

How do I prevent edit loss?

I spent nearly two hours copy editing this article, only for the browser tab to crash. All of my work was lost and I'm pretty upset about it. Is there any way to back up an in-progress article other than copy/pasting all of the raw text into another application? It doesn't seem like it's common practice for changes to be published until all of the intended edits are done. NebulousPhantom (talk) 02:01, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi NebulousPhantom. There's no automatic backing up of edits until you hit the "Publish changes" button; sometimes, if you hit "Show preview", you might be able to get back to a prior version of the page by hitting your browser's page return button, but this isn't a feature built into the Wikipedia software. My suggestion to you is that if your going to be working on a major revision to an article, you might want to do so in your user sandbox where it's easier to save a work in progress; then, you can incorporate the changes into the article when you ready. Another problem with long time consuming revisions of an article is that it increases the risk of their being an edit conflict; there are templates like Template:In use or Template:Under construction which can be used to try and prevent edit conflicts, but sometimes they're just ignored. So, once gain, the easiest way to make major changes to an articles is to try and do it in bits and pieces or to do so in your sandbox first. Many editors seem to prefer to develop changes off Wikipedia where they can be easily saved, convert things into Wiki markup in their user sandboxes, and then incorporate the changes into the article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:23, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello, NebulousPhantom. The short answer to your question is to use sandbox pages and click "Publish changes" frequently. I am working on an article in my sandbox right now, and have clicked "Publish changes" 342 times so far on that draft article. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:40, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

@NebulousPhantom: as far as I am aware, the Visual Editor has a temporary backup system in place that persists after page reload. No idea if this works for tab crashes though... The solution with "going back" is pretty useless depending on your Browser: Some of the Major Browsers, Firefox for example, don't store the contents of already submitted forms offline for HTTPS pages, meaning when you attempt to do this, all what you will be greeted with is an error page (about:neterror?e=notCached for those with a firefox instance). Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:06, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello, and thanks for your answers. The edits persisted for awhile through show preview, but upon the tab crashing, everything was lost. I use Vivaldi, which doesn't store any kind of data as far as I know. I'll make use of the sandbox in the future as suggested. 👻NebulousPhantom ^💬 16:08, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Somebody please edits section of "In popular culture" of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17

Please somebody edits section of "In popular culture" of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 because I doesn't make it, due to restrictions about discretionary sanctions. No IP edits. Lkas123 (talk) 04:26, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

@Lkas123: Welcome to the Teahouse! You can post your suggestion on Talk:Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 using the {{Edit semi-protected}} template and a reliable source. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 04:28, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

are newspaper article can be used as a third party source

Devanshusharma569 (talk)devanshusharma569 hi, i am devanshu sharma and i am writing a article on a NGO they don't have valid third party source, for wikipedia validation but they have some newspaper articles by renowned names and various online sites mentionaing there work. can i use them in my article for third party validation. Devanshusharma569 (talk) 05:09, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Mere mentions don't bring notability. Indian newspapers, even long-established, famous ones, are notorious for the flattering coverage that they provide to those who pay for it. The newspaper articles would have to write about the NGO in some depth but not be promotional. -- Hoary (talk) 05:30, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Notability Criteria

Hi, let me know the notability criteria of Mandir/Temple? ProudMallu (📨│📝) 05:10, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

For notability of a building, see this ("NBUILDING"); for general notability, see this ("GNG"). The building should meet either one of these; it doesn't have to meet both. -- Hoary (talk) 05:24, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

How to restructure a biography article according to WP standards.

Hello ,Tukaram is a high traffic article.Its about a great Warkari Sant of 16th century.The problem is that the article have lots of claim and speculations.Don't know the citation and ref are really reliable.It don't have Early life, Education, Personal life, Career subsection.It also looking it have Original research.It doesn't look like a article should be look like WP article have to.I suggest to take a look and correct grammar, sentence structure in this article.Research Voltas (talk) 06:10, 18 March 2021 (UTC) Research Voltas (talk) 06:10, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

You say that the article Tukaram "don't have Early life, Education, Personal life, Career subsection". It even has a section titled "Early life"; and as for his career, his activities are written up. Yes, the article has various claims and speculations, and these are described as such. The grammar (including sentence structure) seems OK to me: what's the problem? If particular references are unreliable, feel free to point this out in Talk:Tukaram. -- Hoary (talk) 06:25, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Hoary Early life section added by me , just before coming to Teahouse. It's heading section was very long. And everything was mixed up. If you can accommodate all the info of heading section in separate sub section it will be nice. Infobox have cliams about birt without citation. Research Voltas (talk) 06:37, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

No, I am not going to do any of that. Ask for this on the article's talk page; somebody who has more experience of that kind of article than I have will know what to do about the article. -- Hoary (talk) 07:00, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Controversial article , may be include propoganda

Hi today I found a article Kunbi.It have lots of shocking cliams.Some un referenced info. This Research Voltas (talk) 06:40, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

You have already stated your objections on the article's talk page; there is no need to do so on this page as well. The article is related to caste. Rather a lot of rubbish is written about caste by people who cite discredited sources, obviously unreliable sources, or no sources at all. If you want a change made to that article, then say precisely what should be changed, precisely how it should be changed, and precisely what reliable sources you are citing for this change. If a source that's already cited is unreliable, then say which source it is and on what grounds it should be rejected. However, I recommend that you stay away from any caste-related article (or its talk page) until you have more experience of editing other articles. -- Hoary (talk) 07:00, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Hoary Hi , But new peoples believe in this rubbish. Because they think WP have everything is 100 % truth. Whoever edited this Ref a book. I don't have access to that book. I don't believe that writer. I live on grassroots level. I know truth.I suggest to check that article and it's sources. Omitte unreliable info Research Voltas (talk) 10:44, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Ah, truth. Wikipedia deals with verifiability, not truth. I hope that this is acceptable for you. If it isn't, you're at the wrong website. -- Hoary (talk) 11:14, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Internal inconsistency in White Australia Policy article

I was reading this article, and realized that there were some issues, but wanted to ask before making the changes. 1) In the introductory section, the article states "The White Australia policy is a term encapsulating a set of historical racial policies that aimed to forbid people of non-European ethnic origin, especially Asians and Pacific Islanders, from immigrating to Australia, starting in 1901." However, but the sections below indicate that the policy, if not specifically called that, had its roots prior to 1901. Perhaps that sentence means to say that immigration restrictions started in 1901, but it's a bit ambiguous, especially with the comma, which seems to indicate that it's to be read with the clause preceding the last one. Eliminating the comma might help, but it seems like it would be better to reword it to "...from immigrating to Australia, leading to legislative restrictions from 1901 until completely dismantled in 1973."

Then, the paragraph under the heading "The Gold Rush Era" begins with the sentence "It effectively stopped all non-European immigration into the country and that contributed to the development of a racially insulated white society." Aside from the unclear referent ("It"), the sentence would seem to be out of place here, as it appears to refer to the period after 1901, not the Gold Rush Era, which would be part of the history of the attitudes and policies under discussion. But my bigger concern is that it's under the section entitled "Immigration policy in Federation." However, the introductory text indicates that Federation didn't occur until 1901, although the wiki on Federation architecture puts the period from 1890-1915. In any event, the Gold Rush Era information only goes up to the 1870s, so it would seem to predate the label of Federation.

Similarly, much of the text under "Support from the Australian Labour Movement" appears to predate the Federation period--all but the last two paragraphs (and blockquote). That seems to imply that this was all that happened during the Federation period, but the next section of the article, "From Federation to the Second World War" goes into that at length. I suppose the heading is because there isn't much between the end of WWI and the next section.

However, since the last section is "Abolition of the Policy," it seems like it might be better to name the sections as the arc of the policy, something like "Beginnings of the Policy" and "Height of the Policy." Thanks! JodiGMc (talk) 08:32, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

@JodiGMc: you might want to ask on that article's talkpage so people watching the article see. I'd recommend considering boldly going ahead with your changes, since from what you've described it seems like they'd improve the article. Elli (talk | contribs) 11:41, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

SEXISM ALIVE AND WELL ON WIKIPEDIA ?

MY LEGAL NAME IS CERYS ELIZABETH PHILLIPS MATTHEWS.

MATTHEWS IS MY LEGAL SURNAME/FAMILY NAME.

IT HAS NEVER CHANGED. I HAVE NEVER CHANGED IT , MARRIED OR NOT MARRIED. I WILL NEVER CHANGE IT.

ALAS!!- ON MY WIKIPEDIA THUMBRPINT /INTRO PAGE SOMEBODY HAS EDITED MY NAME TO CERYS ELIZABETH ABBOTT.

