Wikipedia:Teahouse

Melecie, 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

Question about sources

Moved to Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard § Are Astrodatabank, TV Guide, Ranker.com, Google Arts & Culture reliable?

Adding a tempate to an existing page

I have created a template to add a football conference to this page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1968_NAIA_football_season) and populated it with the relevant information.

I do not know how to add it, though.

It would be nice to see the template and page in preview first. Is that possible?

Can you help?

Thank you very much.

Bob Jones 75.164.176.76 (talk) 21:53, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi Bob! You haven't created the template with this IP address. What is the name of the template? GoingBatty (talk) 22:01, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

The template, which I made by copying an existing template in overwriting it with new information, exists only on my computer. I have NO idea how to get it into the encyclopedia. The name of the template is: 1968 Northwest Conference football standings.

Thank you very much.

75.164.176.76 (talk) 20:42, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Bob, in order to create a template and have it on Wikipedia, you first need to create a Wikipedia account. Once you've done that, type in the desired name of your template, and you'll be told that no such template exists. Follow the instructions from there. DS (talk) 02:00, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Just a question ;)

Just asking, how often are unblock requests accepted (on average)? Thingy-1234 (talk | contribs) 18:35, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Thingy-1234 It depends entirely on the content of the unblock request, WP:GAB contains information on what administrators are looking for. If an editor can show that they understand why they've been blocked and explains that they know what to do to avoid repeating the same issues in the future then the chance of being unblocked is fairly good. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 18:42, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Yes, I know, I'm just asking for the average rate. ;) Thingy-1234 (talk | contribs) 18:43, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Thingy-1234 I don't think they publish numbers anywhere (it might be in a database report somewhere) but you can sort the block log by "Unblock" to get an idea of how many unblocks are processed Unblock log. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 18:46, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, I've checked it. Though not all unblocks are ecause of unblock requests... Anyway, I'd say it's about like 15-35%, like some vandals put in an unblock request on their talk page because they want to continue vandalizing Wikipedia and they put in some rubbish excuse ('My hand was on my keyboard it was an accident') or something like that, so it's fairly low (also I've checked some blocked user pages and most of them are declined). The unblock log is helpful though, (you can look at the dates :D) Thingy-1234 (talk | contribs) 18:52, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

"It was my brother." is a classic faux explanation. Surprisingly, few unblock request blame a sister. David notMD (talk) 22:15, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

@David notMD: The "maleness" of Wikipedia:My little brother did it—and of the suspected identity of vandals after viewing many of them acting out and making unblock request and the like—never struck me before until your post. (My gut tells me, though, its reflecting an underlying truth.) Certainly it would be very difficult to get data, and even moreso, hard data, as opposed to, say, something anecdotal like surveying a statistically significant number of vandals to see how many use male pronouns versus female pronouns to refer to themselves, if at all, but it would be fascinating to compare how often vandals are male versus female. I am betting it's a really high disparity (i.e., significantly higher than the baseline disparity of male versus female editors).--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:34, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

@Fuhghettaboutit: long-term vandals maybe, but I'd think our vandal-base is actually more gender-neutral. Dunno, just think it'd be similar to our reader-base than our editor-base. Elli (talk | contribs) 08:31, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

@Fuhghettaboutit:@Elli: According to several years of data from https://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/crime/ucr.asp?table_in=1&selYrs=2019&rdoGroups=3&rdoData=c actual U.S. arrests for vandalism are 21-23% female (higher than I expected). David notMD (talk) 11:40, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

@David notMD: Interesting! Thanks for finding that. I'm not sure real world vandalism and vandalism here correlate highly but at least it's hard data point, with everything I've said just musing.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:49, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Is Soroka good enough to GA?

I have recently improved the Mike Soroka article after some small consultation at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Baseball#Soroka, in hopes of it become a Good Article. Is it up to scratch yet? NotReallySoroka (talk) (formerly DePlume) 16:24, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi NotReallySoroka. The article does not have a manual-of-style-compliant lead section. The lead section should provide a "concise overview of the article's topic"; "summarize the most important points" in the body, etc. Here the lead does not provide a real overview; this is too concise. I would expect the lead here to be a minmum of two paragraphs providing a canonical overview. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section (WP:LEAD). This is just what struck me immediately. I did not check for other issues. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 16:45, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi, NotReallySoroka, and welcome to the Teahouse. To add to what Fuhghettaboutit said, it seems like Go Phightins!, who you were speaking to in the linked conversation, would be exceedingly qualified to answer this question, as what constitutes a "good" article is heavily reliant on the sort of subject matter, and Phightins!, having created a featured article and over two dozen good articles on baseball etc., has a fantastic understanding of what a good baseball-related article should look like. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 16:49, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

TheTechnician27 I have pinged him, but unfortunately he doesn't seem to respond. NotReallySoroka (talk) (formerly DePlume) 00:19, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

A pointer please?

Hello, I've read a few guides and looked at the gargantuan training menu. I'd like a way of finding things. For example if I want see all the WP abbreviations - having just run into WP:SYNTH, What's the quickest way to find all the technical help?

Thanks - great tea by the way! Thelisteninghand (talk) 20:33, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Copy and paste this onto your user page: {{Wikipedia policies and guidelines|state=collapsed}}. It's a collapsed box containing many links to policies and guidelines. It will look like this when you do.

Heiro 20:43, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

This: Wikipedia:Wikipedia abbreviations is a list of abbreviations on Wikipedia. You can also add that to your userpage as a way to keep it handy when you want to look something up.Heiro 20:47, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

I'm not the OP but thanks, these are very helpful. PrincessPersnickety (talk) 20:54, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

No problem. It's also easy to create your own collapsed boxes for organizing and minimizing various sorts of information like that. As I did here, as an example User:Heironymous Rowe/Useful books and their citations Heiro 20:59, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

The WP:Shortcut index is also quite a good reference for looking these up, but it is an enormous page. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 21:02, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for this one too. I do struggle to find things in WP sometimes, even when I know what I'm looking for :) PrincessPersnickety (talk) 21:10, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

PrincessPersnickety I think a lot of us do. Probably quite a few of us end up making a page for ourselves where we write down things we think we'll want to refer to again (and either do or don't end up actually referring to them!). Mine, for example, is User:Mortee/Cheatsheet. I don't know if the quicklinks bit of that is the kind of thing Thelisteninghand was after, but anyone's welcome to crib it if it's of any value. › Mortee _talk 22:53, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks all, that's very helpful. What I really want is an animated paper clip.. "it looks like you're trying to edit Wikipedia.." I will have a go at dumping stuff on my user page - thanks!Thelisteninghand (talk) 13:38, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

WikiProject Rocketry

Wikipedia:WikiProject Rocketry became inactive earlier this month. I have revived it and marked it as semi-active. Why does it say"This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Rocketry, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.", when I alraedy revived it? 64.121.103.144 (talk) 00:14, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

The link you gave says that it is semi-active. Is there someplace else that is showing a different status? RudolfRed (talk) 02:10, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Articles that are part of it says that it is inactive. I just revived the project.

64.121.103.144 (talk) 15:23, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Stand-alone Bibliographies

I'm looking into possibly making a stand-alone article for a bibliography, which I've never done before. I came across Black theology and Bibliography of Black theology while working on Minjung theology and thought that it would be reasonable to make Draft:Bibliography of minjung theology. My question is whether or not Bibliography of Black theology currently meets the basic requirements of WP:BIBLIOGRAPHY, which is mentioned in WP:STANDALONE as a "Specialized list article"? Additionally, do you think a bibliography dedicated to Minjung theology would meet the necessary requirements? How specific does a work need to be, to be included in a bibliography and what are the requirements for a subject to be notable enough to warrant a bibliography? For instance, I was easily able to find twenty books written in English that include "Minjung theology" in the title of the work, but would a book that discusses Minjung theology that is dedicated to Christianity in Korea more broadly be acceptable in the list (perhaps under a separate section that makes note of this difference)? And is twenty sources enough or does it need to be forty; is there a specific number required? I'm sure I could also find sources in Korean to bolster the numbers and I've already come across quite a few papers written on the subject so I would think that it would have a similar amount of content to the bibliography dedicated to black theology. TipsyElephant (talk) 01:07, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

I would advise that if the bibliography signifigantly extends then it needs a standalone article. Thank you for asking. NightWolf1223 (talk) 01:10, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

@NightWolf1223: do you think it would be more appropriate to create an article called Draft:Bibliography of the minjung movement and create different sections dedicated to theology, art, politics, etc. It would be a broader topic. Also, I have an example that I'm unsure whether is is fit for the list. The exploration of the inner wounds--Han is dedicated to the topic of Han, but according to the chapter titles about 1/6th of the book is dedicated to how Han is used in Minjung theology. TipsyElephant (talk) 01:56, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

@TipsyElephant: First, there is no article named Minjung Movement, it is named just Minjung. Second, I would say it would depend on what books you want to use. Keep in mind that the books must improve the article. NightWolf1223 (talk) 12:40, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

@NightWolf1223: Oh, I think I misunderstood what the stand-alone bibliographies were. Do they have to have a corresponding article? Like can Bibliography of Black theology not exist without Black theology existing first? The minjung movement makes up the majority of the article on Minjung: Minjung#Minjung_movement. Would it be appropriate to make an article called Draft:Bibliography of Minjung? It seems like a weird name compared to Minjung theology, Minjung politics, Minjung Art, etc. It would literally translate as "Bibliography of the people". Perhaps Draft:Bibliography of Minjung ideologies is more appropriate, but again that doesn't have an article. Maybe Minjung is too broad of a topic? If I continue with Draft:Bibliography of minjung theology what do you think the cutoff would be for an appropriate number of sources? I can include Korean texts right? I haven't included anything written by the most well-known theologians in the movement so I'm sure I could find quite a few, but korean books are probably not the most helpful on the English Wikipedia. TipsyElephant (talk) 14:32, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

@NightWolf1223: are these journal entries on JSTOR and ProQuest pretty much all fair game for including in a bibliography? I've never used JSTOR, ProQuest, or journals even so I'm not sure whether there are specific rules on how to use them. TipsyElephant (talk) 15:18, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Feel free to ask the editors at Wikipedia:WikiProject Bibliographies.Moxy- 14:36, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

AfC question - IMDb and KZfaq referencing

Hi I am a new editor and I have completely gone through article creation and i am making an article about a short movie in my sandbox and i will later move it into mainspace when my account will be autoconfirmed. I have used "IMDb" and a cite known as "KZfaq" as citation. Will it be possible that my article will be created ? I have also provided IMDb external links and moreover, that short movie is listed on IMDb top rated indian short movies on 10th rank out of 250 movies with an IMDb rating of 10.0 and that list on IMDb is not user generated and neither IMDb ratings are user generated.[1] this is that list on IMDb you can check it from here. The movie's name is The "Testpaper". Please let me known that will my article be created as i am very anxious about that as it will be my first article. Sparklycryingbiscuit (talk) 02:45, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Unfortunately IMDb cannot be used due to WP:IMDb. Good luck, NotReallySoroka (talk) (formerly DePlume) 04:05, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Comments on your Talk page and at User:Sparklycryingbiscuit/sandbox are explicit that IMDb is not a reliable source reference. David notMD (talk) 10:34, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Citing own essay in XFD

Can I cite my own essay for XFD, provided that I do not treat it as a policy or guideline? Cheers, NotReallySoroka (talk) (formerly DePlume) 03:52, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

NotReallySoroka Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You can discuss anything you feel pertinent to the XFD as long as you are clear about what it is and understand that it will be weighed accordingly. 331dot (talk) 07:52, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

You absolutely can use an essay you wrote yourself to explain why you think something should be deleted/kept/merged, if you have a load of things with the same issue writing an essay is a good way to avoid having to repeat yourself over and over. The only advice I would give you though is to take it slow, quote the essay in a couple of nominations and see if it has widespread support before jumping into large numbers of nominations or votes. As a recent example, someone recently wrote an essay on why we should delete all redirects containing the phrase "complete list" then immediately nominated dozens of redirects containing the phrase at RFD. Once there they found that there was significant pushback related to the essay and a lot of the discussions were subsequently closed as keep, and another user subsequently wrote a counter essay arguing why some "Complete list" redirects are appropriate. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 15:08, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Hey, I remember that! :( Elli (talk | contribs) 21:07, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Elli Sorry, it was just the first example that came to mind. I did say that I agreed with the essay and voted to keep it at the MFD nomination! 86.23.109.101 (talk) 13:29, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

