Wikipedia:Teahouse

Stormy clouds, 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

Almost unsourced BLP survives AfD — now what?

Earlier I took Stan Freese to AfD on notability grounds; it survived, which is fine of course. However, there's a related problem (which, had the AfD gone the other way, would have been resolved, alas...) in that the article is a BLP of some length, yet it's only supported by two (IMO flaky) sources, each cited once, ie. the vast majority of it is unreferenced. And it has been, and been tagged, like that for years. What should I do next (other than moving on and minding my own business) — should I delete the unsupported content, which would mean removing entire sections? Should I expressly not do that, since I'm the one who moved the AfD? (I should also mention that there is evidence of at least some COI editing, see here, and it looks like removing content might not go down very well with certain IP editors.) Any advice? Thanks, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:22, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, DoubleGrazing. Several sources were identified in the AfD. Use the best of them to improve and expand the article. Or move on. The choice is yours, though my first recommendation is the best, in my opinion. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:45, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Cullen328. Yes, a number of sources were identified, that's true, and they might be enough to establish notability; whether they are enough to support the article contents needs looking into. (Just to mention, though, that the LA Times piece is an interview, the Disney one a close source, one returns 404, one only mentions this person once in passing... so basically we're down to a single source that actually is worth anything, AFAICS.) Anyway, if those two are my options — work on the article myself (which I've zero interest in doing) or move on, I guess I'll choose the latter. :) Cheers, --DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:00, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

I don't know. But if you're starting to wonder whether perhaps it's just you who thinks that the article is wretched, no, the article is wretched. -- Hoary (talk) 06:51, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the note of solidarity, @Hoary: I just think that it makes a mockery of the BLP policy, that articles like this can be published and left there for years, and there doesn't seem to be an obvious, easy way of enforcing the rules. But I'm too old and tired (IRL) to even try to right such great wrongs... ;) Best, --DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:30, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi DoubleGrazing. You could be WP:BOLD and just improve the article as you deem necessary either by finding sources for content you feel is important or removing unsourced content that you feel is superfulous or not as important. If the AfD was a bit contentious or there were quite a few WP:BEFORE or WP:NEXIST comments made by those who felt the article should be kept, then it might be better to be WP:CAUTIOUS instead. Try stating your concerns on the article's talk page and notifying those who participated in the AfD and inviting them to discuss things. The editors who felt the article should be kept might have some ideas on how to improve it. If you don't get lots of responses, you can always then try asking for feedback from relevant WikiProjects. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:53, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

That discussion is pretty short, although some sources were provided to that appear to establish notability. But, if there are no significant improvements to the BLP in the next 12-24 months then a second AfD could be justified to obtain a more thorough consensus. Although I would not do this if you can find significant coverage yourself in the meantime, per WP:BEFORE. Polyamorph (talk) 07:53, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

The discussion concluded that sources exist which could be used to demonstrate notability; but they have still not been so used. I think the article should be converted to draft until someone finds time to do the work. I'm not going to try myself, as I have no understanding of music. Maproom (talk) 12:45, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

The article does need sourcing but this does not indicate a lack of coverage. Since it has been decided that it should be kept, why not improve it (e.g. address the WP:BROCHURE tone of some parts) rather than subjecting it to another contentious AfD? Like what a previous post stated, all participants can perhaps move on to more productive things. Darwin Naz (talk) 22:07, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

ARTICLE GETS DELINED ALWAYS

I really don't understand, when I see other articles on the same platform, passed the qualification, and got approved. I followed the same way when writing my article but get decline. Do you consider based on Popularity or facts? Ophirizayamba2021 (talk) 20:39, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

This regards Draft:Malawi Luxury Inc. Seeing as you are writing what appears to be an advertisement for this company, it is no wonder it has been declined repeatedly. Wikipedia is not an advertising agency. If you wish to make your brand more noticeable, please contact an ad agency. To create an article for a company is a difficult thing. Read WP:BOSS for my general advice on editing about a company. AdmiralEek ^{Thar she edits!} 20:43, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