PRESUMABLY BECAUSE I HAVE MARRIED A MAN CALLED ABBOTT.

I NEVER TOOK HIS NAME, I DONT BELIEVE IN CHANGING NAMES, AND I AM ABSOLUTELY LIVID.

PLEASE LET ME KNOW HOW TO EDIT IT SO THAT I AM NEVER AGAIN REFERRED TO AS ANYTHING BUT MY LEGAL NAME.

THIS IS EVERYDAY SEXISM THAT SHOULD NOT BE TOLERATED ANYWHERE, NOT LEAST MY FAVOURITE SITE, WIKIPEDIA!

CERYS 90.252.179.66 (talk) 09:03, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

• The name was modified in January by this edit without any sourcing. Hoary just reversed the modification as you asked, and I agree with that.

This being said, please do not write in all caps anymore, this is the internet convention for shouting. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 09:21, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

@90.252.179.66: First of all, Wikipedia does not have "intro pages" or "thumbprints", it has articles. As you have a clear WP:COI, you should submit an edit request on the article's talk page. See Template:Request edit/Instructions on how to make one.

Also, please don't write in all caps. It's considered shouting.

185.73.65.98 (talk) 09:18, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

The article is Cerys Matthews. I've changed the first sentence in such a way that it accords with your request -- but not because you asked for the change; instead, because I had no reason to think that "Abbott" was correct. In future, please do not write comments in the article; instead, make your request(s) within Talk:Cerys Matthews (already provided for the article). And yes, you'll be more persuasive if you use lowercase most of the time. -- Hoary (talk) 09:21, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

@90.252.179.66: What happened here: An editor made last name Abbott in the lead paragraph in January. IP editor 90.252.179.66 changed that back to Matthews. As no reference was provided, ClueBot (an automated program) assumed vandalism and changed it back. Accusing an automated program of sexism accomplishes naught. Keep in mind that proof was not provided that 90.252.179.66 is in fact Cerys. Going forward, accepting on faith that 90.252.179.66 is Cerys, then the proper method of editing the article is to propose changes on the Talk page of the article. Be aware that at Wikipedia, subjects of articles do not 'own' those articles. David notMD (talk) 11:28, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

The first change back to Matthews [3] was actually accepted. But then 90.252.179.66 made a completely inappropriate edit [4] 10 hours later. It was this edit which caused ClueBot NG to revert. Consecutive edits by the same user are reverted together by the bot since one bad edit usually means they are all bad. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:30, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Help re: Draft:Rocket_Science_(company)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Rocket_Science_(company)

Hello, I'm trying to create a neutral page for Rocket Science. Before creating the draft article I looked at other companies in the field, specifically Embankment Films and HanWay Films, which I then used as a template to stay within what I understood would be the Wikipedia guidelines of impartiality. I've received 2 reviews which say the page has not complied in this way and so I'm a bit stumped and wonder if anyone can help advise on how to improve the page. I've used references from other sources which were used on the other companies pages, but have seen one reviewer deem that they're not reliable. How can one company use the outside source and not another? I have disclosed my relationship to the company, but believed that as long as one followed the guidelines and used other approved pages as a guide that should not disqualify me. Can anyone help assist in terms neutral tone? Thanks very much, Jonathan JonoLynch-Staunton (talk) 09:05, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the teahouse JonoLynch-Staunton! One problem I notice immediately is a prose list that is better off in bulleted or table form. And again, if you have a conflict of interest, even if you try to follow Wikipedia policies and guidelines, you may still have trouble with promotional tone. I would recommend trying to edit other articles first; creating an article by yourself may be too overwhelming. You can check out the task center for things to do on Wikipedia. Sungodtemple a tcg fan!!1!11!! (talk) 14:48, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

@JonoLynch-Staunton: I made some minor updates to the draft for you. Please remove all the external links from the "Film Library" section. You may replace them with links to Wikipedia articles. GoingBatty (talk) 20:22, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Musician bio page

Hi, I'm trying to create a musician bio page for myself but it was rejected as the sources were unreliable (bios from bandcamp and spotify). Can I create a page without references? What other references can be used? Here's the text I used:

Raquel Torre (Lacquer) started her music solo project in 2019 releasing two demo singles as Lacquer. In 2020, she released her first album "So Little Changes" with FlexiDiscos and Discodrome Records. This album was conceived in her London room, then taken to the studio where Jonah Falco completed the production, recording, mixing and mastering. Her music reflects her taste for synth sounds, catchy pop and sad melodies. RaquelTorre (talk) 09:16, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

No, you may not create an article about anyone if it lacks references. Nobody may. -- Hoary (talk) 09:22, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi! But the page is about myself. I don't quite understand how my own references and my own published music are not valid. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RaquelTorre (talk • contribs) 09:47, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

To save a lot of typing, please read WP:AUTOBIO. I think it will answer a lot of questions. - X201 (talk) 10:18, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Also, please note that an article about yourself is not nessesarely desireable. Victor Schmidt (talk) 11:01, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Qualifying for a Wikipedia article requires that other people have written about you. Your accomplishments (album) could be listed, but contribute not at all to what Wikipedia considers as confirming notability. David notMD (talk) 11:11, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

@RaquelTorre: Welcome to the Teahouse! For more information about Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion (called "notability") for musicians, see WP:MUSICBIO. GoingBatty (talk) 20:13, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

GoingBatty That was a very nice welcome. Maineartists (talk) 15:43, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

orthographic maps

How do I draw country ortographic maps that Wiki editors used to draw in Country infoboxes? Mhatopzz (talk) 09:45, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Mhatopzz. Take a look here. I think you will find what you need there. Thanks, EDG 543 ^{(message me)} 12:29, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Getting some off-wiki help for a team of editors

Hello Everyone!!

I'm Rafi from Bangladesh. I mostly work in Bangla Wikipedia but thinking of starting my journey in English Wikipedia too. I have a team of 20/25 members who are currently active in bnwiki. The interesting fact is we're all from the same educational institution. We worked together to make our college article a "featured article" in bnwiki. We're also leading the "Wikiproject Notre Dame College" there. We want to start with the same spirit here. (Actually working with this type of motivation helps a lot in learning) The fact is these freshers are more comfortable in social media like facebook messenger and mail. So we'll need some amazing people to train these guys using social media or mail. Can I get some help? Mrb Rafi (talk) 11:57, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Mrb Rafi first of all, thanks for all your contributions, but this isn't a place to ask for people to help you, we are supposed to help you technical-ish problems. but you could always ask for help in return for barnstars ig. Lovin'Politics (talk) 12:23, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

@Mrb Rafi: welcome to the Teahouse! It is perfectly fine to ask for help here at the Teahouse, it's why it is here (and you do not have to do anything in particular to reward anybody who helps you out – Lovin'Politics was not being serious.) However, the Teahouse volunteers are not necessarily prepared to go outside Wikipedia; if your friends are prepared to use IRC, there is some information about the Wikipedia IRC channels here, and there is also a Discord server, which you find out more about here. As you probably already know, it is always a good idea to use the article talk page, in this case Talk:Notre Dame College, Dhaka, to communicate with other editors especially if you are planning a major rewrite/restructuring. Good luck with your project! --bonadea contributions talk 13:06, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Mrb Rafi, people who study or studied at a particular school would have a conflict of interest when writing about that school. Please read Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide and observe what it says. -- Hoary (talk) 13:00, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Hoary Going to a college and editing about it (provided it's not part of any internship within the college, but just as a regular student) is as much a conflict of interest in Wikipedia terms as writing about the city you live in. VAXIDICAE💉 18:40, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Mrb Rafi! Even though IRC and mailing lists have been around since the beginning, I feel that the culture at English Wikipedia is strongly oriented towards communicating on-wiki, so that discussions happen in the open and are preserved for long-term reference. (This often puts us in conflict with the Wikimedia Foundation which develops policy in Facebook, Slack, Google Docs, and face-to-face meetings.) Apart from some activist groups that organise off-wiki, a lot of us distrust social media companies like Facebook and WeChat, so it might be challenging to find people to do outreach via social media. Have you looked at Wikipedia:WikiProject Bangladesh? Perhaps your group could form a sub-project there for discussions that aren’t directly related to the article about Notre Dame College, Dhaka. — Pelagic ( messages ) – (04:40 Sat 20, AEDT) 17:40, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