I have nominated one redirect for discussion, using my own essay as a reasoning among others. --NotReallySoroka (talk) (formerly DePlume) 00:22, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

NotReallySoroka Ok, just wait to see what kind of feedback other editors give and whether they agree with the essay or not, if feedback is positive then nominate some more, if people point out flaws or exceptions or generally disagree then go back to the drawing board and think about how you could rework it to address their concerns. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 13:29, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

On warning times

Hi again, how long should the time between warnings be? Am I allowed to give a second warning just after 5 minutes of the last when a user keeps disrupting, or should I wait for an hour to ensure they've likely read it? -Melecie- talk! 07:07, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

@MelecieDiancie: there is no rule on this - if they continue disruption you can quickly escalate. Elli (talk | contribs) 08:24, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Noted, thanks! -Melecie- talk! 08:41, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

ok to copy short description from wikidata on Anne Goldthwaite

the short description on Anne Goldthwaite wikidata is much more descriptive than our Anne Goldthwaite wikipedia page. is it ok to change from "American painter" to "american artist and advocate of women's and equal rights" Gi vi an (talk) 09:47, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

@Gi vi an, yes it is. Short descriptions should try to be at least a little bit descriptive, so changing it would be great. See Wikipedia:SHORTDESC for more information on short descriptions. — Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 10:03, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

My article's reviewer told me to come here for the new review

Hi all, I had a submission (my first!) submitted last early December and reviewed on the same day - and declined. I have since then considerably reviewed, restructured, added sources and shortened the article, carefully taking into account all comments made, and have been patiently waiting for a new review. Since then, nothing happened and my first reviewer, who "retired" since then, told me to come here. Can anyone help? The page is Draft:International_Association_of_Department_Stores Thank you! --Perchsquirell (talk) 09:48, 18 April 2021 (UTC) Perchsquirell (talk) 09:48, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Perchsquirell There are reviewers who keep an eye out for drafts that are at the long end of the to-be-reviewed pile, so all that can be said is be patient. It does look like you did a lot of work on the draft after the Declined. The second paragraph of History has no refs. David notMD (talk) 10:39, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Can't reset password, and password WIkipedia gave me doesn't work.

I tried logging into Wikipedia, reset my password and they gave me a temporary password, which doesn't work. I tried it multiple times but it just doesn't work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.170.201.172 (talk) 10:21, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Usernames and passwords are case sensitive. Do you enter them at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:UserLogin? Do you get "Incorrect username or password entered", or does something else happen? PrimeHunter (talk) 12:38, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

And please be advised that copying&pasting passwords from emails often leads to surrounding spaces/special chars to be copied as well, rendering the password invalid. Victor Schmidt (talk) 13:37, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

How do I add a link to a non displayed image that pops up when hovered over with the mouse cursor.

I want to add a link to a word in a Wiki page that will pop up a specific image contained on another Wiki page. So for instance I might have a sentence copntaining the words "Mona Lisa" and I want the user to be able to hover over that and for an image of the Mona Lisa (from a Wiki page) to pop up. I don't want to have to link to a whole Wiki page that contains the image, I just want the mentioned image to 'pop-up'. This is an example, not the actual image I want to link to. I have read all the help pages about images but don't see this usage illustrated - maybe it's not allowed ? Any help much appreciated. Ramses506 (talk) 12:35, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

As far as I am aware that is impossible based on how the popups work - you'd need to link to the image's page directly, and even then that will not provide only the image (though the additional info will not be present in popups as it's template-based). —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 12:40, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Mazu picture

Caption goes here.

Today I walked with Mazu in the pilgrimage in Dajia Taichung. I took pictures, can I post on Wikipedia? After, can I put pictures in English and Chinese page? Thank you for your time~ Also where is help desk at Chinese Wikipedia?

@Mazubobee: You may either upload on English Wikipedia or you may upload onto here. I apologize, but I don't know where the Chinese help desk is. Sorry, NightWolf1223 (talk) 13:01, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

It could be [2] Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:31, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you~ I uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. How do I add to page? Mazubobee (talk) 15:20, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

@Mazubobee: Can you please say which article you want it on and I will take care of it.NightWolf1223 (talk) 16:18, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy link: [3]

@Mazubobee: Those are some fantastic pictures! Actually, I've been wanting to write a specific article for the Mazu Pilgrimage, and I believe your pictures will come in handy. I've put one of your pictures here; to see how I did it, go into "edit source" and modify the markup you see there. You may also use VisualEditor, which inserts pictures like a Word document. If you do not want to put pictures on the right side, there's also the gallery format: see WP:GALLERY for help on those. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 03:24, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

how to be a host of a wikiproject

hi i am wondering how do i start a wiki project because i need some help creating a article Bak172 (talk) 15:56, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello Bak172 and welcome to Wikipedia. Creating a Project in order to get help with an article might not be the right way to do it - a Project usually deals with issues continuously. There are already plenty of projects on Wikipedia - some are active, some not, you can take a look at the list here - WP:PROJDIR. When you find the one that looks appropriate, you can file a request there or contact one or more members directly on their talk pages. You can also file a request at WP:EAR. Best,Less Unless (talk) 16:44, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Donald Trump fan fiction

Hello WikiPedia. I am wanted to make and article about Donald Trump and fan fiction. I fell that this would be a valuable edition to the encyclopsedia How do I make it then? 162.245.178.141 (talk) 16:24, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

You will need to make an account in order to make an article. Please see your first article for more details of what makes a good article. That said, this probably will not make it through articles for creation. NightWolf1223 (talk) 16:44, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

I started it at Draft:Donald Trump fanfiction. This is an important topic. 162.245.178.141 (talk)

That said, this probably will not make it through articles for creation -- I looked it up, and questionable as it is, this topic is unimpeachably notable. If AfC rejects this, that's a slight on AfC. I've made a list of sources at User:Vaticidalprophet/Donald Trump fanfiction for our anonymous friend, and it's not exhaustive -- see also this, for instance. Vaticidalprophet 16:49, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank 's you Wikimedia editor. I will use those sources for my new article..this is exciting making an article on WikiPedia. 16:51, 18 April 2021 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.245.178.141 (talk)

And good luck. This should certainly be a valid article, and thanks! There will be some people who will not like. Donald Trump is not very popular here, and people are tired of hearing about him. Maybe those people will succeed, you never know. You've chosen a fraught topic (and good for you, and thanks!) and on that account might get some opposition.

Make sure you describe the entity neutrally, without any judgement on your part about President Trump. Even if you want to say "This story glorified President Trump" you will need a source with someone else saying that -- not us, not matter how obvious it may seem. (It's probably OK to include a couple-few quotes from fanfic stories, as long as as they are representative of the the thrust of the story, and as long as you quote from a proportionally fair mix of pro/con stories (if there is any anti-Trump fanfic).

Godspeed, and call on me if you have further questions or if the article is attacked. Herostratus (talk) 17:06, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

OP, you could also consider including this at Donald Trump in popular culture somehow. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:10, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Learn how to reference properly. David notMD (talk) 18:56, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

I've slightly improved the draft, but even so, I suspect it's a better fit for Donald Trump in popular culture. I could certainly see an AfD succeeding on those terms. BrxBrx(talk)^{(please reply with {{SUBST:re|BrxBrx}})} 18:40, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Given the amount of pop-cult-RS on this (and has anyone checked JSTOR yet?), I'm starting to think this could be a decent spin-off article, a little like Saturday Night Live parodies of Donald Trump. However, I'm not very eager to read musings about Trump-on-Putin erotica. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:32, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Everytime I trying to Add Same topic External link

Everytime I trying to Add Same topic External link Your contributer removed....

I was trying to add link with same topic information but removed by your contributer or executive.

My sources is same topic where people get benefits also...

But may be here joined as editor or contributer hard to stay... Kareena2020 (talk) 18:18, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Kareena2020 is now indef blocked for multiple reasons. David notMD (talk) 19:06, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

one of them being, adding a link to a page of meaningless computer-generated text. Maproom (talk) 19:09, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

+/- numbers in edit history

Hello, I'm new-ish, just wondering what the + and - numbers in the edit history signify?

And also, should I create a user page?

Thanks! w Willyteatime (talk) 18:29, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

@Willyteatime: Yes, definitely create a userpage! And the + and - signify how many bytes you added or deleted in a page. Creamepuff 18:49, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

You're under no obligation to create a user page. Some editors have been working here for years without having one. But if you want one, by all means go ahead! Maproom (talk) 19:12, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

@Willyteatime: Just make sure you follow the guidelines listed at WP:USER.NightWolf1223 (talk) 21:13, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

I want to submit an article, but another one exists for this same individual in French

I am in the process of researching and writing a biography on J Alex Castonguay. He already has an article uploaded by another person, in French. How do I contribute my own separate article in English, with much more detail? PhotoGrandson (talk) 22:47, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi PhotoGrandson, welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia languages are edited independently. You are free to ignore fr:Joseph-Alexandre Castonguay. See Wikipedia:Articles for creation for how to create and submit a draft. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:32, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Help making article sound more encyclopedic?

Hello. I have written an article called Tamerlaine Sanctuary and Preserve. It's been rejected for sounding like an advertisement, or non-notable. I disclosed that I work there, and also the sanctuary received accreditation from Global Federation of Animal Sanctuaries, the most-respected level an animal sanctuary can reach. My first draft was, after I read the talk pages and help from other editors, definitely not dry enough and way too exuberant. (ie, read like advertising). However, I've whittled down to very encyclopedic info and I'm just not sure what else I can do. As for notability, in addition to the accreditation, we have a letter congratulating us on it from Senator Cory Booker, and a video on YouTube that our founder hosted alongside Senator Booker and other animal welfare activists. However, these seem like biased sources (Youtube, a personal letter) so I didn't include them. Should I have? Because we have only been around since 2013, and haven't had a media person during this time, we don't have a lot of press coverage. It gets worse. This is my first article and I royally messed up our photos. I included photos from our database assuming they were all ours, and apparently they are not. So they've been deleted and I'll have to fix that issue. But as for the article, I suspect the issue is just that I work there, because I noticed that many other articles about animal sanctuaries had fewer sources, or much, much, more descriptive histories and language. However, Wikipedia has the disclosure for this situation, so it seems that it's not disallowed? I warmly welcome any suggestions to improve my article. And I thank anyone who can help in advance, profusely. THANK YOU! If you have time and inclination, here is the article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Tamerlaine_Sanctuary_and_Preserve  Vegan4theAnimals (talk) 23:08, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Status: Declined 17 April and not yet resubmitted. Creator has not yet declared on own User page that this is PAID/COI. David notMD (talk) 00:03, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

@David notMD: I think there was an intended but slightly botched attempt to disclose here. I used that as justification for fixing it as a proper {{connected contributor (paid)}} template.

@Vegan4theAnimals: Your cooperation would be appreciated if you place the following code on your userpage (User:Vegan4theAnimals): {{paid|employer=Tamerlaine Sanctuary and Preserve}}. This will guarantee that you are in compliance with the mandatory paid editing disclosure policy. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 00:47, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

@Drm310: Thank you! I don't have a userpage just yet (I don't think? I will (try to) make one now. I appreciate this! Vegan4theAnimals (talk) 01:56, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

@Drm310: Thanks again. I fixed it. I hope? Vegan4theAnimals (talk) 02:28, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

@Vegan4theAnimals: You copied some extra code surrounding it, but I've removed it. It's now displaying properly, so all is good now. Thank you. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 02:30, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

@Drm310: Thank YOU. Fingers crossed. Vegan4theAnimals (talk) 02:33, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Consider submitting again. David notMD (talk) 09:27, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Capt. John C. Ainsworth

I (proudly) share his name, so please correct the middle name to read Commigers, NOT Commingers. My mother had to go back to city hall to get my name corrected on my birth certificate. Thanks, John Commigers Ainsworth (Jr.) It's a long story... 130.13.139.37 (talk) 23:10, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy: John C. Ainsworth. Problem is ref #4 spells it "Commingers" and no other ref provides a middle name. Needs a ref to support the proposed change. David notMD (talk) 00:06, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

How to breathe

 2603:6011:8D00:B870:B5D0:91D9:CD19:8572 (talk) 00:48, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

We cannot give medical advice. If you are having trouble breathing call a doctor. RudolfRed (talk) 01:59, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

In, out, in, out, in, out.... repeat as needed. David notMD (talk) 12:41, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

If Arbitration calls for prior proof of dispute resolution, can I use XfDs towards it?