@Ophirizayamba2021: Fix ping AdmiralEek ^{Thar she edits!} 20:44, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Ophirizayamba2021, please read Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) for a better understanding of what makes a company notable and therefore eligible for a Wikipedia article. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:50, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

The only problems I see is that the section names are all caps, in the main thing there is a link showing and not a reference. That’s all I can see. Maybe check if you have cap locks on Josh cant edit at all (talk) 20:53, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

The article is written like a advertisement. The punctuation is also missing in lots of spots. The lead section (which in this article's case is most of the whole article) isn't cited either. TigerScientist Chat > contribs 21:14, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

• Ophirizayamba2021 Please see other stuff exists. Other similar articles existing does not automatically mean yours can too. As this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, it is possible for inappropriate articles to go undetected, even for years. We can only address what we know about. If you want to help out, please identify some of these articles you have seen for possible action. 331dot (talk) 21:36, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Before you do anything, reply to the PAID query on your Talk page. If you are paid, must be declared on your User page. If not, state that on your Talk page. David notMD (talk) 21:57, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Ophirizayamba2021 (talk) 01:56, 20 May 2021 (UTC) This article is NOT PAID, If I indicated at first, then I must have missed it, This is not paid, Let me give you a bit hint. In Malawi, there is No Print on demand, and this just started Last Year, I provided links based on what has been achieved and what others are talking about it. Malawi is not Europe, its one of the poorest, so some new companies take time to get that Public figure status, If you require it to mature for years before writing an article about it, then I can totally understand, but I was more than careful when starting the project, followed all the processes, checked how others are coming up with articles, this is why am surprised to get a note that it looks like an advertisement. I love Wikipedia

Ophirizayamba2021 (talk) 06:06, 21 May 2021 (UTC) I have not get any response from you please update me with the proceedings.

Ophirizayamba2021 You have had many many responses. So sum them up, the sections are in all caps, it is like an ad, punctuation issues are prevalent, and it is unsourced. TigerScientist Chat > contribs 18:55, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Ophirizayamba2021 (talk) 21:49, 21 May 2021 (UTC) I have heard, your points. So now, what is the first step i need to do to the article ? so i can improve it

How can I improve this draft?

I have made an outline, and have a collection of source down below, however I got stuck on writing a good topic sentence for each section. If anyone has tips on writing these and improve the article in general, I would be happy to hear them and try to include it to the article :) DrifAssault (talk) 05:26, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Please note that most of the sources are VIetnamese, as it is one of the languages i can understand very well, and that is where most of the sources is. They are generally very reliable (except primary and trinary sources) since all of articles have editorial oversight. DrifAssault (talk) 05:30, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Your draft has a lead. And it has a lot of headers. None of these headers is followed by any text. Are you hoping that other people will look through your unsorted list of references (all of which appear to be in Vietnamese), decide which can be usable where, digest these, decide what's most important within what they say, and then write the topic sentences? If so, I doubt that you'll have any takers. If I misunderstand (and I hope that I do), please explain. -- Hoary (talk) 05:37, 20 May 2021 (UTC) [Accidentally (I hope) removed by Lowercase Sigmabot; readded -- Hoary (talk) 05:52, 20 May 2021 (UTC)]

Yeah, guess I need to do it by myself then... DrifAssault (talk) 06:42, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Draft: Elmer G. Cato

FYI

 – added WL to Header -Maresa63 ^Talk 07:08, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, can I have my article reviewed again? I would appreciate any inputs to it so I can continue editing.