@Lovin'Politics:@Bonadea:@Hoary:@Pelagic: Thanks to you all for your cooperation. bonadea, discord is a good place, of course, I'll try to bring them together there. Irc may seem a lil bit uncomfortable for new editors, the talk page too. At the very first we face the problem of making new people comfortable with wiki markups. We've seen that most of the people leave wiki just because they find these markups tough and feels as "they don't belong here 'cause they're not that much smart!" I've heard it from some of my junior brothers while introducing them to Wikipedia for the first time. At this point, social media can give them a more "tangible" idea of what they're doing. They can communicate with the same people there whom they may talk onwiki. For the same reason, I've seen our local wmf chapter also focuses on using social media for new editors. And "Conflict of interest" topic was also raised while we were working on bnwiki. We were able to convince the whole bnwiki community that we're following the rules strictly. Some of the most experienced bnwiki editors also observed our workers for the whole time. We got this privilege because I was able to make a whole team of 20/25 completely new editors where I was totally alone at first. Hope you understand. And thanks again for all of your cooperation. Take love! -Mrb Rafi (talk) 18:33, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Edit or Edit source

I feel weird, having 9,600 edits and a year of experience, being here – like an adult in a baby chair. On the right hand of the page, I always see a "Read" - "Edit" - On talk pages "+" - "View history" - star signifying watchlist icon - "More [move, purge, rater, AFCH]" - "TW [ARV, Warn, Wel, TB, CSD, XFD, RPP, Last, Unlink]" In files that show me another user's view, "Edit" is ALWAYS replaced with "Edit source", with no exceptions. A very long time ago, I saw "Edit source" in place of "Edit", but it disappeared when I accidentally enabled VisualEditor, and "Edit source" has never come back since. "Edit" is harmless, of course, and I'm sorry if I'm wasting your time, but where is "Edit source", how do I get it back, and why don't I have it? 🐔 Chicdat  ^{Bawk to me!} 12:06, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Chicdat, in your preferences, go to the editing tab and uncheck the box that says " Temporarily disable the visual editor while it is in beta." This should make it say "Edit source" instead of just edit. I had this same problem, don't sweat it. Thanks, EDG 543 ^{(message me)} 12:13, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

@Chicdat: The logic behind it is that if you have disabled VisualEditor in preferences then there can only be one kind of edit tab so it isn't necessary to specify the longer "Edit source". If you dislike VisualEditor so much that you both want to disable it and rejoice in seeing an "Edit source" tab then you can add the below to your common JavaScript. It doesn't change section edit links. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:35, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

$( function () {
    var tab, tablink;
    tab = document.getElementById('ca-edit');
    if ( tab ) {
      tablink = tab.getElementsByTagName('a')[0];
      if ( tablink ) {
        tablink.firstChild.nodeValue = 'Edit source';
      };
    };
});

Well, thank you. I'm walking out of my baby chair with great difficulty... 🐔 Chicdat  ^{Bawk to me!} 10:05, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

@EDG 543: If you have selected "Editing mode: Always give me the source editor", is there any benefit to also ticking the box for "Temporarily disable the visual editor while it is in beta"? (Just curious, as it seems you have used both combinations of settings. Personally, I use "Show me both editor tabs", and haven’t experimented much with disabling VE.) Pelagic ( messages ) – (04:57 Sat 20, AEDT) 17:57, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Question

Hello, i have a question about some image on wikimedia commons. If one image is not used in any Wikimedia page, this image can be deleted? Thank you All the Bests --TommasoRmndn (talk) 12:11, 18 March 2021 (UTC) TommasoRmndn (talk) 12:11, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

TommasoRmndn hey. you'll have to work through the commons deletion process Lovin'Politics (talk) 12:15, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

TommasoRmndn generally, images are deleted on Wikimedia Commons if they are not educationally useful or if they are copyright violations. See commons:Commons:Deletion policy. Elli (talk | contribs) 12:54, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Deletion of draft when I was still working on it

So, on my draft of iFlightPlanner, someone tagged it for speedy deletion under G11 when I was still working on it. Now I am being asked to declare a COI when none exists. Please help. NightWolf¹²²³ 13:12, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

NightWolf1223, hello, friend! I haven't seen your draft, but it appears that your draft was written like an advertisement, which explains why they suspected your conflict of interest. You can request it be undeleted if you have no COI and wish to clean up the draft. If you do have a COI (I'm not at all accusing you), please just either declare it or abandon the draft altogether. Otherwise, you can request undeletion here. Thanks, EDG 543 ^{(message me)} 13:49, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Otto Krahn Group

Hi there, I've made a draft about my client Otto Krahn Group. Yes, it is paid but I think it matches the guidelines of wikipedia anyway.

So I disclosed in the talk-section of the article that this content is paid. Should I move it now into the encyclopedia?

tx&best Peer

--Kibonaut (talk) 14:40, 18 March 2021 (UTC) Kibonaut (talk) 14:40, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

This will need to be reviewed before being accepted, it can take up to 4 months, please note that the company's website is not an independent source so does not contribute to any notability. You have yet to submit the draft. Theroadislong (talk) 14:51, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia page

How do I create a new Wikipedia page? EGGINATOR (talk) 15:24, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

EGGINATOR, welcome to the Teahouse. You're going to want to read Your first article and follow the steps there. That being said, it's best to hang around Wikipedia and see how other articles are structured first. I strongly suggest evaluating whether the subject you're planning on writing about is notable for Wikipedia as well. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:27, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Guidance on living persons with the same name

Hello Teahouse! I am trying my best to update a lot of content involving the Montana Legislature, but not that article specifically. It seems that a lot of content in related articles is outdated, one of which is the Template:Montana State Senators. This template does not reflect he current roster for the Montana State Senate, and thus I have and will continue to make the appropriate updates. That being said, I encountered an issue which I am sure I will encounter again: it looks like there is an individual, Bob Brown who has an extensive history in Montana politics. According to 13 of the current roster, a different Bob Brown is serving.
Here is my question: because there is already a Bob Brown (Montana politician) article, and another page needs to be created for another Montana politician named Bob Brown, what is the protocol in naming the article for the latter mentioned Brown? Hopefully that makes sense; happy to clarify! Thanks in advance! PerpetuityGrat (talk) 15:47, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello, PerpetuityGrat. Good question. A possible solution is suggested by looking at Bob Brown (disambiguation), where you will notice that there are three notable soccer players named Bob Brown, and they are disambiguated by adding the year of birth to the title. So, the current politician biography could be moved to "Bob Brown (Montana politician, born 1947)" and the other one with the proper birth year in the title as well. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 15:56, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Poetry/short story collections - Should we list their tables of contents/create articles for this purpose?

Hello, This requires a bit of explanation, so bear with me!

Something that I think would be very useful for researchers and people interested in poetry is having a place where we list the contents of each collection, so that if they are searching for which collection a specific poem was originally published, they can actually find it (this is surprisingly difficult to do on the internet, I would usually have to call a librarian or two until one of them can look up the book and send me the table of contents).

For cases such as Robert Frost's first book, A Boy's Will, (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Boy%27s_Will) the contents are listed, which is very helpful in identifying which poems of his come from his earliest published collection.

However for most poets, when I look them up on wikipedia, I often see a list of poetry collections they wrote, but the collections often do not have their own articles, likely due to the works being out of print and/or not meeting notability requirements. Even looking at Robert Frost's poetry collections, many do not have their own articles since they are not his more notable collections.

My question is this: is it appropriate to create an article for a collection of poetry just so that I can list the table of contents? I would not have much other information to add beyond the publication info and contents, but I think it would be very helpful for many people to have this information somewhere. This would, however, create potentially many short articles that are essentially lists of poems and a publishing date, so I'm not sure if that would be appropriate. Is Wikipedia the right place for this?