If yes, how will a late contest be counted? Thanks, NotReallySoroka (talk) (formerly DePlume) 02:59, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello, NotReallySoroka. I suggest that you provide some specific context, and perhaps links to discussion of a specific dispute. Your current question is too vague to answer, at least for me. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:39, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

I would like to establish a precedent that no redirects of a certain type may be created. Can I use RfDs where those redirects are deleted to prove that Arbitration is the right path? NotReallySoroka (talk) (formerly DePlume) 06:04, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

@NotReallySoroka: this is absolutely not something you should take to ArbCom - if you believe it to be truly necessary, you should run it as an RfC, though I recommend against that too. Elli (talk | contribs) 06:15, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

NotReallySoroka Arbcom is a last resort option to deal with behavioural issues that the community is unable to deal with alone, think misuse of admin tools, long term tendentious editing in a topic area, off-wiki harassment campaigns, issues involving private information that cannot be released publicly on an administrators noticeboard etc. It is extremely rare for Arbcom to involve itself in content disputes, and even then it's restrained to things like "articles on topic X must use high quality scholarly literature as sources", they don't actually decree what is/isn't allowed to go in an article. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 13:37, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

See my response to the question you posted immediately below. -- Hoary (talk) 07:17, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Can disambiguation pages exist in my userspace?

 NotReallySoroka (talk) (formerly DePlume) 05:57, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Your miscellaneous pages (example User:NotReallySoroka/Fried), your many questions here, and your keenness to remind people of something or other that you did in relation (or not) to somebody named Soroka -- all of these add up to suggest to me that you're not really here to help improve an encyclopedia. So show me that I'm wrong: forget your userspace (other than to respond to any questions or similar posted to your talk page), and spend a week making substantial improvements to one or two existing articles. -- Hoary (talk) 07:14, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Hoary:

1. At least I am not intentionally vandalising the Encyclopaedia.
2. I have recently branched out to do RfDs too. Granted, I cite an essay with Fried as an example, but all these redirects have nothing to do with baseball, and I use my Essay to avoid repeating myself.
3. Most of my recent userspace edits are done to my Fried essay.
4. My reminding of others of Soroka are either my username, clear jokes outside mainspace, or advice-seeking on how to turn it into a WP:Good.

NotReallySoroka (talk) (formerly DePlume) 16:57, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

The hat shopping for both your main and alternate accounts say otherwise. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:18, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Beeblebrox This is not an appeal for your decision to withhold new page reviewer rights to me, but:

1. WP:RPC#Becoming a reviewer did not define "measurable track record" in terms of mainspace edits or duration of activity.
2. It makes sense for my alt account to be promoted to extended confirmed per the request for rights page, which states that the right "may be added to legitimate alternate accounts of users that already have this access."

NotReallySoroka (talk) (formerly DePlume) 18:36, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Well, I don't think any advanced permissions were intended for users who screw around more than they contribute, I don't know what your game is but you certainly don't seem focused on improving the encyclopedia. I'll give you a hint: having barely 100 article edits before you start asking for all sorts of advanced permissions is not a "measurable track record"it is more of a  Redflag. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:09, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Unblock

I was blocked few years ago, i requested for unblocking many times, they asked me few question, which i answered, but they say you are not answering what we are asking, i guess i dont understand their question. is there anyway they ask me in simple english, as i am not native english speaker, i wish to be a good editor, i feel there was some misunderstanding in blocking me my user name is aftabbanoori. . 39.41.112.211 (talk) 06:14, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello IP user. I have checked aftabbanoori (talk · contribs) and the only recourse for you is go to WP:UTRS. I am not the admin, but I think the question posed to you is simple and quite clear: "If unblocked, what specific articles do you intend to make changes to, and what sources will you be citing?" You have answered that you will edit flower/plants articles, but you never made it clear on what kind of sources you will be citing IF you are allowed again. SunDawn (talk) 06:38, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Same. After LOTS of examples of adding unsourced content and images, and edit warring when your edits were reverted, you were blocked in 2017. In years to follow you have made multiple unblock requests and filed nine (!) unblock tickets at UTRS, but at no time did you do what the admins asked, which was to provide a specific example of an article you would edit and reliable source references you would provide with that edit. Your answers were always too general - basically, "I'll be good." David notMD (talk) 09:43, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

aftabbanoori (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) can currently edit his own talkpage, sso he can request an unblock there. @39.41.112.211: Please prepear a specific change you want to make, along with any sources needed for that. You say that english isn't your first language, perhaps edit Wikipedia in your native language? Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 10:16, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Indeed, since they have chosen to edit while logged out, it is clear they are in Punjab, Pakistan. There are Wikipedia versions in Punjabi,Eastern Punjabi, Urdu, Saraiki, and Pashto at least. See List of Wikipedias. Also, I'm afraid as this is obvious block evasion the IP is going to be blocked. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:22, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Also paging @Oshwah: as they apparently tried to mentor them a while back. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:28, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

You can use Google Translate. 138.36.120.176 (talk) 19:39, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

That's terrible advice. Machine translation is not reliable across languages with different grammatical rules and idioms. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:41, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

I agree with Beeblebrox. Machine translation is mediocre and somewhat-marginal with accurate translation at best... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:30, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Assistance about Creating deleted page

If a page is previously deleted and the reason is R2 then what should I do ? Which process should I follow to create the page ? As I am a extend confirm user. DasSoumik (talk) 10:30, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi DasSoumik, welcome to the Teahouse. What's the page? R2 is about redirects from mainspace (a normal article) to other spaces (somewhere 'behind the scenes'). Without knowing which page it is and what you think should be there, it's a little hard to answer in the abstract. › Mortee _talk 10:41, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello Mortee the page got deleted and reason is misplaced user page after that it is deleted with the reason R2. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DasSoumik (talk • contribs) 10:56, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

DasSoumik, I understand, but what are you trying to create and where are you trying to create it? › Mortee _talk 10:57, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Mortee the page name is Aritra Das. Check this one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DasSoumik (talk • contribs) 10:59, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

DasSoumik thanks. It looks like an article was created there in 2016 but the admins believed it was created by or on behalf of that person themselves, and just replicated their CV. That would be wrong of course (see WP:NOTCV). If there's someone notable with that name, you can write an article about them. The fact that a different article with the same name has been deleted doesn't affect the procedure at all. I see you've started articles before, so you'll already be familiar with the guidance at Help:Your first article and Wikipedia:Articles for creation.

By the way, if you could sign your messages here with ~~~~, it does help to see who's saying what. I forgot frequently when I first started! All the best › Mortee _talk 11:08, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Hey Mortee, yes I am familiar with the guideline but I don't know whether Aritra Das is same person or not with the previous one. So I am going to make a draft about the subject. After that I'll write you in your talk page. Can you help me to tell whether the subject is suitable or not for wikipedia ?? And thank you for your advice about sign. DasSoumik (talk)

DasSoumik, it doesn't matter if it's the same person or not. Good luck with the draft. I'll try to answer your questions. › Mortee _talk 11:23, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Mortee thank you. Hope you will answer and you will guide me if I am wrong. DasSoumik (talk)

@DasSoumik: The deleted page was created by Aritradas1984. The only content was:

Senior Visualiser at Blue Stockings Communications Pvt. Ltd., Senior Visualiser at Studio Red and Sr. Graphic Designer at Comm-ad design

Past: ABC Advertising Bureau & Consultant and ABC Adversiting

You still haven't said which Aritra Das you want to write about. Wikipedia:Notability (people) is the general guideline for people to have a biography. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:15, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello PrimeHunter, thank you for your help. By the way the person about whom I'll write is not similar with the previous one. So can I write directly or else I have go through on draft or afc ???

Is this table a copyright violation ?

I created this table:

Book of Mormon Videos

Title	Verses of the Book of Mormon	Duration	Release date	Reference
The Lord Commands Lehi's Family to Leave Jerusalem	First Nephi 1–2	18 min	20. September 2019
Nephi Is Led by the Spirit to Obtain the Plates of Brass	First Nephi 3–5	25 min	27. September 2019
Ishmael's Household Joins Lehi's Family	First Nephi 7	12 min	4. October 2019
Lehi Sees a Vision of the Tree of Life	First Nephi 8	13 min	11. October 2019
The Lord Guides Lehi's Journey	First Nephi 16	16 min	18. October 2019
The Lord Commands Nephi to Build a Ship	First Nephi 17–18	15 min	25. October 2019
Lehi's Family Sails to the Promised Land	First Nephi 18	13 min	1. November 2019
Lehi Gives His Family a Final Blessing	Second Nephi 1–4	13 min	11. November 2019
The Nephites Separate from the Lamanites	Second Nephi 5	8 min	15. November 2019
Jacob Teaches of the Atonement of Jesus Christ	Second Nephi 6-10	8 min	22. November 2019
Nephi Teaches the Doctrine of Christ	Second Nephi 31-32	5 min	29. November 2019
Nephi Records His Final Testimony	Second Nephi 33	2 min	6. December 2019
Jacob Teaches about Pride and Chastity	Book of Jacob 2–3	10 min	13. December 2019
Sherem Denies Christ	Book of Jacob 7	7 min	20. December 2019
Enos Prays Mightily	Book of Enos 1	6 min	27. December 2019
King Benjamin Addresses His People	Book of Mosiah 1-5	18 min	13. March 2020
Abinadi Testifies of Jesus Christ	Book of Mosiah 11-18	25 min	20. March 2020
Alma Preaches the Word of God	Book of Alma 4-7	10 min	17. April 2020
Alma and Amulek Are Delivered by the Power of God	Book of Alma 8-15	23 min	24. April 2020
Ammon Serves and Teaches King Lamoni	Book of Alma 17-19	23 min	1. May 2020
Alma and Amulek Teach about Faith in Jesus Christ	Book of Alma 31-34	20 min	12. May 2020
Alma Counsels His Sons	Book of Alma 36-42	17 min	15. May 2020

--93.193.170.30 (talk) 11:15, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

You would probably want to use references from the actual church website that are links to the videos themselves along with another source if you can find one. Might I ask what the purpose of the table is besides listing the Book of Mormon videos and what scripture verses they are about? That might help us understand the context a bit more. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 19:37, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

References

I don't know. (If you think it might be, please explain.) What I do know is that IMDb can't be used for referencing purposes. -- Hoary (talk) 12:07, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Generally the sort of stuff you've got in that table (names, dates, running times) are considered to be facts, which on their own would not attract copyright protection. A compilation of facts can however receive copyright protection, as there is some creative input involved in deciding on a selection criteria and organising/displaying the data, so really this comes down to one question - did you compile that table from facts found in various web pages, or did you copy it wholesale from a source? As above even if this isn't a copyright issues it can't be added to the encyclopaedia as is as IMDB is User generated content, which is considered unreliable. Is there another source you could use, e.g. the programme's official website? 86.23.109.101 (talk) 12:58, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Contributing to Wikipedia

 Miriton (talk) 11:53, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

If you have a question about doing so, feel free to ask it here. -- Hoary (talk) 12:05, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Editing Help

Could you help me, I'm new to Wikipedia and want some help around editing and other things. GoogleTheContributor (talk) 15:22, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

The pencil icon is the edit icon, if you see a lock, the page is protected due to vandalism. Do general edits or else they’ll be reverted. Here’s some templates:

Wikilink will appear in blue. Not created pages will appear in red.

John A. (example)
Born	1 May 1960 (example) London, England (example)
Died	7 July 2011 (aged 51) (example) Dublin, Ireland (example)
Cause of death	Gunshot wound (optional example)
Occupation	Doctor (example)

(always close with }})

(31.187.7.220 (talk) 15:43, 19 April 2021 (UTC))

Ignore what the IP said above as it wasn't entirely helpful. The pencil icon isn't always the edit icon. IN fact, usually it's just a button. If you see a lock then the page is protected but not just because of vandalism, there are also other types of protections. You don't have to only do general edits to not have them reverted, as long as the edit is constructive it won't be reverted. If it is, just know that your edit was in good faith. The templates they provided above are: the general stub template {{stub}}, the ref template <ref>reference</ref>, and also the person infobox {{infobox person}}. If you need anymore help feel free to ask! Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 19:17, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Some advice would be to check out The Wikipedia Adventure. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 19:35, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

References

Can someone help me review my submitted article?

I have submitted this article "Draft:Idegu Ojonugwa Shadrach". I do not know how to do anything about it any longer. So, I would love if it can be reviewed by anyone here, please. Mountain120 (talk) 13:09, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi Geertje Tutschka, welcome to the Teahouse. You have saved Draft:Idegu Ojonugwa Shadrach but not submitted it for review. I have added a box with a submit button. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:29, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi Mountain120, I think PrimeHunter meant you in that message. Before submitting your draft, please also have a look at WP:REFSTART to learn about references on Wikipedia. It's unlikely that the draft would be accepted without any inline-citations. – NJD-DE (talk) 13:40, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Plenty thanks to you all. I have submitted the article as instructed. I also look forward to seeing your subsequent help on my article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mountain120 (talk • contribs) 20:26, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Submitted and Declined. References must be inline, not added under References, and references to his own work do not establish his notability. Do not resubmit unless you can find references about him, not to stuff by him. David notMD (talk) 00:47, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

This is good. How can I find such references, please?Mountain120 (talk) 14:52, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Advice needed regarding COI

Hi, I'm very new on Wiki and I'm working on a new article about "Legal coaching" and because I'm very close to this subject (I'm a well-known expert on this in Germany, Austria and Europe)it is hard to be complained with the Wiki-codex. I worked already with Biogeographist and he suggested to ask you for your feedback. I would really appreciate your help - thanks a lot in advance --Geertje Tutschka (talk) 09:51, 19 April 2021 (UTC)--Geertje Tutschka (talk) 13:24, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello there Geertje Tutschka, and thank you for asking before you do. While you can add stuff to it with a Conflict of Interest, it's not recommended. My best advice for you would be to see WP:COI. You can also make an edit request or a request for a page (courtesy link required). You could start the page and another editor could help clean it up so that it's fit for Wikipedia. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 19:12, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi The Wolf - thanks, but I already added a COI note on my User Page regarding this: "This user has made a public declaration indicating that they have a conflict of interest with regard to the following Wikipedia article(s): Draft:Legal coaching" as you can see. Do you mean something else? Where can I get a courtesy link or another editor? Greetings Geertje Tutschka (talk) 12:55, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Geertje Tutschka. Whilst we welcome experts who can bring their knowledge and familiarity of Reliable Sources, one does need to tread extremely carefully in not appearing in any way to be promoting one's books, services or employer, or bringing one's personal biases or opinions to bear in an encyclopaedia entry. At first sight, the topic appears that it might be Notable, though self-published sources (such as Jo-Anne Stark's) are not regarded as highly as those produced by normal publishers. I see you've already submitted your draft for review, though there's plenty of time to fix any weaknesses. These are:

• Text is too turgid and written in 'semi-legalese'. Try to write in plain English, as if for an uninformed high school/1st year student at the oldest. I found it hard to understand the lead, let alone the rest of the essay draft article.
• Remove citations to book reviews, such as GoodReads. This are trivial and undermine your purpose in writing about the subject, especially as you've cited the self-published book elsewhere
• Remove repeated refences. See WP:REFNAME for guidance on how to use and then reuse the same references in a way that it appears in the reference section only one. You can use the template {{rp}} after each use of that single reference to indicate which page number(s) you are citing a statement to.
• Less is more: pare out trivia; there's a lot of essay-like content which needs removing. It needs to be a factual encyclopaedic entry, not a trivia-filled magazine article.
• Declare your Conflict of Interest. You are citing a number of your own publications and, as such, have a clear WP:COI. Please follow those guidelines to place a COI-declaration on your userpage. There's no shame in this; it's just to ensure clarity for everyone here.

Finally, you may wish to seek input from interested editors at Wikipedia:WikiProject Law who might wish to contribute. I'm afraid that after I get past the lead in any legal article, my willingness to live diminishes paragraph by paragraph and in a rather logarithmic manner. Hope this helps, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:04, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi Nick - thanks a lot. It will take some time to work me through, but it is really helpful. I will come back ASAPGeertje Tutschka (talk) 12:44, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

You'll have to wait for a courtesy link (a link for something that wasn't immediately link but is provided by another host). Also, you don't necessarily get an editor, you request one to take a look at your draft and help improve it. But since the link doesn't seem to be getting provided I will go ahead and search for the link to the page where you can request for an article to be made (keep in mind that there's most likely a backlog so it may take some time before someone creates your article). Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 19:22, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

@Geertje Tutschka:, the page to request an article is WP:REQ. Also, please call me either Blaze or Wolf (i've stated this on my userpage but I"m not gonna ask you to take a look at it as it's not really helpful to what you need). 19:25, 20 April 2021 (UTC) Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 19:25, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

New article (biography)

I received some very helpful suggestions from this forum last week in regard to the draft article "Josef Josten" in my sandbox - thank you. I have done my best to address the issues raised. Now I would like to transfer the article from my sandbox to the draft space to get it reviewed. I can't find this part of the process in the Article Wizard: can you help me? Honza. [[User:|Honza Giles]] (talk) 14:32, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi Honza Giles, I have moved the draft from your sandbox to Draft:Josef Josten. I also added the AfC box with a submit button. I removed the COI Userbox as this will not be part of the article, but please add it again to your userpage by adding {{UserboxCOI|Josef Josten}} on User:Honza Giles. – NJD-DE (talk) 14:45, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Honza Giles, Wikipedia expects its contributors to use neutral language, and not display a point of view. The phrase "earning him the honour of exceptional hatred by the Czech régime whose actions he exposed" displays a point of view. Ok, it's a point of view we all share, but such language should still be avoided. Maproom (talk) 07:38, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia tour

Hello! I'm new to Wikipedia and was wondering if someone could give me a tour. I made my first edit and I think it was an okay edit. GoogleTheContributor (talk) 15:18, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello GoogleTheContributor and welcome to Wikipedia!! Check out the The Wikipedia Adventure. It will show you different aspects of Wikipedia, and could be a nice start for you. – NJD-DE (talk) 15:41, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

@Njd-de Okay! Thank you. GoogleTheContributor (talk) 15:42, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi GoogleTheContributor. If I might, some hopefully constructive criticism regarding that first edit. While it appears mostly fine, it is one including a change of an unsourced statement to a different nuance of meaning without adding a source. This doesn't tell me whether you understand that Wikipedia essentially runs on sourcing – an overarching standard that should guide most our edits – we don't write what we know in our heads.

Sure, if you know for certain that Fengshen Yanyi is also called Huang Cang (rather than originally called that), on balance that part of the edit is an improvement, but in my view a much better edit would have been to make this change while adding a citation to a reliable, secondary, independent sources Template:Z21 that verified the original information and your change. Many experienced users would approach any edit like this with sourcing as their number one guide, and wouldn't dream of making an equivalent change without involving a corroborating source. I am saying this just to introduce you to a focus that is common here, and yet alien to many people, if not from a very particular academic writing background.

One other thing: in that edit you also changed "favourite" to "favorite". You might have just thought this was a misspelling but the former is the British/Commonwealth spelling, and the latter, the U.S. spelling convention, and should not have been changed. Please see WP:ENGVAR. As to a tour, in addition to the adventure link provided above, please see Wikipedia's tutorial. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 19:13, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

How much of an article do I need to remove a stub?

Do I just need 3 or 4 lines to have it removed, or do I need more? Please help. (31.187.7.220 (talk) 15:20, 19 April 2021 (UTC))

Here’s an example of a still-stub with about 4 to 5 lines on Pietro Ferrero:

Pietro Ferrero was born in 1898.

In 1925, he had a son, Michele Ferrero.

On 14 May 1946, he founded his company, Ferrero.

Pietro died on 2 March 1949.

Can articles with this much lines get a stub removed? (31.187.7.220 (talk) 15:27, 19 April 2021 (UTC))

Hi 31.187.7.220, welcome to the Teahouse. There's no clear definition of a stub. WP:STUB suggests rules of thumb including 250 words, 500 words, or the WP:DYK standard 1,500 characters of readable text in the body of the article. Going by DYKcheck, Pietro Ferrero Jr. has 678 characters, 119 words in its main text, which suggests it's still a stub. That fits my assessment of the article, so I'd leave the stub template there for now. Being a stub isn't a criticism of an article, it's an invitation to further expansion. I think it's best to leave the template there until an article is clearly long/complete enough that the template doesn't apply. Any useful, referenced detail you can add is very welcome. I hope this helps. › Mortee _talk 16:01, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

@31.187.7.220: there's not really a set amount of lines required to upgrade a stub to a higher quality article. I'll use one of my articles as an example. This is a link of one of my articles as a stub. It has a small amount of prose, an infobox, a track listing, and references. That version was created a while ago. Now look at the current version of the article. I'd say it could use more prose, but the point is that there should be enough content for the article to be, well, an article. It's gonna take far more than four lines to get an article better than a stub. Good luck. versacespaceleave a message! 16:06, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Okay, thanks, but the name... Pietro Ferrero, you got it wrong. (31.187.7.220 (talk) 16:03, 19 April 2021 (UTC))

Oh! You're quite right. Sorry. Pietro Ferrero is a shorter article and would still be a stub if you added the text you mentioned. There must be a lot more to write about the founder of a such a big chocolate company. I hope you'll have fun if you decide to help us expand the article. Do ask again at the Teahouse if you have questions about it. › Mortee _talk 16:07, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, although it’s still a stub. It looks a long article! (Commitments with talking means you must have a cup of 🍵🍵) (31.187.7.220 (talk) 16:09, 19 April 2021 (UTC))

Sorry, can you reiterate what you said? I didn't understand. @31.187.7.220: versacespaceleave a message! 16:12, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, although it’s still a stub. It looks a long article! (Commitments with talking means you must have a cup of 🍵🍵) (31.187.7.220 (talk) 16:09, 19 April 2021 (UTC))

Cup of tea. (31.187.7.220 (talk) 16:40, 19 April 2021 (UTC))

Getting notifications for pages that are nominated for deletion?

Hello. I have a LONG watchlist built up over the years. Sometimes I will look at it and a page entry would say "Article closed as delete" or something to that effect. I did not know that the page was even nominated for deletion, otherwise I would have fought to keep it. This has happened numerous times. Is there any way to get or opt into notifications of pages on our watchlist that are nominated for deletion? Urbanracer34 (talk) 15:23, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

@Urbanracer34: you're notified on your watchlist when a deletion banner is added to a page versacespaceleave a message! 15:37, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

@VersaceSpace: That is weird. I've never noticed it. Thanks for the answer. Urbanracer34 (talk) 15:43, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Teahouse Badges

Hi, I saw some old Wikipedia user pages with Teahouse badges, and clicking the badge sent me to WP:Teahouse/Badge. It says that badges are discontinued now. What happened to them?

Was there consensus to stop distributing badges, or were they simply abandoned?

Sorry this isn't specific to editing. I was just curious as to what happened to them. Aknell4 (talk • contribs) 15:49, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

@Aknell4: you can see that Nick Moyes asked on the talk page in 2018, then marked it as historical in 2020. Following that I'm pretty sure it was just abandoned. Elli (talk | contribs) 16:13, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Oh okay. Thank you. --Aknell4 (talk • contribs) 16:23, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

"more" drop down menu missing

Hi, I'm a new editor here, made 24 edits and my account is a day old, I've been trying to publish a draft from my Sandbox but I cant fond the "more" drop down menu where I'd click move to publish my article. please i need help ASAP

Thanks! D'phenomenal (talk) 16:41, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

P.S: I'm editing on my phone could that be the cause?

@D'phenomenal: Go to Wikipedia:Article wizard --Aknell4 (talk • contribs) 16:47, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

@D'phenomenal: welcome to the Teahouse. You will not be able to move any Wikipedia pages until your account is autoconfirmed, which will happen when the account is four days old. However, it is usually not a good idea to try to create a Wikipedia article and move it to the main encyclopedia when you are still a very new editor, and the content of User:D'phenomenal/sandbox could not be moved to the live encyclopedia at this point. There is quite a bit of basic information missing (such as where the school is located), and no indication of what makes it notable according to Wikipedia's definition of notability. The mission statement doesn't belong in an encyclopedia, and there are no independent sources. If the draft was moved to the live encyclopedia now, it would be deleted or moved back to draft space.