Thank you for your time! -A new user 24.55.162.1 (talk) 16:02, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello. In order for a book such as a poetry collection to be eligible for a Wikipedia article, it must comply with Wikipedia:Notability (books). An article consisting only of a date and a list of poems is not acceptable, because Wikipedia is not a directory. Articles about books should have prose describing the book, including summaries of critical commentary. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 16:44, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

The other approach we have is List of poems by Robert Frost. But I imagine we would only do that for particularly famous and prolific authors? (It could be modelled in Wikidata, e.g Birches (Q16385136) part of (P361) Mountain Interval (Q6925009); that’s a whole other discussion.) Pelagic ( messages ) – (05:33 Sat 20, AEDT) 18:33, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

editor routinely removing "over-referencing"

I'm struggling with another editor's decision to remove what they considered "over-referencing". I write about underrepresented topics, such as women, and prefer to cite every statement to make clear what facts are coming from which sources. In a new article, Lucille Thornburgh, an editor removed many valid references, using the term "reducing over-referencing". I requested information about what policy this editor was using to justify this action on their user page, and they said there was no such policy, but they would "certainly continue to do this by default". I'm not sure why it would be appropriate to remove valid references. Skvader (talk) 16:19, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Skvader. I think that the other editor gave you a perfectly reasonable explanation on their talk page. If you write a long paragraph and several sentences in a row summarize the same reference, there is no reason to add the same reference after each individual sentence. Using the reference once at the end of that group of sentences is perfectly acceptable, and results in a less cluttered article. That's a well-done article, by the way. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 16:34, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Not a policy but WP:TOOMANYREFS may have some relevance. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:46, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

There is nothing in Wikipedia:Citation overkill that suggests adding a citation for each statement is inappropriate, and, in fact, Wikipedia:Citation underkill suggests that it is a good idea to do so. Why remove accurate citations? Can you see how this would be discouraging to someone who is trying to improve the equity in Wikipedia? Skvader (talk) 19:02, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Skvader You used one ref more than 30 times (since then, one editor cut, another restored). I am on the side of the editor that cut. The issue is that often, you have consecutive, related sentences, each one with that ref. Reducing the number of times that ref used would not leave content unreferenced, as it would by inferred that a ref at the end of several sentences applies to all of the preceding sentences. What you did is not over-referencing, per se, as that applies to providing multiple references to a simple factual statement, where one would be sufficient. David notMD (talk) 22:05, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Mobile Editing

I've noticed that when I'm editing on my phone that it's impossible to use the visual editor for categories when the title of the article is too long. The button to publish comes after the title and instead of wrapping around once it reaches the end of my phone screen it just goes right off the end and it's impossible to tap. I was wondering where I should mention this for someone to look into fixing. I know I can just type the category, but I thought I'd mention it anyway. TipsyElephant (talk) 16:27, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello, TipsyElephant. You may want to consider using the fully functional desktop site, which works perfectly well on mobile devices, and does not suffer from the numerous bugs that affect the mobile site and the visual editor. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 16:38, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

@Cullen328: How do I change to the desktop version? TipsyElephant (talk) 16:27, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

TipsyElephant Hi , welcome to Teahouse. It's simple to do that. After typing category just hold your phone horizontal on landscape . You will see button. Research Voltas (talk) 18:10, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

@Research Voltas: Turning my phone sideways does absolutely nothing (it just stays vertical), and even if it did I'm guessing that really long title would still go off the screen because whoever programmed it didn't account for long titles. I was originally wondering if there is someone who deals with the backend who would be able to fix the problem that I should get into contact with. TipsyElephant (talk) 16:24, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

TipsyElephant, while in mobile mode, scroll to the very bottom of the page. You will see a link to click to enter desktop mode. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 16:47, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Using Wikipedia content (text) in a mobile application

Hello. I am developing a mobile app where I present cities and their info. I get info about cities from Wikipedia API.

My question is: how to properly attribute text from Wikipedia? I know that there is a lot of info about how to properly attribute the text and I read it already. Unfortunately I am not very good with this kind of stuff and am worried that I am not doing it correctly. I am currently writing the following line in my app after the text from Wikipedia: "This article uses material from the Wikipedia article ArticleName, which is released under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share-Alike License 3.0." This doesn't seem correct to me however, since it's stated on Wikipedia, that text can be under different licenses: Creatice Commons or GNU Free Documentation (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reusing_Wikipedia_content).

Any help will be very appreciated. 90.157.166.45 (talk) 17:25, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! When looking at the desktop version of Wikipedia, on the left hand side of every article is a link to Cite this page. For example, when you click on this link from New York City, you get this result, which has multiple citation formats. Good luck with the app! GoingBatty (talk) 20:06, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

GoingBatty, thank you for your quick response! However, I still have a problem, since I get my data from a Wikipedia API (for random cities that I don't know in advance). So checking the citing rules for each city in advance is not possible. Is there a way to get a "cite" text with a call to API for specific wikipedia page? So that I would get for example text for Paris (which I already get) and a cite text that I should add below the text.90.157.166.45 (talk)

Unable to edit because Wiki thinks i have COI

So I'm trying to edit a page regarding a local state politician who I like is running for governor. However, when i tried to post, it got removed because it was considered "promotional material". If possible I would like to know what specific things I had posted were promotional so i can avoid using them. Wiki apparently thinks I have a conflict of interest now because I've tried unsuccessfully several times to make an edit. PLease help Davidbaumel.nj (talk) 19:00, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

'Wiki' does not think anything. Individual editors think. User:Innisfree987 reverted your additions twice. Start by declaring on your Talk page that you do not have a conflict of interest with Jennifer. That means not paid or compensated, and don't know her. After that, make an entry on Innisfree987's Talk page, asking what parts of your additions to the article are considered promotional. David notMD (talk) 19:09, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Davidbaumel.nj. Adding material copy-pasted from her website, such as "JENNIFER'S VISION FOR VIRGINIA'S FUTURE", is fairly obviously promotional. Wikipedia articles summarise what reliable sources say about a subject, not really what the subject wants to tell the world about themselves. Cordless Larry (talk) 19:16, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Davidbaumel.nj, another concern is, as Cordless Larry pointed out, the material copy-pasted from her website. Wikipedia has a copyright violation policy, and material posted as such on Wikipedia will be removed as soon as possible. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:23, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Davidbaumel.nj, Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources. --ColinFine (talk) 20:11, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

From where to start my wikipedia page

Wikipedia page creation How to create my wikipedia page? K. Lillrud (talk) 19:54, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

@K. Lillurd: Welcome to the Teahouse! I suggest reading WP:AUTO, WP:COI, and Help:Your first article. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 20:02, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

@K. Lillurd: Any Wikipedia article(not a mere "page") about you would not be yours to control; see WP:OWN. You do have a user page, which you can use to tell the Wikipedia community about yourself as a Wikipedia editor or user; it isn't for telling anything and everything about yourself. See WP:USERPAGE for information on acceptable(and not) user page content. 331dot (talk) 21:17, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

User name

Is it necessary to have user name and name of the person about whom is being written kept same 111.119.187.32 (talk) 21:08, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

You should not select a username which represents another person you intend to write about. That is considered impersonation and will likely lead to a block. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 21:14, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Hello, IP user. The answer is emphatically, No. There is no connection between the name of an editor and the names of the articles they choose to create or edit. If you do edit an article with the same name as yourself, this suggests that you are writing about yourself, which is very strongly discouraged. If you are not writing about yourself but you use the name of your subject as your account name, that is even worse, because Wikipedia regards that as impersonation. Advice: create an account which is personal to you and has a name meaningful to you. (Ity doesn't have to be your real name: I use my real name, but many editors don't). Then, as long as you are not trying to write about yourself, you can read your first article and notability to see whether it is worth trying to create an article about that person or not; and how to do it. But my advice would be to spend a few months editing existing articles and learning how Wikipedia works before you even think about creating a new article. --ColinFine (talk) 21:15, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Question about user page

How do I change my user to make it say "native" for English? BlueDaNoob (talk) 22:16, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

@BlueDaNoob: you can use {{Babel:en}} or {{User en}} —Belwine (talk) 22:27, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Is there Chinese or Korean

Is there Chinese or Korean like en-5? chinese-1 won't work for me BlueDaNoob (talk) 22:29, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi BlueDaNoob. I think you might be looking for {{User zh-5}} and {{User ko-4}}. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:43, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

And you can also use {{User zh-4}} or whatever your skill in the language might be. —Belwine (talk) 16:01, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Help - Rewriting

Hello

I need help to rewrite this draft as required by the reviewer. I have started rewriting but need more improvements from an experienced editor. Thanks in advance--Art&football (talk) 22:37, 18 March 2021 (UTC) Art&football (talk) 22:37, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Art&football first of all, you don't need to do the '~' for the teahouse because you automatically have those '~'s at the bottom. next, you want to try to remain as not ad like as possible because that was one of the reasons that your submission was denied. I personally think that you should try to make it as impartial as wiki is a impartial encyclopaedia and we don't advertise. so you want to find more sources to make it as neutral as possible Lovin'Politics (talk) 01:15, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Reliable Sources

Hi! I am new to finding sources and wish to edit about animals, especially insects. Can someone kindly point me to any good place to find free, reliable sources about it? User404User (talk) 22:39, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi User404User. I have many thousands of edits to bird-related articles, such as in writing Glossary of bird terms, and my go-to start is searching Google Books, with preview available set and then searching for some applicable name/phrase in quotes with "ornithology" (so for insects, you might use "entomology"), e.g., like this (and of course refine from there, depending on what I find or don't find). I often use in conjunction the Wikipedia citation tool for Google Books (and the Library of Congress' ISBN converter for proper ISBN hyphens) to make citations (though I always tweak its default output). Please note that due to a recent change to the Google Books interface, the default URLs provided no longer work with the tool – you have to switch to the "classic view". Please note also resources like Wikipedia:Free English newspaper sources (shortcut: WP:FENS), and see also Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Library/Navbox shown at the bottom of that page. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:24, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