As Aknell4 says, you might want to try using the Article Wizard, which will guide you through the steps of creating an article draft. You can then submit the draft for review. (I see that you already submitted your sandbox draft once, but it was declined for being empty.) Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 17:01, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your help,btw i included the location of the school the link on the address leads to Google maps showing the location of the school, there's also a picture of the main building plus I cited two external websites that compiles a list of schools where the school name was mentioned,the school can also be found on web mentioned on about 10+ websites. will i be able to publish it for review after 4 days when im an autoconfirmed user already? — Preceding unsigned comment added by D'phenomenal (talk • contribs) 17:20, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi again D'phenomenal. I'm afraid the draft in your sandbox does not meet the minimal requirements for a Wikipedia article. I mentioned a couple of them above, such as having independent sources and showing how the school is notable. You can submit your sandbox draft for review now, by clicking the blue "Submit" button in the draft, but it would not be accepted. I have added a welcome template to your user talk page; if you take a little bit of time to read the information there, you might find it easier to understand what is required from a Wikipedia article. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 17:46, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

@D'phenomenal: Presuming that you can demonstrate how the school meets Wikipedia's notability criteria, then please review the Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Layout (e.g. change the table to {{Infobox school}}, move the image into the infobox, add a lead section, fix the section headers, fix the typos and date format, add punctuation, remove the link to Facebook, add a "References" section, remove the container categories). Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 19:21, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for your help, btw you can check my Sandbox now but I'm having a little problem with aligning the {info box} to center.

Thanks!

@D'phenomenal: the reason the infobox was centered was that the image and the map were too wide. I have fixed that for you, and also restored the sandbox template which will allow you to submit the draft for review once it is ready. There is still no claim of notability, no lead section, and no independent sources, though. --bonadea contributions talk 11:36, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi! thanks for your help, just cited an independent source,pls kindly check, as for notability the school is easily found when searched online and its available on several independent websites. please help me review it if its good enough to be submitted. thanks!

@D'phenomenal: Notability has to be established in the article, according to the guidelines in. It's not enough to say here that there are websites that mention it, or even to just provide links to those sites. If, say, there's a site that lists the schools in some county, including the school your article is about, that doesn't help if it just lists the school and routine details (e.g., location, grades taught, when founded...), because there's nothing notable in such details. The article has to say what makes the school notable, and give at least one reliable source for all the information it includes. Follow the advice of the regular Teahouse hosts above-- I'm just a longtime Wikipedian. --Thnidu (talk) 02:00, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Why is the Teahouse named the Teahouse?

The Teahouse has nothing to do with Tea, so why is it called Teahouse? (31.187.7.220 (talk) 17:06, 19 April 2021 (UTC))

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! There's a good explanation [4] here - and here - WP:TY. Happy editing! Best, Less Unless (talk) 17:22, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

In case you don't wanna read through all that here's a general explanation, it's to make it seem more welcoming to new users. If it were something like "Help for new users" then it might make them feel stupid for asking questions. The name "Teahouse" is supposed to make it feel more welcoming. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 19:08, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

That’s why should feel more welcome with a picture of tea at the top of this article! (31.187.7.220 (talk) 22:29, 19 April 2021 (UTC))

helplease

I don’t know how to edit. SpaceLikeSpace (talk) 17:29, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello SpaceLikeSpace and welcome to Wikipedia. Well you have successfully made an edit here, so you know how to post messages on talk pages already. I have left you a message on your talk page with a few links that might be helpful for you. Alternatively, you could also check out The Wikipedia Adventure if you are into interactive learning. In case you have any question, you're always welcome to ask here. – NJD-DE (talk) 18:01, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Need English wiki page

Can you translate this page into an English wiki? https://si.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thisarana_Arama UspLK (talk) 17:43, 19 April 2021 (UTC) UspLK (talk) 17:43, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

@UspLK: welcome to the Teahouse. It might not be very easy to find a Sinhala speaker here at the Teahouse, but there is a draft at Draft:Thisarana Arama which appears to have pretty much all the content that the Sinhala article has. The draft needs more reliable sources to show that the organisation is notable according to Wikipedia's definition, however. --bonadea contributions talk 17:56, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your information @Bonadea ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by UspLK (talk • contribs) 18:02, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Looking for help with what seems like vindictive editing and which repeats a closed debate on deletion

Hi All, I work on a number of pages, mainly political and historical and often in the libertarian, New England, Republican spaces. There is an article that I have been doing edits on for some time, since 2016 or 2017. I'd have to look at the history. I recently reversed an edit: although the edit that had been made was a deletion of a fact on the article for Ed Lopez, it was removed because the source is now considered "deprecated". I restored the original edit because even if the source is not considered 'reputable' it wasn't being used as a source of objective information. The editor who had questioned that edit has re-deleted the item and has, in addition, added 'notability question' template message / box. This debate was already resolved in November of 2016 and it was decided that the article would remain on Wikipedia. Since then, the article has included additional national news and sources such as CSPAN and PBS on the subject of US presidential elections. I know we make a commitment to accept edits as being made in good faith - but I am having a really hard time not seeing the edits here as vindictive and potentially political in hue. I am already concerned about sources that are considered deprecated and sources that aren't. Political subjects have become highly toxic on Wikipedia and elsewhere and are one reason I don't do a lot of editing. I think that his editor's approach is unfair and my question is who can I ask for some help: I don't want to get into an argument with another editor but I honestly take the edits that took place as being vindictive: "You can't disagree with my edit, and if you do I will one-up you and escalate the debate beyond the edit we began discussing." It's very hard not to read the edits that followed my restore edit that way. Any feedback is appreciated. As I said, the delete debate on this article took place in 2016 and since 2016 the article has been reinforced with additional secondary sources of substance. This is one of those frustrating situations I have encountered on Wikipedia too often where an editor seems to delight in anything but improving an article that has a place on this service we all volunteer to help build. Grant18650602 (talk) 18:08, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi Grant18650602, for information on deprecated sources see Wikipedia:Deprecated sources. ♔MEisSCAMMER^{(talk)(contribs)} 19:23, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

I have read a bit about deprecated sources, but I still feel the issue here is the disproportionate response to a disagreement on what constitutes a minor edit. Could someone help me understand how to tackle this issue?Grant18650602 (talk) 19:30, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi All, I want to revoke my question, another editor at Wikipedia has looked at the article and is giving constructive feedback. I appreciate the help.Grant18650602 (talk) 20:19, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

What is the difference between Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam and MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist?

Kleinpecan (talk) 18:17, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Kleinpecan Wikiproject spam is a wikiproject (i.e. a group of editors) working together to remove spam from the encyclopaedia and clean up the results of paid editing. The spam blacklist is a software feature that prevents the addition of links to certain websites, the MediaWiki talk page is used to propose additions and removals from the list. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 18:45, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, and yes I know this. However, you can propose additions to the blacklist on *both* of those places, and it seems weird to have two places with the same purpose, so surely there must be some difference between them? Kleinpecan (talk) 18:49, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Kleinpecan In theory Wikiproject spam is intended to be a general noticeboard, where spam can be dealt with in a number of ways (e.g. just cleaning up the mess, account/IP blocks, page protection, blacklining on the English wiki or global blacklisting which blocks it across all wikimedia sites), while MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist is supposed to only be used for requesting additions or removals to the local spam blacklist. In practice there isn't a lot of difference and misplaced reports published on MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist will be dealt with according to administrator discursion. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 18:59, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

How do i upload pictures to an article if wikimedia is blocked?

How do i upload pictures to an article if wikimedia is blocked? ILove2Type801 (talk) 18:40, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

@ILove2Type801: you mean if Wikimedia Commons is blocked by, say, your network admin? You could upload locally to Wikipedia and ask someone else to transfer the files, I guess. Elli (talk | contribs) 18:50, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

User doesn't seem to be blocked on commons. CanadianOtaku ^{Talk Page} 19:43, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

No you dont get it!. I mean if The website is Blocked. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ILove2Type801 (talk • contribs) 14:32, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Uploading locally using the article wizard works as well. Sungodtemple a tcg fan!!1!11!! (talk) 00:02, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

New edits and Draft help

Hello,

When I joined as a newbie, I saw a small box from Wikipedia that took me to a page where edits were required. How can I get that box back? I feel that it's a great way to improve pages.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Tim_Heatley How can I make this neutral? What should I rephrase?

Thank you! Spicyramens (talk) 19:26, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello! While I don't exactly know what you're talking about, there's a good chance it might've been replaced by the Suggestions Bot. Another host will have to provide a courtesy link as I don't have it. Also a way you can make Draft:Tim Heatley neutral is by reading through it and deciding "is this from a positive point of view or a negative one" and figure out what makes it one of those and try and rephrase it. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 19:30, 19 April 2021 (UTC)(talk)

I think it's a latest feature from Wikipedia. Can you make a new account and check it???

I would rather not since it's kind of a pain to create a new account just to check one feature. I do have an alt with basically no edits, however as stated on the userpage of said alt, it will be inactive unless something is wrong with this account. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 19:48, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi Spicyramens. As to your first question, I think you might mean the features provided through Wikipedia:GettingStarted. If you want to access that feature again, please copy this code: ?gettingStartedReturn=true Now, navigate to any random page → place your cursor in your browser's address bar after the existing URL → paste the copied code → hit enter. Along that same vein, you might find the Wikipedia:Community portal (linked under the "contribute" menu on the left hand side of any page) and Wikipedia:Task center of even more utility. See also User:SuggestBot/Getting Recommendations Regularly. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 20:34, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Fuhghettaboutit talk Got it! Thanks!!! Can you share the codes for submitting a Draft?

@Spicyramens: Sure. You would paste at the top of the draft and save the following {{subst:submit}}.

By the way, regarding your post above, here's just a tip on using talk pages like this. Our convention is that when you reply to someone you indent one level in from where they posted. Indents here are created by colons (not initial spaces, which do not work), with each additional colon indenting a post one level deeper. So since you started the post, everyone who responded above indented one from yours, with one colon ":". Your response to those would properly indent one more (with two [::]), and this response would then normally start with three colons (:::). Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:23, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Fuhghettaboutit I didn't really understand, but thank you! I have submitted the Draft too.

Contribution Link Help

How to link my new contribution "Jiang Luxia" English version under the Chinese page?

I created a new page for Jiang Luxia (by mistake it was typed as Jiang Lu Xia). Can you advised the steps to publish it and also, how do i link this english version with the existing chinese page)?

Thank you. Rachwoo (talk) 19:28, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

@Rachwoo: I am going to add a button to the draft allowing you to submit it for review. However, if it were to be submitted right now, it would be declined immedately, because it is unsourced. We are not interested in a rerun of the Seigenthaler incident. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 19:59, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Items

Here's some symbols that can help you:

Information

Ambox

Stop hand

Watch

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.36.120.176 (talk • contribs)

Hi. I might be wrong but I am going to make an assumption that your post regards including such symbols on answers to posts at this page. Putting aside that there are categories of symbols that I think are more tailored to question and answer forums (e.g., those in Category:Resolution templates and Category:Image with comment templates – where the symbols you've posted above are more tailored for things like user talk warnings and information templates), we have had numerous discussions about their use, with consensus not to use them. See, for example, Wikipedia talk:Teahouse/Archive 23#Closing discussions. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 20:04, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Autoconfirmed when?

I've made nine edits. When can I edit semi-protected articles? (If you need more info, I joined afternoon of yesterday.) TechnoStomp999 (talk) 20:26, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

@Technostomp999: Welcome. I added a header to this question to seperate it from the one above. Your account will become autoconfirmed when your account is at least 4 days old and you have made at least 10 edits, and then you can edit semi-protected pages. RudolfRed (talk) 20:27, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! Also, Is this Earl Grey or Green? Either way, It is deeelicious. TechnoStomp999 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 20:32, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Earl Grey or Green? Are you talking about the tea that's used for the hosts who didn't add a image? If so I wouldn't be able to tell you as I don't drink tea myself. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 20:39, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

I don't either, but one sip of this Teahouse Tea will send your taste buds to heaven. TechnoStomp999 (talk) 20:48, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Technostomp999 it's a house blend. We're glad you like it! Stop by any time for another cuppa › Mortee _talk 21:24, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

You have made a total of three edits to articles. All three were reverted, and rightly so. It's not clear to me that your purpose here is to improve Wikipedia. -- Hoary (talk) 22:59, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

@Hoary: you might want to take a look at WP:BITE as just because their edits were reverted doesn't mean their purpose isn't to improve Wikipedia. They may have made test edits. Not all reverted edits are bad edits. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 19:17, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Messaging a Wikiperson

So I made an edit this week and a user sent what seemed to be an automated msg, how do I reply/msg a User once I know their name?

PS Wai Moe Naing (one of the most prominent leaders of the anti-coup protests) does not have a page but this is all I know of them Leoset (talk) 21:26, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

@Leoset: Welcome to the Teahouse! I like to use {{ping}} to message a user (as I did here with you). GoingBatty (talk) 21:34, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

For further help, if for example you wanted to ping GoingBatty, then you would type {{ping|GoingBatty}} and they would get a notification that they have been pinged (unless they are on the mobile app which you can see why at WP:THEYCANTHEARYOU). Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 19:15, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Disputing a removed edit

Why does an edit get removed for not being constructive, without any reasons given and how is it possible to dispute that?

The original quotes the sources mentioned incorrectly and also doesnt make sense grammatically. I dont mind my personal edit being removed but it really bothers me that this particular sentence exists there just like that... 2003:6:2186:1E47:919F:1BE4:3B1E:9BAB (talk) 21:50, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

You are welcome to dispute the edit on the reverting editor's talk page or on the talk page of the article. Please could you provide us with the article the revert was performed on so we can take a look? Kind regards, Willbb234^Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 21:54, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Third Opinion Help??

How do I provide a Third Opinion for a dispute? Is there a page I can go to find ongoing disputes? Someone help!! 14thReason (talk) 22:10, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi 14thReason. Assuming you visited Wikipedia:Third opinion (since you know the name), you may have been surprised by the lack of any discussions listed, prompting your post, but it really is just empty right now. You might try instead visiting some open RFCs. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:26, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

14thReason - alternatively, you could sign up for the Wikipedia:Feedback request service and be notified when people are asking for third party comments. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 23:55, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Timtempleton - Thanks a lot, I signed up for some of the categories. Thanks for the help!! 14thReason (talk) 18:01, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Suggestion on BTS' talk page

Someone made a suggestion that the "Cultural impact and legacy" section get a seperate page as the main page is already quite lengthy but no other editors have responded to it. So I was wondering if anyone here could help with it? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BTS Btspurplegalaxy (talk) 22:14, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Hey Btspurplegalaxy. I know nothing about this band, but be aware of just how lengthy these search results are. Even the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cultural impact of Beyoncé, for this attractive cruft nuisance type article, got numerous delete !votes, despite surviving. By the way, if you do go ahead, please be sure to follow copyright attribution requirements for merges. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:49, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Who should reassess improved articles?

Hello, how common/appropriate is to update yourself the assessment of an article after you have improved it?

I read that everybody is allowed to assess or change an assessment (besides for the "high categories", but I am not talking about those), and I understand that, if I "overestimate" my improvements, other people can always downgrade the new assessment later.

Precisely for this reason, I always thought it was more "correct" not to do it myself and wait for neutral opinions. However, I realised that this may never happen, since there is a category for pages without an assessment (which I believe is routinely visited) but there isn't one for "pages needing a reassessment" (I couldn't even find a template about it), so articles may remain with an old assessment for years and years after they have been improved.

So, to make it short, would it be bad to make some improvements on a page and (if I deem it appropriate) immediately improve its grade, or is this actually the standard procedure? Thanks for the help! Francesco Cattafi (talk) 22:16, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi Francesco Cattafi. I remember this coming up a few times, here and elsewhere and it seems to follow a typical pattern I would summarize as: "Can I really self-assess?" "Even for my own improvements?" "Yep, go ahead and do it, though of course you can't choose GA, FA, FL, etc.)" "Really? Seems odd sort of goes against our typical sensibilities; COI and all that." Yeah, I know, but it's an internal assessment process anyway, really just for wikiproject organization and so forth. Do it.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk)

Who invented olanzapine

 Cadnan99 (talk) 23:31, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi Cadnan99, welcome to the Teahouse. This page is meant for questions about editing Wikipedia. I think the right place to ask about the invention of olanzapine would be the science reference desk. Hope this helps, › Mortee _talk 23:39, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

You have made 12 edits to Olanzapine, including repeated statements that it was invented by Dr abdikadir shaib (without a reference). All of your edits have been reverted. The proper place to have a discussion is at the Talk page of that article. David notMD (talk) 01:15, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Against what is in a citation, you edited Clozapine, Amisulpride, Risperidone and Paliperidone to state that they were inferior to Olanzapine. All edits reverted. Continuing this misbehavior will get you blocked. David notMD (talk) 01:50, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Dallas J. Bennett Article

Hello all I am currently trying to get an article about Dallas J. Bennett published here on wikipedia. He is a bright young man who has accomplished so much but I do not have many sources to help make my case. He has had 2 articles about his accomplishments published in the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians' tribal newspaper. The EBCI is a sovereign nation and to their people his accomplishments are considered national news. Any help is greatly appreciated. Wikiboi77 03:35, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Regrettably, "do not have many sources" means "does not meet notability requirements". Notability is the extent to which a topic has been noted. I'm sure Mr. Bennett has a bright future ahead of him, but at this point it is premature to have a Wikipedia article about him. DS (talk) 04:09, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

how do template plz

How do I make templates like other articles that are popular? Please tell me on how to do that, because I am new. Interesting536 (talk) 04:56, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

@Interesting536: do you want to know how to write templates, or how to use them in articles? Elli (talk | contribs) 07:38, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Elli, I want to use them with articles. I would like to do the thing because I don't know yet, like an article of a person and a template is used to show his or her birth and death. Please give me an answer when you see this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Interesting536 (talk • contribs) 07:42, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

@Interesting536: ah, you'd like to use infoboxes. Help:Infobox should be helpful. Elli (talk | contribs) 07:46, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

I know what you're talking about but if you ever want to create your own infobox then you might want to ask for some help in doing so as it requires writing a lot of code in order for it to function properly. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 20:22, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

User Pages question

Is this considered self-promotion? Still confused about how I should report these people that create these kind of pages about themselves on their userpages. Thanks, AnApple47 (talk) 05:19, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, gone. DS (talk) 06:22, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello, AnApple47. The best place to report various types of misconduct depends on the specific circumstances. I have indefinitely blocked this account because the username itself is a policy violation since it represents a group rather than an individual, and the account was editing to promote that group. The best place to report this specific type of misconduct is Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention. If you see an account that is doing nothing but vandalizing, then file a report at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. If an editor is consistently pushing a non-neutral point of view, then file a report at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard. If the editor is being generally disruptive and hostile, attacking other editors and violating multiple policies, then Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents may be the best place. Follow the instructions for each noticeboard carefully, provide evidence, and be prepared to defend your own behavior which may come under scrutiny if you file a noticeboard report. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:35, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Adding Photos

How can we add photos of places to wikipedia BHAT MOHMED IRSHAD UL HAQ (talk) 07:24, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

@BHAT MOHMED IRSHAD UL HAQ: you can take a photo and upload it to Wikimedia Commons with an appropriate license, then edit the article to add it. Elli (talk | contribs) 07:38, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Need some Help

Hello everyone, I am facing issues at the time of creating the article about Jordan Nash. I already wrote the article, it was rejected and then accepted and then rejected again. I request an administrator to kindly help me with explaining the rules if I violated any. Also, I met with an editor who wasn't nice with me. I have something to say about that Editor but I think it will not be proper to say that openly. Can anyone please provide me the contact details of how to share the details. This is the draft page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Jordan_Nash  AntheaNash (talk) 07:46, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Please note that there is a case of undisclosed paid editing and WP:MEAT. I have filled the SPI already and shared the off-wiki details with Arbcom and a few admins so if anyone interested to know more please mail me for private evidence per WP:OUTING. Thank you, GSS ^💬 08:44, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Depending on what the editor said to you they may not have read WP:BITE. But the situation above is a bit more important. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 15:21, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Citing sources in a different language

Citing sources in a different language Hello everyone. First time posting here :)

I would like to create a page about a notable electronic skateboard company but see a potential issue. This company is Italian and has mostly been cited by Italian sources but their market appears to be mostly American. So my question is: should I write this page in English or Italian? If the former, can I cite articles written in a language other than English?

Thanks! Roamingralph (talk) 07:50, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

@Roamingralph: you can write the article in English. See Wikipedia:Verifiability § Non-English sources - non-English sources are allowed. Elli (talk | contribs) 07:53, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

@Roamingralph: here in the English language encyclopaedia all articles must be written in English, if you wish to write a page in Italian you should write it on the Italian Wikipedia. you can use Italian sources, but English language sources are preferred. If you have to pick between two equivalent sources (e.g. an Italian Newspaper and an English one) you should use the English Language source, if the Italian source is significantly higher quality or there is no equivalent source then using Italian sources would be fine. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 09:51, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Something doesn't seem right...

Greetings all. I'm relatively new to editing Wikipedia and until the last day or so, everything had been going swimmingly. That was until I made what I thought was a small and fair edit to the Luke Hughes (furniture designer) page. Since making the edit, a couple of users have reverted the changes back a few times - despite me explaining exactly why the change has been made. I have asked why they keep changing it, and one editor quoted an inappropriate passage of text (that when I checked, wasn't even there) and what they thought to be a weak reference. So, trying to help, I pointed out that the passage of text was different to what the editor had quoted (and quite reasonable in my view - I may be wrong though) and got rid of the weak reference. However, once again the template messages have been put back up and the weak reference reimplemented - despite it being called out as an example of what was wrong with the page. Now I'm being questioned on why I'm editing the article and if I have any kind of connection to the subject or other editors. All-in-all, it just feels like there's something going on here. LAficionado (talk) 08:46, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

The talk page of the article would be the appropriate place to discuss this. --David Biddulph (talk) 08:57, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. That's exactly where I'm discussing it with the two editors in question, but I feel like it needs more eyes for a more reasoned discussion. LAficionado (talk) 09:22, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

I'll take a look at it as I have nothing to do with him and know nothing about him so I Feel my POV might be helpful here. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 13:31, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Nevermind there's a lot going on and I don't understand enough about the situation to be able to be of much use. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 15:19, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

publish article

How do I publish my draft from my sandbox to the mainspace instead of submitting it for review? I believe I am correct in assuming my account is old enough to that I am just not clear how I do it. Thanks for the help. Gandalf the Groovy (talk) 14:36, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure it has to be approved in order to be submitted in the mainspace. There are a few exceptions (such as the very first articles or splitting an article) where this isn't necessary but as far as I know, you have to submit it for review. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 15:17, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Actually, the opposite is true, you are no longer required to submit to AfC. Your track record is one article submitted to AfC and approved, and a second waiting on a reviewer. For your Antarctica draftDraft:Antarctica in World War II, you may still want to consider submitting to AfC rather than promoting it straight to being an article in mainspace. David notMD (talk) 15:38, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

@ David notMD How would I go about moving the article to mainspace? When I hit publish it submit's it. Is there a line of code I have to add. Any help is aprreciated.

Hi Gandalf the Groovy. The way to do so is using the move function – moving the page to a name with no namespace prefix (that's all the mainspace really is). In the move dialogue, this will be indicated with "(article)" in the left hand field. Note that if a page already exists at the title you are attempting to move a page to, this can block the move. In such cases (where you think the move is uncontroversial), you can either use {{db-move}}, or make a technical move request at WP:RM#TR. Certainly, we try to shunt the vast majority of new users to default to submitting through AfC, because of how often their creations are inappropriate entirely or are not ready for the mainspace – but your creations are not what AfC is predominantly needed to rein in! (Though I agree with David notMD that AfC might still be helpful, such as in suggestions for improvement and the like.)

The flip side is that the content that AfC is mostly aimed at keeping herd over as a gatekeeper function, when created directly in the mainspace by new users, rather than getting declined and then improved, will often just be deleted straightaway (or just gets maintenance template tagged but without any likelihood of being fixed any time soon, with no equivalent deeply motivating mechanism to impel creator to improve further – which lack of publication is for many; or, unfortunately, escapes much review at all and sits around with copyvios and promotional content etc.)

But there is no requirement that any page be submitted through AfC, nor prohibition against direct mainspace submission – only the technical barrier of autoconfirmation. (In that regard, Blaze The Wolf, answering questions here is I think a very useful activity, but please try not to guess when giving answers, as here and as is quite apparent from some others.) Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 16:24, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Approval algorithm?

Hi Teahouse Team,

I have created a page for my organization. I was initially rejected and I was also informed to not copy/paste in order to avoid copyright violations. All of the material on my created page is our own material. Is there a formal criteria algorithm I can investigate? I've looked at other organization's Wikipedia pages and the one I created is just as if not more than informative than theirs.

Thanks! VPMSX (talk) 14:52, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello, VPMSX and welcome to the Teahouse. Without even looking at your draft, I can tell you that if it is "our own material" then 90% of it is inappropriate to a Wikipedia article (aand this is not even getting into the copyright question). 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) 14:57, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Am I to understand that the best way to get a published article is to have newspaper articles written about us then?