"Entomology". (Which itself has subdivisions, e.g. acarology for ticks and mites.) -- Hoary (talk) 01:42, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

explaining what you've changed

Hi, I tend to give a reasonably detailed (sometimes a bit tetchy, but that's me) account of what I've changed in/added to/taken away from an entry, but I notice few others do this, certainly not in much detail. I'm interested generally speaking in (1) the reason contributors usually don't describe their changes (2) whether experienced contributors like yourselves think there is any value in doing so - aside from to me, when I go down memory lane on my Contributions. Davidnicholsknowsbest (talk) 22:39, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Davidnicholsknowsbest (talk) I tend to work on lesser-known historical articles and most people are leaving an Edit Summary after editing, so it might be that a higher number of editors working in your specialties are forgetting to leave them. If I make many changes to an article I tend to write "Expand article and add good references," and if I make just one change I'll specify, such as "Added cause of death, added reference." (Since a number of people forget to include references, I'm a stickler about letting others know that I add them.) If I should delete anything I'll often summarize with "removed flowery words to make article more encyclopedic." When I first started editing, back in 2007, I considered it an important responsibility to make changes to an encyclopedia so I read the rules first, and one of them was leaving an Edit Summary. I still consider being a Wiki editor an honor and a responsibility, so I want others to be able to trust what I added or deleted.Karenthewriter (talk) 00:04, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

@Davidnicholsknowsbest: It's good practice to leave a descriptive edit summary and can let other editors know roughly what changed without having to search through a large number of diffs, and I encourage you to keep doing it. The big reason why new editors don't add as long of an edit summary is because they don't know what it does and why they should do it. Wikipedia doesn't force you to leave one before submitting (though you can enable a gadget that reminds you if you forget). More seasoned editors don't mostly because of laziness; you'll find a lot of us using "weird" terms and abbreviations. I always leave edit summaries (partly due to the gadget), though certainly not as long as yours, instead just enough for people to get a rough idea what I changed. All my talk page edit summaries are just "re" since editors should actually read what I write. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 00:12, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Please keep making edit summaries saying what you did, and why you did it if it's non-obvious and potentially controversial like I did here. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:50, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter: Wow! Pure obstructionist deceptive sophistry, used to convey the exact opposite of the quoter's actual sentiment. I'm not sure I could have been so tactful.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:03, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Re: Vandalism Warnings

Hi, I’m Helen. I was wondering about the vandalism warning badges that I see other users throwing at vandals. How do I put templates like that into someone’s talk page? I hope to eat those bad-faith edits for breakfast and would love to know how it’s done. HelenDegenerate (talk) 00:51, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

HelenDegenerate first of all, if it is a re- you could always respond on the original message on the talk. but, we don't put them for users, users put them up themselves. Lovin'Politics (talk) 01:21, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

@HelenDegenerate: - Welcome to the Teahouse. Editors can use {{uw-vandalism1}}, {{uw-vandalism2}}, {{uw-vandalism3}}, {{uw-vandalism4}} to give escalating warnings on a vandal's talk page. Click on each link for the details. GoingBatty (talk) 01:28, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

HelenDegenerate, if you are autoconfirmed (have at least 10 edits and your account is at least 4 days old), you will be able to use a tool called Twinkle. It has a functionality to revert noconstructive edits, warn users using the appropriate template (which you can select) and report persistent vandals and spammers for administrator attention after enough warnings. There is another tool called RedWarn which also offers similar functionality with a more modern interface. JavaHurricane 02:04, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

permission revoked?

Hi - I have just tried to edit Jay Inslee and I wasn't able to edit without pending reviews and I am an extended confirmed user Lovin'Politics (talk) 01:11, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

@Lovin'Politics: Welcome to the Teahouse! Click the lock at the top of the article, and you'll see the article is under pending changes protection. Scroll up and you'll see a table at Wikipedia:Protection_policy#Types_of_protection that show the differences between protection levels, and that all edits are reviewed when a page is under pending changes protection. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 01:31, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

GoingBatty but I am extended confirmed, I should be able to edit the article — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lovin'Politics (talk • contribs) 01:39, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

@Lovin'Politics: Please study the table at Wikipedia:Protection_policy#Types_of_protection. While extended confirmed editors can perform normal editing for articles with Semi-protection and Extended-confirmed protection, the instructions for Pending changes protection state "all users can edit. However, once an unregistered or new editor makes an edit, that edit and any subsequent edits by anyone will remain hidden from "readers" (users not logged in) until the edit made by the unregistered or new editor is reviewed by a pending changes reviewer or admin." GoingBatty (talk) 01:49, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Help to create a page?

Hello! Is there someone willing to create a page for me? I should not create the page myself. There seems to be a few forums but I cannot figure out how to use freenode #wikipedia-en-help

Is there a tutorial on how to use freenode?

Malchus Malchus Biblion (talk) 01:13, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

If you are "notable" (in Wikipedia's sense of the word), then people will want to create an article about you, even without any encouragement (let alone payment) from you. The huge majority of people are not "notable". I'm not. Chances are that you're not either, because, well, most people aren't. -- Hoary (talk) 01:46, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

@Malchus Biblion: Welcome to the Teahouse! Instructions for freenode #wikipedia-en-help ^connect are at Wikipedia:IRC/Tutorial and Wikipedia:IRC/wikipedia-en-help. However, the editors there will not create an article for you. They may suggest you use Wikipedia:Requested articles or that you contact a related WikiProject. Hope this helps! GoingBatty (talk) 01:53, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Question

Why this picture is linked to Washington station? Störm (talk) 03:15, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

@Störm: Welcome to the Teahouse! I don't see that picture linked to any Washington station article. Maybe it was vandalism that was reverted. Could you please specify which Washington station article you're referring to? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 03:29, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Fixing a spelling mistake/typo

Fixing a typo

I just created this account to mention a typo. On the page about "Venkateswara", I am pretty sure the fifth line under "Legend" reading: "Indra did not acknowledge Bhrigu's presence buy was busy in enjoying the dance of apsaras in heaven" has a typo on that "buy". The "y" should be a "t" I am assuming. Now someone can maybe do something about it I guess - I don't know how things work here. I'm just passing through for now. Thank You and all the best to everyone!

 Done Cmr08 (talk) 06:05, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Notability Criteria

Let me know what are the main notability criteria for a Mandir/Temple and Church? ProudMallu (📨│📝) 06:00, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

@ProudMallu: In general, if there aren’t specific guidelines for a category, and/or you have trouble finding notability criteria, you should just refer to the general notability guidelines WP:GNG. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 06:19, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

@ProudMallu: I think a church would fit under WP:NBUILD. --Wizzito (talk) 06:24, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

@ProudMallu: And you might also consider instead adding info here Hindu_temple#Regional_variations_in_Hindu_temples. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 06:28, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Timtempleton, Thank you so much for the information, friend. ProudMallu (📨│📝) 06:32, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

What to do when a lot of incorrect "facts" are found in an article?

Make a bunch of individual edits throughout the page? Write a separate section on that page in which I express the alternate interpretations of an expert or two and provide links to their books, etc? Create (or 'correct" already existing) articles on those expert heroes of mine in which I write about their views on the aforementioned issues? Gasp ... Bring it to the attention of a moderator on a special page set up for that sort of thing? Thanks. (PS Am I supposed to sign with tildes here??? -- Kisevalter ... Was ... Nash) Kisevalter Was Nash (talk) 06:39, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Correct or remove it. Remember to cite an WP:RS. Firestar464 (talk) 06:43, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Kisevalter Was Nash. It's difficult to answer a general question like this, becuase so much may depend on the particular circumstances of that article. It sounds to me as if you're talking about a case where there are significantly different views of the subject in different publications. Wikipedia expects that all significant views in reliable sources will be summarised in an article, but whether differences of opinion should be mentioned throughout the article or collected in one section will depend on many things. If one of the interpretations is a fringe view, then it should get at most a short paragraph, and often no more than a mention. If (as sounds probable here) there is likely to be controversy from Wikipedia editors about the different views, then you shouldl certainly discuss is on the article's talk page before making any edits. See WP:BRD --ColinFine (talk) 12:25, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Will this make it to Wiki?

I have a draft of my very first entry for Wikipedia in my Sandbox.

I would like to know if the entry can make it into Wikipedia provided I complete the draft to the standard (add more links to references, ...)

Thank you very much,

Helena Helenaachillesova (talk) 06:45, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

You seem to be asking "If my draft meets your standards, will it meet your standards?" Well, yes. If you're asking "Does my draft look as if it will meet your standards?", then the answer is no. The "references" (which are only nebulously described) are, I'd guess, by your biographee. But what Wikipedia needs are sources about him written by people who were/are independent of him. Please see Wikipedia:Notability (people). -- Hoary (talk) 07:04, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Deleted history

Hello, how can I get the deletion history of Aswathy Sreekanth? ProudMallu (📨│📝) 06:50, 19 March 2021 (UTC) ProudMallu (📨│📝) 06:50, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Check the log. Firestar464 (talk) 06:53, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Not a deletion history, but please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aswathy Sreekanth. -- Hoary (talk) 07:06, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

What if no one responds on the talk page?

Hello. I think I understand talk page etiquette reasonably well, and I'm familiar with the ordinary sequence of Edit-Revert-Discuss-Edit that tends to occur on Wikipedia. But what if you try to discuss an edit, and no one responds?

In my particular case I had an edit reverted, and I tried to argue my case both before and after the edit on the article's talk page, but no one ever responded. I linked the reverting editor in my comments, so I assume they would be notified, and an admin adjusted the style of my post, so I know they saw it, but there have been no responses although it's been two months since my original post, and 11 days since my most recent one.

What can I do? I don't want to get into an edit war with the person who reverted my edit, but if they refuse to discuss, and I think my edit is correct, then what other avenues are available to me?

If you would like to see the specifics, I am referring to the Mughal Empire talk page.

Thank you. Shmarrighan (talk) 07:10, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi Shmarrighan. All editors are WP:VOLUNTEERs which means when and how much they edit is completely up to them. You can't make another editor discuss things if they're not interested in doing so, but some editors might not be watching every page they edit or may have set their user preferences to not receive pings; so, you can try leaving a friendly message or a Template:Please see on the other editor's talk page just on the chance that they might've not noticed your message. If they still don't respond after that, you can try leaving a message on one of the WikiProject talk page listed at the top of the article's talk page or one of the other things listed in WP:CONTENTDISPUTE to see if you can get others to respond. For reference, the log entry for that particular article shows that it's been protected multiple times up to 2013 due to disruptive editing and other problems. Sometimes when that happens those monitoring the article can get a little burned out from constantly be on the watch for vandalism, etc.; so, they might be a little skeptical of a new or newish editor showing up and proposing major changes on the article's talk page. I don't think you did anything wrong by posting on the article's talk page, but a personal message on the other editors' user talk pages letting them know you're interested in genuine discussion regardless of the result (not simply saying you're right) might help get things going. -- Marchjuly (talk) 09:02, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Shmarrighan, WP:APPNOTE can possibly be of help. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:36, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Publishing a new entry

DraftI have a draft biographival entry that I would like to publish, but I am stuck as to next steps and I am somewwhat confused by Help Topics? I would appreciate any assistance that can be offered to a newbie. Thank you in advance. Jax Jaxsydney (talk) 07:16, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

You have been editing User:203.220.198.106/sandbox. This has no references, and therefore is unpublishable. Please read Wikipedia:Verifiability. Incidentally, I notice near the foot what I suppose is a memo to yourself: "CV Dad???". If this is a biography of your father, grandfather, or another relative, then you have a conflict of interest. Please read Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. -- Hoary (talk) 07:42, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Is it necessary to have a same username and the name of the article being written

 K. Lillrud (talk) 07:26, 19 March 2021 (UTC) Is it necessary to have a same username and the name of the article being written

@K. Lillurd: An IP, which I assume is you, asked this question earlier and was answered. See Wikipedia:Teahouse#User_name. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 07:32, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

WP allows to use emojis ?

I want to ask , Is WP allow it on talk page or user page discussion, communication.In the articles. Research Voltas (talk) 08:17, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

@Research Voltas: It is allowed on talk pages and user talk pages. It may not be a good idea to use too many emojis since they can make a text harder to read, and they might not display for all people, but it is not forbidden (and definitely not vandalism). In articles, emojis should only be used if they fill an informational purpose, and they almost never do. More info here. --bonadea contributions talk 08:36, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

I don't think emojis should be added to an article unless doing so has encyclopedic value (e.g. showing an example of an emoji in an article about emoji like is done in Emoji). They can be used in talk page discussions, but whether they should be used might depend upon the context of the discussion. Moreover, excessively or inappropriately using them might not be seen as being helpful by some others involved in the discussion. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:40, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Yesterday I stumbled on i-D... Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:57, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Deletion discussion

Can I get the deletion discussion page of Dev Mohan? Thanks in advance. ProudMallu (📨│📝) 09:08, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello ProudMallu, you can find the first AfD for the article here :-) Pahunkat (talk) 09:12, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Draft delete

How to delete a draft by a non author of the draft page? I only know Db-g7, which is used by authors only. ProudMallu (📨│📝) 09:30, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

ProudMallu You may use any of the relevant speedy deletion criteria. If you just want to delete it just because, it's not necessary as drafts are deleted after six months of inactivity. If you feel that there is a reason to delete it that is not one of the speedy deletion criteria, you may start a discussion at Miscellany for deletion. 331dot (talk) 09:34, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi ProudMallu. The Criteria for speedy deletion are generally strictly construed, and require some study to see whether they apply (I say this because it happens a lot: don't just read the summaries but the criteria themselves, setting out the actual coverage details). Generally speaking, for drafts, the criteria that might apply would be CSD G11 (blatant advertising, requiring fundamental rewrite); CSD G11 (unambiguous copyright violation, with no prior version to revert to [you might check out this guide]) and of course CSD G13, referred to in the post above, which only applies after six months of inactivity.

There are a few other criteria that could potentially be applicable (e.g., G3, G5 and G10), but they're not nearly as common. As to MfD, it is rare that using up community resources on discussion of a draft that meets no CSD is warranted, where they are going to be deleted under G13 in the normal course anyway. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 10:53, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi, how can I delete a draft page? I'm am not the creator of that draft. But the creator is not edited the page after July 2020. Like Db-g7, is there is any templete to delete the draft ? ProudMallu (📨│📝) 12:40, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Why does its existence concern you, ProudMallu? -- Hoary (talk) 12:44, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Moved up in the page, ProudMallu, because there's no reason to start a second thread on the same subject. -- Hoary (talk) 12:46, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

How can I create an article?

So, I saw that there was a new creepypasta around called Crow 64 (It is a very good one too). It has gotten some media coverage, and it even has a community dedicated to it. Plus, the source code was just released for it. I wanna create an article about this recent creepypasta, so how can I make one? Blue Jay (talk) 10:03, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi Blue Jay.

• See generally Help:Your first article. Then:

1. compile a list of reliable, secondary, independent sources that treat the topic in substantive detailTemplate:Z21 (think at least two to three paragraphs dedicated to the topic), to see whether it is actually notable, as we use that concept here;
2. if you can't make that list with at least three entries, with different content from one another, write nothing;
3. if you can, visit the Wikipedia:Article wizard and follow the prompts to create a draft;
4. write only what the sources you've compiled first verify (without copying the words used); and
5. cite those verifying sources as you write, which will also demonstrate the topic's notability.

Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit Kind regards, (talk) 11:14, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Vaibhav Maloo

Hi, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Vaibhav_Maloo is pending approval since months, how can I get a conclusion for this page? Nuttyprofessor2016 (talk) 12:15, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi Nuttyprofessor2016. It has been a long time, but you can only wait. As it says on the [fourth] submission template: "please be patient. This may take 4 months or more..." Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:27, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

P.S.. In the meantime, you can improve the submission's odds of being accepted by transforming the naked urls into transparently attributed citations, and better attribute the ones that aren't just urls, but provide little detail.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:38, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Nuttyprofessor2016, check in the template where it says "Improving your odds of a speedy review". Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:31, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Your request sets me off on a little exploration that somehow leads me to wonder how his father, Vinay Maloo, meets WP:PERSON. -- Hoary (talk) 12:34, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång: Not that I'm saying it doesn't, but I have always wondered if adding some wikiproject tags to the talk page really has much of an affect at speeding up reviews. It would be interesting to study whether it does often. I am skeptical; a significant overlap between AfC reviewers and Wikiproject participants would be a condition precedent, and then those AfC participants would have to associate their AfC activities with their Wikiprojects in a very deliberate manner.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:38, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

I'm hopeful, I remember a soccer-player being wikiproject-tagged and it was done in hours. The tagging may of course have been unrelated, but as I understand it, it increases the chance that a topic-interested editor may notice it. You may not win, but the investment is cheap. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:44, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Honestly, the best way to get my attention on a draft would be to not include any references, because I always knock those out first (as it gets flagged as such in big red letters). Totally not recommending it, as it leads to an automatic decline, but it does greatly improve your chances of getting reviewed faster! :) Thanks, EDG 543 ^{(message me)} 12:57, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Ha! Very true--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:11, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Someone submitted my talkpage for Afc recently, that was also dealt with very quickly. A little insulting, perhaps. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:39, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

The draft title was salted back in October, so will require an admin to review. Theroadislong (talk) 13:55, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

How can I confirm that my article has been received?