VPMSX (talk) 15:11, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Technically yes. Wikipedia isn't necessarily the best place to get your company known. And it's also not a very good idea for you to write the article anyways according to WP:COI. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 15:19, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Your draft has many paragraphs that are not referenced. Unless you can provide citations for the information that are not from the credit union itself, all that needs to be deleted. David notMD (talk) 15:51, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Also, are you sure you want an article? - X201 (talk) 15:54, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello, VPMSX. Thanks for disclosing your conflict of interest. Please read Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). We take that guideline seriously. Please also read another guideline, Wikipedia:External links. Your draft has inappropriate external links in the body which need to be removed. An essay well worth reading is Your first article. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:19, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Tea cup photo removed?

...Why? As it appears to be unconstructive? (31.187.7.220 (talk) 16:16, 20 April 2021 (UTC))

Please welcome that back again, as it welcomes the users here. (31.187.7.220 (talk) 16:16, 20 April 2021 (UTC))

The photos are rotating, see Wikipedia:Teahouse/Hosts. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:28, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

So they appear unconstructive? (31.187.7.220 (talk) 16:30, 20 April 2021 (UTC))

No, they "are rotating" refers to the fact that at the top of the page the profile of those who have self-designated as hosts shuffles every so often – rotates through the list – some of whom can be viewed at the page Gråbergs Gråa Sång linked, and such displayed host profiles have a picture associated. Just wait and a user with the cup picture will return.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:12, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

The teacup picture appears for Teahouse hosts who have not added a picture for their profile (like me, but i'll get around to it eventually). It's not unconstructive because it actually isn't an edit at all. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 19:09, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Mistake

I really bungled something up. I was attempting to move Draft: Leng Ouch to the mainspace which I accomplished succesfully but then decided to revert. This has created a huge mess of redirects. I am very confused and if someone more experienced with the technical part of Wikipedia could help that would be great. My apologies for any trouble created. Gandalf the Groovy (talk) 16:40, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

@Gandalf the Groovy: Wow that was a lot of moves! It's all done; just a whole bunch of redirects. As I advised above, if you don't submit through AfC, when you are ready to move the page to the Mainspace, make sure the left hand field of the move function dialogue says "(article)" in it, and the title in the right hand field also has no namespace prefix, i.e., just "Leng Ouch". Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:28, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

@Fuhghettaboutit Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gandalf the Groovy (talk • contribs) 17:44, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

How to request for draft edit

How can i request for protected dwarf for edit. Rawalrajendranath (talk) 16:31, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

You can make an edit request on the article's talk page. Or you could be bold and make the edit yourself if you are able to. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 19:07, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Use the Article Wizard. (31.187.7.220 (talk) 16:33, 20 April 2021 (UTC))

About burger king bandana n word man

I want to edit the jetblue article so that the new burger king jetblue situation shows up. What are some good sources? Is the independant a good source? Is fox news a reliable source? Lionsleeps26 (talk) 17:12, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi Lionsleeps26. How does the fact that the airplane involved was operated by Jet Blue relate to the indicent? The answer in my view is that is a very incidental detail. The essence of the incident is an individual's racist meltdown on an airplane, where the airline company involved is essentially irrelevant except as a background detail.

By contrast, if this incident was or included details more airline-company-itself specific (for example, some of the stories we've seen in the news where some flight attendants' actions or inactions caused the parent corporation to issue apologies), that would invoke different analysis grounds (though the focus still might be too diffused).

For these reasons, as a matter of editorial discretion, this incident seems too peripheral and out of scope for any mention in relation to the article topic, an article about Jet Blue, regardless of reliability as to the source one might use to verify the detail.

If, say, we had an article focused on the topic of racist incidents occurring on airplanes, then it might fit there (I am decidedly not suggesting that any such article be created [and think the same would likely be too indiscriminate an article topic]); just hoping to add some clarity on the focus issue I am referring to). Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 18:17, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Text align center

Can you please give me an example of when we need to use text align center and cn you please look on my user page i’ve improved if you have any feeds i’ll be happy to work on it. Superman011 Superman011 (talk) 17:34, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello! While I don't know the answer to your first question, looking at your userpage, if the article doesn't already exist (Which is something i will check after I write this), if you want to make it a draft and submit it for review then your userpage isn't necessarily the best place. Using your sandbox would be better. Your userpage is usually used to give information on who you are (on the internet mainly) and to declare a conflict of interest, or to just fill with userboxes. For an answer to your first question you'll have to wait for another editor to answer it as I don't have enough knowledge to answer it. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 19:04, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

I just checked and that article Dancing with the Stars already exists and you seem to have copied that article to your userpage which isn't necessarily a good idea. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 19:05, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

and additionally, there are very few cases for using center aligned text in an article except for the caption to an illustration or sometimes in a table (as was done there). DGG ( talk ) 05:51, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Difference in citation style

I was trying to see how I could contribute to Black theology and realized that the citation style was a mess. I already made some corrections based on some of the guidelines I read on how to cite sources, but I was unclear whether using citation that are completely included inside the body of the article with some kind of reference name falls outside the citation style of the sfn template that appears to be used for the majority of the sources. These two citation styles aren't supposed to be used at the same time right? I would assume the sfn template is the one that should be used for all of them because it's used with the majority of the sources already and the template seems more suited for a topic like this that will probably be using a lot of long sources and page numbers. If I wanted to cite a guideline when making the correction of converting the refnames to sfn templates what would that guideline be? TipsyElephant (talk) 18:23, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi TipsyElephant, it is fine to mix sfn citations with citations to documents that are cited only once or to newspaper or journal articles that are short enough that specific pages don't need to be cited. Use sfn for books where you are citing pages. We often see Featured Articles with citations mixed like this. StarryGrandma (talk) 18:33, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

@StarryGrandma: Thank you very much! I had asked a similar question earlier and never got a response so the prompt answer is very appreciated. Would it be fair to assume that this answer also applies to other templates like sfn such as harvnb? TipsyElephant (talk) 18:35, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

TipsyElephant, yes. The sfn template is just a form of the harv templates with the <ref> tags automatically included. StarryGrandma (talk) 21:07, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

"Recent Edit undone because it did not appear constructive"

A recent edit of mine (while logged out) was undone on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shell_script. I'm not sure why this was done.

Nevertheless, I believe the edit was constructive. While it was a small change, it brought that sentence more in line with the rest of the surrounding paragraphs, that is, listed shells in the form "Name (command)", as was already the case for other shells, and also removed a dead link for what I feel is (currently) a small enough subject to not deserve its own page.

In any case, at the very least I'd like to know the justification for not allowing my edit, beyond "not constructive", i.e. what specifically made this 9-character change so bad that it needed to be reverted? CoffeeTableEspresso (talk) 19:14, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. You can always revert the reverter's revert. But only at most 3 times a day. You should provide evidence to the reverter that your edit was constructive.

P.S. You shouldn't edit while logged out if you can, or you could be accused of sockpuppetry. Littleb2009 (talk) 19:19, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy link — Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 19:24, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

I have not done anything since my change was reverted since I didn't want to start an edit war. You're right about not editing while logged out, that was my bad. It was just a small edit so I didn't even realize until after it had been reverted. CoffeeTableEspresso (talk) 19:29, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

I checked the edits and found that the version before and after the revert were practically synonymous. You could just let it go and leave. Alternatively, combine the two versions of the article before and after your edit. Littleb2009 (talk) 19:45, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

@CoffeeTableEspresso: You added text that claims that osh means "Oil Shell", which is not supported by the man page or any other source that I can find. The man page, which is linked in the article, clearly states that "osh" means "old shell" and the word "oil" does not appear in the man page. If you have evidence otherwise, please discuss it on the article's talk page. Do not revert the change again without discussing. CodeTalker (talk) 19:51, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

@CodeTalker: Thank you, this would have been nice to know at the start, when my edit was originally reverted. (I would not have reverted had I been given this reason initially.) I've reached out to Andy Chu about what it stands for, I will update on what he says once I hear back. Either way, "Old Shell (osh)" or even "OSH (osh)" are also better than what's currently on the page IMO.CoffeeTableEspresso (talk) 20:09, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

@CodeTalker: I see the confusion here, we're talking about two different shells both named osh. I didn't realize Old Shell existed when I made the edit, my mistake. CoffeeTableEspresso (talk) 20:51, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

reframe

steps on reframing your life 47.181.138.146 (talk) 19:47, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

That's a very profound statement, IP editor, but do you actually have a question for us about how to edit Wikipedia that you want to ask? After all - that's what we're here for. Deeper, more philosophical matters probably ought to be referred to a much higher authority. Best wishes, Nick Moyes (talk) 19:57, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Protect popular articles

Please protect popular unprotected articles, e.g. Portugal. (31.187.7.220 (talk) 20:10, 20 April 2021 (UTC))

There is no reason to do this as the main reason articles are protected is to protect them from vandalism. Just because an article is popular does not mean it needs to be protected. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 20:16, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Actually, I noticed that the Portugal page is Pending Changes protected. Littleb2009 (talk) 20:40, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Also, requested is Ben Dunne, which has too much "vandalism" by me. (31.187.7.220 (talk) 20:20, 20 April 2021 (UTC))

Check the edit history and you’ll see. (31.187.7.220 (talk) 20:26, 20 April 2021 (UTC))

You can make the request at WP:RFPP. The article Ben Dunne does not have any recent edits so protection likely not needed. RudolfRed (talk) 20:39, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello 31.187.7.220, I removed your request for protection of Ben Dunne. Such requests should be made at WP:RFPP and not on the article's talk page. However making requests because of High level of IP vandalism when most IP edits where done by you, is pointless. Unless you are asking to be blocked (again). – NJD-DE (talk) 22:43, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

How To Join

How To Join The Teahouse Crew Phantom Digital (talk) 20:58, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

It might help to start responding to Teahouse posts first. ♔MEisSCAMMER^{(talk)(contribs)} 21:43, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

You just registered an account a few days ago. If you are interested in becoming a Teahouse host - basically a question answerer about editing Wikipedia - then I suggest looking at the questions asked and replies from experienced hosts for a couple of months before essaying answers yourself. David notMD (talk) 22:02, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Revision of my draft : Michel Rivera

 Courtesy link: Draft:Michel Rivera

Hi Wikipedians, I have been told by a good friend in Wikipedia that my content of the article Michel Rivera Seems Promotional. It would be nice if someone helps me to the promotional things out of the Article. Thanks in Advance!!! Jocelin Andrea (talk) 01:16, 21 April 2021 (UTC) Jocelin Andrea (talk) 01:16, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Doing that would require a complete rewrite, so no. But here's a start: Something-something "showed his act of kindness and humanity from Michel". To whom did it show this? Just to you, or to the unrelated writer of a reliable source about Rivera, and if so, which and where? (Incidentally, why the chummy "Michel" rather than "Rivera"?) And as the draft stands now, it appears that nothing whatever, aside from his "boxing record", is sourced anywhere. -- Hoary (talk) 01:49, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Template lacks documentation

The display of {{Not English inline}}, which is meant for tagging a phrase or sentence that should be translated into English or be accompanied by a translation, links to WP:Template index/Translation, where it is not described at all. See Template talk:Not English inline#bad message. Thnidu (talk) 01:21, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Why my wikipedia page got rejected?

 Courtesy link: Draft:Sankaran Thayumanavan

Hello: The Wiki page has been rejected again on the grounds that only minor improvements have been made and that it is encyclopedic. I have some serious concerns about this process.

First of all, there have been extensive changes from the last version to now. But, it still says that it is only minor.

Secondly, I would be happy to bring to your attention 10s of other Wiki pages of scientists, whose stature is similar or lower, but with Wiki pages that fit the so-called encyclopedic description. In fact, my original submission was precisely modeled after two scientists' wiki page whose accomplishments are very similar.

Having waited this long and seeing the rejection is something that I cannot understand at all.

Please let me know about the next steps.

Thanks, ShankarThai (talk) 01:38, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Telling us what the article is would be a good first step!! --Bduke (talk) 01:46, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

@ShankarThai: Welcome to the Teahouse. If this is in regards to the draft I've linked to up top, are you having any difficulties understanding what reviewers mean by their comments? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:54, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

User:ShankarThai - Are you the subject of the article? Is the article an autobiography? Robert McClenon (talk) 03:13, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

User:ShankarThai - The only edits you have made in more than a year have been for one article on one person. Do you have a conflict of interest? If you are the subject, that is a conflict of interest. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:18, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

@ShankarThai: Welcome to the Teahouse! You might also be interested in the essay Wikipedia:Other stuff exists. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 03:35, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

It should not have been rejected. He meets one of the qualification for WP:PROF, as a Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. , one of the 2 highest honors in US science. Since it is sourced, there is no reason not to accept it. , and I have done so. Further improvements can be made in main space. I will assume the most reccent reviewer did not notice that. . DGG ( talk ) 04:44, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

More exactly,

The version first submitted on Jan 6 [5] was reviewed by a very trustworthy reviewer, who commented correctly that it did show notability but had other problems, primarily far too many citations to the work. That reviewer also commented correctly that the tone suggested that of an autobiography, presumably thinking of the awards section as it was at the time.