When I visit the page I created a month ago, I see a box to "submit your draft for review" as opposed to a message that says my entry to under review (or something along those lines). How can I tell if it is being reviewed? Also, I added a photo to my entry but I don't see it on the page.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Vegan4theAnimals/sandbox&action=edit&section=1 Vegan4theAnimals (talk) 12:58, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi Vegan4theAnimals. Assuming this is about Draft:Tamerlaine Sanctuary and Preserve, it was not submitted. On February 9, a user removed the AfC submission template (for reasons unknown). I have returned it so you can now click the submission button. However, note the comment in the draft "this will need re-writing in a dry neutral, encyclopaedic tone before being submitted for review". Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:24, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

What is overlinking?

I want to know what overlinking is, since I heard it in edits reverted by users. -  Joshua's Number9 (talk) 13:06, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi Joshua's Number9. See WP:Overlinking. Here's a tip for finding relevant policies, procedures and guidelines, and most anything else you hear mentioned by regular editors, or come across in Wikipedia's interface. Type "WP: (an easier-to-type alias of "Wikipedia:") into the search box, followed by the word or phrase you heard (in this case "Overlinking"). Most of the time, this will quickly locate a targeted, behind-the-scenes information/help page, or how-to guide. See more at Help:WP search protocol.Template:Z202 Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:26, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks! -  Joshua's Number9 (talk) 13:06, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Kishor salvi

Actor — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kishor salvi 6 (talk • contribs) 13:30, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Kishor salvi 6, hello, friend! You are going to need to specify what you want. Did you have a question? If you desire to make an article about said actor, I wouldn't recommend it. Your username indicates that you are the actor, which would give you a conflict of interest. You can request that another editor create this article here if you'd like. If this actor is truly notable, an article will undoubtedly be created in the future. If you meant something else, please elaborate. Thanks, EDG 543 ^{(message me)} 14:24, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Account Deletion

I want to delete my Wikipedia account! How can I? ProudMallu (📨│📝) 14:02, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

ProudMallu, it's sad to see an editor with as many helpful contributions as yourself go. There is no way to "delete" your account. Typically, you can just abandon the account, maybe place a {{retired}} tag on your user page and talk page to alert other editors to your retirement. You can request a Courtesy vanishing, which involves your username being changed to something random and your user pages and subpages being deleted. Thanks, EDG 543 ^{(message me)} 14:30, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

You can't, really, but see WP:VANISH. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:31, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Help with Draft:Sima Ladjevardian

Recently, I attempted to develop a wikipedia article for a local philanthropist, activist, and political candidate. After several redesigns of the site, I ran into an assortment of criticisms that I'm having trouble addressing.

Initially, the article was criticized for lack of significant coverage. Since then, 34 references have been added detailing my subject's participation in philanthropy and politics over the last fifteen years. These include links to the Houston Chronicle, Texas Tribune, and the Washington Post. Several of these articles are full profiles on the subject, during her Congressional campaign and in her philanthropic endeavors. At this point, I'm not sure how to add more independent, reliable, published sources that the admins will consider valid. These repeated requests seem far in excess of what I've seen for other individual articles, and so I'm having trouble identifying the baseline standard I'm expected to meet.

More recently, an admin suggested the article be submitted as a subsection of 2020 United States House of Representatives elections in Texas. So I'm curious to know if including the subject's fund raising and philanthropic efforts are appropriate in this context. The subject has enjoyed a substantive role in Houston prior to her candidate run and I'd like a space to include that information. Zifnab25 (talk) 14:11, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy Draft:Sima Ladjevardian declined three times, mostly because she ran for Congress and lost.Reviewers have left comments. In my opinion, nothing she has done prior to or after running for Congress makes her notable. David notMD (talk) 15:13, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Talk for "Sachsenhausen concentration camp" page

I am looking to improve the page on Sachsenhausen concentration camp, which currently has little information about the development of the camp in the pre-War and early War years. In preparation, I have tried to find the "Talk" about the article. The first Talk archive (Talk:Sachsenhausen_concentration_camp/Archive_1) covers the years 2006 to 2009. Changing the address to Archive_2 or _3 finds nothing. The current Talk page is rather unhelpful, consisting mainly of a long piece, which may or may not be a response to an earlier post, and that is dated August 2018. A possibly related aspect is that the List of prisoners of Sachsenhausen was separated out of the main page in August 2018. Is there any way of accessing the Talk posts of 2009 to 2018?

The page on KZ Sachsenhausen in German Wikipedia gives more extensive coverage to the earlier years of the camp and is better structured than the English page. While much of the material that I would add will be taken from primary sources (hopefully to allow the "Needs references" flag to be removed!), it may be helpful to take information from the German page. Are there any guidelines on the etiquette of "borrowing" material from corresponding Wikipedia pages in another language? Douglian30 (talk) 14:12, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Douglian30! You can copy Wikipedia between languages. Make sure to check out Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia to find out how to give proper credit where credit is due (it is required). Thanks, EDG 543 ^{(message me)} 14:39, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Douglian30, and welcome to the Teahouse. Actually, Talk:Sachsenhausen concentration camp/Archive 1 goes up to 2016: for some reason the 2009 posting Talk:Sachsenhausen concentration camp/Archive 1#Were there gas chambers at Sachsenhausen? was missed when the archive was first created in 2018, and the bot added it on the end in 2020. All the 2017 posts were manually removed in this edit, with the edit summary "delete anonymous discussion breaching Talk policy"; but like everything else that has ever been on the talk page, they are accessible in its history.

For translating a portion from the German: as EDG says, you can do that as long as you attribute it. WP:Translation is helpful. Note that you cannot cite a Wikipedia article as a source, but you can cite the sources cited in the German article (as long as they meet English Wikipedia's criteria for reliable sources) - foreign language sources are acceptable if there is no good English source. Your reference to "primary sources" is a little concerning: you may mean something different from what Wikipedia means by primary sources; but if not, be aware that such sources can only be cited sparingly. --ColinFine (talk) 16:34, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Many thanks, both. The archival Talk confirms the risks associated with the Sachsenhausen page, but we owe it to those who suffered to record the facts as best we can. Using "primary source", I was referring to published eyewitness accounts, equating these to journal articles (the primary literature), followed by abstracts (secondary services) and reviews (tertiary literature). These definitions probably vary by subject area and context (food composition took the biscuit here, inverting the national food composition tables to be the primary source and the source of their data to be the secondary source!), but published descriptions of events might be considered a preferred source, as thereafter selection and subjectivity intrude (as indeed they do in writing a Wikipedia page, which is why collaborative editing is important). Douglian30 (talk) 18:05, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Regarding Draft:Joy Corrigan

Hi, a draft I recently submitted to AfC was reviewed by Robert McClenon. His comments suggested that I take the issues with the draft and relevent COI disclosures to the Teahouse. Here are a couple of issues that I've addressed on the Draft talk:Joy Corrigan in response to the review comments:

1. Discrepancy in Corrigan's date of birth: her date of birth on the List of Playboy Playmates of 2017 is 16 January 1988 with a 'citation needed' tag; however, her actual date of birth is 16 January 1995 as mentioned here and here. There are several articles cited in the draft that mention her age to be 25 (written before her birthday this year). I was hoping that her birth year would be fixed on the 2017 Playmates page once her biography page has been published.
2. Her notability: I believe her notability was checked as an actor - I could be wrong about this, the reviewer would know better. But, she is primarily a fashion model who has also played minor roles. Shouldn't her notability be, then, assessed as a model?
3. The COI disclosure: the page has been tagged with COI; however, I had already added a disclosure on the talk page of the draft and my user page. Is there something else that needs to be done?

Please advise on how to proceed and if there's something else I need to do to resolve the issues. Much appreciated! Hillster (talk) 14:47, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

I welcome the opinions of other editors as to whether she satisfies general notability or modeling notability. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:09, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

A user is harrassing me

Hi , a user from India. harrassing me , asking questions , writing on my talk page.Anathor user from same area nominating my articles for deletion just to harasse me.And asking questions , If you're from America ,Why your editing articles about India.WP is globel website.How can they question me ,why I'm editing about this.I just warn him once because he's using Malyalam language on WP. B'cause it is Eng project.From that point he's coming on my talk page and asking and writing questions.The user is User :AARYA SAJAYAN and User: kashmorwiki . He's vandalising. They're doing editing war.Research Voltas (talk) 14:56, 19 March 2021 (UTC) Research Voltas (talk) 14:56, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Two users from India trolling me.Beacuse I warned one of them for increasing his edits by wrong means.And other one is disrupting new article Nahata college by pasting Speedy deletion temple.The article have sources but they're trolling and harrassing me.I want to delete their messages from my talk page and block them from editing my talk page. Research Voltas (talk) 15:01, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

You can remove any message from your talk page. Ruslik_Zero 15:31, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

The Kahata College article was nominated for deletion at AfD, not Speedy Deletion. You improperly removed the AfD template and it was restored. You can participate at AfD, and also attempt to improve the article. David notMD (talk) 15:35, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

I think Research Voltas, do not know what is vandism. The user is simply accusing me for vandalism. Moreover, I am a rollbacker who fights vandalism. It would be better, if someone teach this user what vandalism is. Regards. Kichu🐘 ^{Need any help?} 15:45, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

AARYA SAJAYAN, she doesn't obey Wikipedia rules. Admin need to block her. That's for sure. And you, Research Voltas is not from United States. Firstly, your English proves that. Secondly, this one, you stated there you wishes to visit England as well as United States. Shame on you. Kichu is doing his duties very well. 223.228.158.168 (talk) 15:53, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

@223.228.158.168:, someone not having as good a grasp of the English language as others doesn't at all mean that they aren't from the US. That doesn't even make sense. And the "incriminating" evidence you provided states that he wishes to go to New York, a single state, not the country as a whole. I live in the US, but, believe it or not, I have never visited New York, either. These attacks need to stop, regardless of what is going on. Thanks, EDG 543 ^{(message me)} 17:01, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

AARYA SAJAYAN was blocked once. But Me and Oshwah talked about our policies and guidelines to her, and was given a second chance by Oshwah itself. She is doing well after that Kichu🐘 ^{Need any help?} 16:01, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

223.228.158.168 your language is so offensive. WP don't allow use of foul language against our editors. I suggest experienced admin to block all these editors. Some of them today threat me because I warned him not use Malyalam from since he and he's friend. Started writhing on my talk page.I suggest strong actions against them Research Voltas (talk) 16:14, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

[5] is this what you call vandalism. A user apologising to you for being uncivil in your talk page.? And Aarya has been never warned by any user for vandalism. Same in my case also. I have nothing more to say. I am assuming good faith here and I would like to thankyou for wasting my time. I have other works to do here. Regards. Kichu🐘 ^{Need any help?} 16:54, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Not sure if this situation would be considered a conflict of interest

Hi; I'm extremely new to editing on Wikipedia; this would be my very first article published. To start, I recently noticed that there wasn't very much information on the topic of Minecraft anarchy servers. There is a page for Minecraft servers as a whole; and on that page they list some notable servers, including one anarchy server, 2b2t. The 2b2t article is excellent; it does a really good job of covering 2b2t in detail. However there are other notable anarchy servers, and semi-anarchy servers, and I think having a page on the genre as a whole would be helpful.

Here is the potential issue: I play on some of these servers pretty regularly. I'm not a member of staff on any servers, or anything like that; but I prefer some of the servers to others. So my question is, if I keep the article descriptive, and list all the notable servers I can think of, would this still be considered a conflict of interest? I've got a draft article submitted for review currently, here-> Draft:Minecraft_Anarchy_Servers, but I would like to improve that while it's pending review, so any and all suggestions are appreciated! Thanks, User: Its_choosday_innit Its choosday innit (talk) 16:20, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

@Its choosday innit Fandoms are not reliable sources as they are community written. Please see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources#Questionable_and_self-published_sources. I do not believe this subject to be notable enough for it's own article unless you can find reliable sources from independent news sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gandalf the Groovy (talk • contribs) 16:34, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi there, Its choosday innit, and welcome to the Teahouse. This isn't a conflict of interest (though of course be sure to write from a neutral point of view), and the fact that you're so conscientious of this leads me to believe you'll do a fine job of staying neutral. As far as the draft itself goes, I actually think its overall header structure is good (though it would need a lead section), which is important as essentially the skeleton of the article. I say that, because looking at the header names, these would all be subjects that I – a generic reader – would want to learn about. I found this draft to be an interesting read. It may be worth it to go into the history of prominent servers, but I recognize that might be a whole can of worms.

Where issues start to arise, however, are in the sourcing and in the prose. Use of primary sources is allowed and is often very useful, but the general notability guideline makes sure that each Wikipedia article contains substantial coverage from independent, reliable sources. This does not include user-generated content such as other Wikipedia articles or Fandom articles. This draft in its current state just doesn't have that sort of reliable, independent sourcing, mostly because I'm just not sure it even exists. Moreover, I'm not sure how this draft could distinguish itself from 2b2t given the state of reliable sources' coverage of anarchy servers, as they seem to focus pretty much exclusively on 2b2t. Sadly, I think this draft is between a rock and a hard place, wherein it needs to create an article within the framework of coverage from reliable sources, but most of those reliable sources are focused around 2b2t, the subject of an existing article. Essentially, it either wouldn't be sourced to Wikipedia's standards or it would just become something akin to a fork of 2b2t. That said, I don't want to let this discourage you; none of this reflects on you as an editor. It just means it might be WP:TOOSOON to create an article about this specific subject until reliable sources start covering other anarchy and semi-anarchy servers other than 2b2t. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 16:47, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Thank you both for your advice! Would articles like this be better sources? They're listings of popular servers, so they aren't written exclusively about the servers mentioned in the draft; however some of those servers are on their list, so they do get described briefly. Gamespur article RockPaperShotgun Article If not, no worries! I can keep looking for better coverage of the topic. Thanks again for your help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Its choosday innit (talk • contribs) 17:05, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Its choosday innit, Hello! If you don't mind I could redirect you to another area; you can visit WP:VG/RS where there is a list of reliable, unreliable, and related sources that specify in video games. You an also get some additional advice from other people in this field at WT:VG, and join their Wikiproject. Panini^🥪 17:39, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Tysm User:Panini! That is super helpful; I have asked my question about additional sources on their advice page here-> video game advice-forum post, and I will check out that list of sources you posted! Thanks again to everyone who's made suggestions! Its choosday innit (talk) 18:58, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

How can I make an article?

hi. How to make an article on wikipedia? Editor1234567891011121314151617 (talk) 16:44, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

If you go here you will find instructions on how to create an article. Polyamorph (talk) 16:49, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

See also, this helpful guide. Polyamorph (talk) 16:52, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi Editor1234567891011121314151617.

• As noted above, see generally Help:Your first article. Then:

1. compile a list of reliable, secondary, independent sources that treat the topic in substantive detailTemplate:Z21 (think at least two to three paragraphs dedicated to the topic), to see whether it is actually notable, as we use that concept here;
2. if you can't make that list with at least three entries, with different content from one another, write nothing – no article is seemingly possible on whatever the topic is, at this time, because it hasn't been the subject of sufficient independent publication by the wider world – and you will be wasting your time; no amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability;
3. if you can, visit the Wikipedia:Article wizard (also linked above) and follow the prompts to create a draft;
4. write only what the sources you've compiled first verify (without copying the words used); and
5. cite those verifying sources as you write, which will also demonstrate the topic's notability.

Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:21, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Editor1234567891011121314151617 So far, your one article edit has been reverted by an automated program as probable vandalism (it was), and your attempt at a draft Draft:WikiGame should be Speedy Deleted as never-going-to-be-an-article. I suggest you complete the tutorial, and then decide whether you want to contribute to the encyclopedia or not. David notMD (talk) 18:19, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Where can I write to request page deletion?

NOTE: When replying to me, please add {{Re|GOLDIEM J}} to notify me.

I recently reverted an unconstructive edit, and created user:72.238.60.119/talk while misjudging the text format for a talk page title. Is there a specific space I can request this be deleted, please? Thank you. GOLDIEM J (talk) 17:55, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Looking for feedback on my draft

I recently created the draft Draft:Circle of Hope Girls Ranch. I believe that it qualifies for notability because it has been covered in multiple news sources (Kansas City Star, NBC News, CNN) and because a Missouri House bill was created based on the controversy and closure of the school. This is my first time creating an article, so please go easy on me, I'm trying my best. Thank you! :) --Wizzito (talk) 18:00, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Wizzito, from just the quick glance I gave it, I notice that the article is about the school itself, yet solely focuses on the controversy, closure, aftermath, etc. I would suggest adding some details about the school itself prior to the closure. Thanks, EDG 543 ^{(message me)} 18:08, 19 March 2021 (UTC)