The version revised on Jan 12 that I saw on Jan 15. [6] had somewhat fixed the tone, and had fewer, but still an excessive number of references to the work.

I then did a preliminary cleanup to [7], reduced to the most important awards and cleaning up some wording. It was then revised to [8] on Nov 9 by the contributor, restoring unnecessarily some of the awards, but correctly removing most of the references.

Another review saw it a few days later, making the comment [9] that "The draft is being continuously submitted without any improvements", a conclusion which could not have been reached if the history had been examined, and rejecting it as is done when articles are in fact submitted 3 or more times without perceptible change, but which was completely inappropriate here, as the article had only been submitted twice, and had been very radically improved.

The contributor came here, and the relevant comment from the original reviewer mentioning the apparent COI but not commenting on the improvements, and an irrelevant one from another reviewer that did not consider the notability .

I then accepted the article. The COI did not matter at that point because the article was a plain descriptive article with a neutral POV, but I did say that it was still not yet in our format, but fixable.

since then, the wikitable incorrectly used as an infobox was removed, but should have been converted to the proper infobox which would have shown essentially the same information, and various minor cleanup done.

Further work remains necessary: adding the infobox, indicated the number of citations from Scopus or Google Scholar to the most cited articles, and possibly restoring a slightly more extended description of the work, but using them inimum number of references to support it, as this is not an academic CV nor a scientific papers, where one lists everything possibly relevant. It is completely appropriate to give an somewhat fuller discussion of the work of a scientist so eminent as to be an AAAS Fellow.

The original fault was ours. We should have ourselves written bios for every fellow of the AAAS, so it would not be necessary for people to adopt the much more difficult course of writing their own. Then we did OK--the person submitted low quality article, two of us looked at it, and it was much improved. Ideally I should then have gotten back to it to follow up my original cleanup, but in practice I do not have time to do that, and must rely on other reviewers. The next review was unfortunate, but as is obvious to anyone here, there is a very understandable tendency to be rather impatient with people who submit work that is apparently COI, because 90% of the time, the person is not in fact clearly notable, and the other problems with the draft never do get fixed. I want to express my appreciation to the subject, who was persistent enough to bring it here. And also to Marchjuly who notified me. I unfortunately am not able to watchlist all the pages I work on, and I hope people will notify me if something I had worked on comes here, and they disagree with my previous work or remarks. DGG ( talk ) 05:33, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Can "Page Status" replace "Assessment" for my Top edits per namespace page?

When checking my edit contributions to Wikipedia, I discovered the word "Assessment" in the titles of various tables. It applies to the page status completion of the article. If it isn't defined as the page's status it implies to be grading my individual edit contribution. People are used to seeing personal A/B/C grades on our report cards, not team grades. https://xtools.wmflabs.org/topedits/en.wikipedia.org/Kartane This use of the word Assessment will appear elsewhere in Wikipedia regarding edits and/or page status. Kartane (talk) 01:59, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

@Kartane: If it isn't clear, those are the content assessments of the page that you edited, not a rating of your personal contributions. This is what the word "assessment" widely refers to in the context of Wikipedia. Meanwhile, "Page status" does not have a widely-understood meaning among editors. XTools is intended for your own personal reference only, so as long as you know what "assessment" means, that's good enough. The maintainers of XTools are unlikely to change it just for you. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 03:27, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

To [User:Ganbaruby|◢  Ganbaruby! ]

The page in question relates to my edit stats. The table shows 1) my Edits, 2) Page title, 3) Assessments, 4) Links.

"Assessment" in the table heading means Content Assessments within Wikipedia. Shouldn't it say "Page assessments" the same as it says "Page title"? Even Content Assessments implies my personal edit contribution in this table on a page about my edits. The table headings look like 1) My stats, 2) Wikipedia, 3) My stats, 4) Wikipedia. Also, did I reply correctly?

Kartane (talk) 04:23, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

@Kartane: Again, I highly doubt that's going to happen, but you still may ask about it at mw:Talk:XTools. Also, you didn't notify me correctly; I suggest you look at Template:Reply to. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 07:40, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Notability

So, I spent a few minutes on the various Bee Gees' (and Andy Gibb's) entries a few days ago adding in the name of their mother and sister as 'relatives'. One of these (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_Gibb) was reverted and the others I think just quietly had Barbara and Lesley Gibb's names deleted. The reversion was justified on the basis that relatives had to be 'notable'. I suppose on one level, I get that, but in this instance (1) I don't think this helps at all with Wikipedia's 'women problem', (2) since Wikipedia cannot in itself count as basis for 'notability', on what basis is 'notability' decided? The reason I ask in this case is, I would propose that being the mother or sister to some of the biggest-selling musicians of the 20th/21st century is notable in itself (Lesley also has enough interaction with the music industry IMO to warrant an entry of her own, which would clearly change the situation, but I don't want to muddy the waters right now). When it comes down to it I think the kind of person who would assiduously delete the women out of the Bee Gees' history has at least as much of an agenda as I, who would assiduously add them. But I'm interested in both policy, precedent and opinion of others, not necessarily on the matter of the Bee Gees' mother and sister, but on this kind of issue. Davidnicholsknowsbest (talk) 02:17, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

@Davidnicholsknowsbest: Welcome to the Teahouse! I believe Wikipedia:Notability (people) and Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Privacy of names are what you're looking for. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 02:38, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

OK, thank you for that. So: 'The names of any immediate, former, or significant family members or any significant relationship of the subject of a BLP may be part of an article, if reliably sourced, subject to editorial discretion that such information is relevant to a reader's complete understanding of the subject.' But do these people qualify as 'relations'? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.250.0.113 (talk) 02:44, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

@Davidnicholsknowsbest: Template:Infobox person#Parameters is also applicable. Lesley is already mentioned in the Andy Gibb article, so the question is simply whether she belongs in the infobox or not. Note how Ruth McCartney is not listed in the infobox in the Paul McCartney article, and George Harrison's sister Louise is not listed in his infobox - but both are mentioned in the body of the article. GoingBatty (talk) 02:46, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Davidnicholsknowsbest, infoboxes are controversial, and some experienced editors oppose their use. One problem with infoboxes is that they tend to get filled with excessive data like every identifiable relative. A reasonable point of view is that relatives listed in infoboxes should be limited to notable relatives with Wikipedia articles. Otherwise, infoboxes will become filled with genealogical lists of many relatives. That does not assist rapid overview understanding of the topic (a person in this case), which is the function of an infobox. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:11, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

How am I doing on Wikipedia?

Hello! I am a new editor who has made some changes. I'd like to know how I'm doing and if I should change? Quaverstand15 | Talk 03:40, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Welcome! It's good to see you. Have a cuppa tea. Or a coffee if you prefer. Check the pages you've edited and see if any reversions have been made to your edits. If you don't understand them, send a message to the editor who did the fixes. (Hint: One of them was me.) Happy editing! Sincerely, BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 03:55, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Quaverstand15: Welcome to the Teahouse! Thank you for your contributions! Some suggestions:

• When posting to someone's talk page, be sure you mention what article you're referring to. (e.g. this edit to User talk:174.18.45.201)
• When posting to a talk page, be sure you sign your posts (even when substituting a template). (e.g. this edit to User talk:2405:205:C8A7:AE9B:703D:76AC:AC47:6CE3)
• When reverting someone's edits, please give a short reason why in the edit summary per WP:REVEXP. (e.g. this edit to Amrapali Express)
• In your edit to Colour TV case, it appears you changed the article from Indian English to American English. Please don't change the variety of English in an article (especially one tagged with a template like {{Use Indian English}}, per WP:ENGVAR.
• You added Category:Films to Adda (2019 film), when the subcategory Category:Indian films is more appropriate per WP:CATSPECIFIC. Similarly, on Untitled21, I think Category:1970s photographs is better than the general Category:Photography. Also, you added only one general category to Alexander Rodenstock, so I've added more specific categories.

You'll get the hang of it - Keep up the good work! GoingBatty (talk) 04:12, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

@BeenAroundAWhile and @GoingBatty Okay, thank you! Quaverstand15 | Talk 04:14, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

@Quaverstand15: One more: At Operation IceBridge, you found some vandalism and kindly reverted it and warned the user. However, the IP editor made four bad edits in a row, and you only reverted the last one. I've reverted the rest. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 04:23, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty Oh, I didn't see. Thank you. Quaverstand15 | Talk 04:43, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

My post is getting declined everytime

Hi, Iam new to wikipedia. Can you please guide me why my draft is getting declined ? i HAVE ATTACHE DTHE MESSAGE SHOWN TO ME. Iam don't know what steps should I proceed .

 Aathiravp (talk) 06:21, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Aathiravp. There is already a Wikipedia article Joyalukkas, and I recommend that you expand that article instead of trying to create a new article about a branch of that company. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:27, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Your screenshot, Aathiravp, shows a light blue box with text saying This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies)" (plus some italics and links). That tells you why the draft was declined. The following text (which I shan't repeat here) tells you what you should do. If some part of this text is hard to understand, please ask here about it. Meanwhile, I have two questions for you:

• Why are you editing in the userspace of somebody else (Killugon1234)?
• I get the impression that you and Killugon1234 are related to Joyalukkas Lifestyle Developers. Am I wrong?

-- Hoary (talk) 07:13, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Documentation of Sudanese important people

What are the requirements of documentation for the important people in society, I have many social and historical people in Sudan I need to write information about them in The Wikipedia for the purpose of documenting these people. Abdulla (talk) 07:56, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Abdulla2021, see Wikipedia:Notability (people). In short, your article needs to be a summary of reliable sources (WP:RS) about that person, nothing else should be in the article. If there are no such sources, the article will not be accepted. These sources must be added as references in the correct manner, see WP:TUTORIAL. If you intend to write about living people, the restrictions are even stricter, see WP:BLP. Help:Your first article may be of help to you, and perhaps WP:WPAFRICA. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:10, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

How to move or rename pages or articles?

How to move or rename pages or articles? Is it a new user cannot move or rename pages or articles? Please give me permissions to do pages moves or rename. Thank you. PutraMalaya78 (talk) 08:20, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

@PutraMalaya78: Page moves, as documented at WP:MOVE, is restricted to autoconfirmed users, which you will be on April 23. That being said, I strongly suggest new editors to refrain from moving an article until they have more experience with editing; instead, new editors should go to requested moves to have input from more experienced editors. May I ask which page you would like to move? ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 08:27, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Unprotect creation of Anushka Sen

I have significantly contributed and expanded Draft:Anushka Sen. I feel it is ready for mainspace. As review process may take lot of time, I decided to move it myself but the destination is creation protected since 2 years. Now please remove that protection as subject is notable. The protecting admin is no longer admin, hence I am requesting it here. -- Parnaval (talk) 11:00, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Parnaval To contact administrators directly you should use the administrator's noticeboard; however, as an administrator I would encourage you to allow the review process to play out as it is better to find out any problems before the draft is made a part of the encyclopedia and not afterwards, especially with a topic that has been deleted and recreated several times. Do you have a specific need for a speedy review? Have you addressed the reasons for deletion given in the deletion discussions? 331dot (talk) 11:10, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Advice on appropriate sources

Hey all!

I'm looking to make some changes to the Netmums wikipedia entry (I have a COI and am a paid editor and have declared this on the relevant pages).

At the moment, the intro para about Netmums talks about 'As of 2012...' obviously this is nearly a decade ago. I tried to update the page to say that Netmums now produces daily editorial content (and is no longer just a forum). This change was rejected. I'm not sure if this was because it was deemed promotional or because the citation I gave was the Netmums website itself.

I'm not sure what would be considered a legitimate source to show that the website produces daily content other than the website itself?

Plus, I wondered if you had any advice on how to word this addition so it isn't considered promotional – in my mind it's just factual and updating the page to give users info on Netmums that is correct as of 2021 not 2012.

Any advice would be greatly apreciated. Thanks! JPjourno (talk) 11:10, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

What are COI's?

I see a lot about it but I don't know what it is. So what is it? Quaverstand15 | Talk 11:52, 21 April 2021 (UTC)