Thank you! StratCom1080 (talk) 05:54, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Teahouse hosts are (mostly) not also Reviewers. You resubmitted the draft on 18 May after making corrective edits. It goes into the backlog of 5,000+ drafts waiting for review. David notMD (talk) 14:23, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

@StratCom1080: Your comment so I can continue editing suggests you don't realise that it is perfectly acceptable, and even encouraged, for you to continue editing the draft while it awaits another review. Other editors have already tried to improve it and you can do so as well, especially to tackle the comments made by the reviewers who declined the earlier versions. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:32, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

I created a article about law of India

Some days back I written a article about The Dowry Prohibition Act 1961. I tried to write this law's status in infobox but I can't able to do that. I need you to write it and improve article. Huge Earth (talk) 06:09, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

@Huge Earth: Template:Infobox law's |status= parameter only takes a strict list of inputs, which can be found in it's documentation. "Active" is not one of them; instead, try "Current" or "In force". ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 08:18, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Article for fretboard diagrams?

I just noticed while going through the Guitar chord page that there are no explanations for how fretboard diagrams are read. After some more searching, I could not find any other page with it either. I could be wrong, but if the information is not on Wikipedia, I'm planning on making a page for it, in which case I would greatly appreciate some help on drafting it. Thanks! —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 06:42, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

TechnoSquirrel69, I would say a good article title would be Fretboard diagram. Make sure that the topic is actually important, and read WP:GNG. If you cannot prove sufficient notability (2-3 sources) it will not be accepted. For now, I've created an article at Draft:Fretboard diagram. I, personally, have no idea what a fretboard diagram is, so I can't really help you much. Sungodtemple (talk) 12:27, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Wikidata help page?

I wanted to ask if there is a similar place to ask questions but for wikidata instead of english wikipedia because I can't find one 87.119.186.254 (talk) 07:32, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi IP, I think it's at wikidata:Wikidata:Project chat. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 08:12, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks! 87.119.186.254 (talk) 08:32, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

add photo and link article

Dear community, I am new to wikipedia. I have translated the article for "Irene Bertschek" from German to English. It got accepted, now I would like to use the same picture as in teh German article. ALso , the comments tell me, the English article is an "orphan". What can I dou to change this?

Thank you for help! Nebelao (talk) 08:04, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

@Nebelao: Another user, Victor Schmidt, put the image in for you, and I cropped the image so that the person isn't too small. Click on "edit source" and look at the image syntax to see how we did it. For further reading, see Help:Pictures. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 08:31, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

@Nebelao: "Orphan" just means that no other article links to Irene Bertschek. An obvious way to make such links for biographies is to consider which institutions the person studied at or is associated with. So the article has a reference to her studying at the Université catholique de Louvain. Hence it is valid to add & link her name in that article, at Université_catholique_de_Louvain#Alumni. Note that such lists in articles are only to be used for notable people: the evidence for notability in this case being that the article about her exists. Actually, in my opinion, her notability as an academic is a bit thin based on the sources so far, so you might like to try to find some additional ones. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:19, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Is the earth flat

Is the earth flat? RolmazingRol-N (talk) 08:34, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

It depends on your point of view. -Roxy . wooF 08:35, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

No, the earth is not flat. Paul Vaurie (talk) 08:55, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

In my opinion, "earth" can be flat, "Earth", not. David notMD (talk) 14:25, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

MAYBE ITS FLAT MAYBE ITS NOT????????? (sorry for caps its a joke) TigerScientist Chat > contribs 15:25, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Not where I live. It's a steep climb to the top of my road to get to the shops or the bus stop. Can't speak for the rest of the world, of course. Mike Marchmont (talk) 15:34, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

I sailed a boat all the way across the pacific ocean in 2012, and it was flat all the way (except the bumpy, wavy bits, and they were flat on average) back then. But it may have changed?Wayne 03:12, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:MC_Kevin.jpg

Hello. This file https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:MC_Kevin.jpg should be deleted immediately, it is a copyright violation. Someone classified the work as their "own work" when on the Portuguese Wikipedia it is clearly under fair use or something. It should be deleted on all other Wikipedias. Paul Vaurie (talk) 08:53, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

I have requested speedy deletion on Commons, which will stop it being used on all language Wikipedias. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:01, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Inscription of Hüis Tolgoi

Hi there guys. I recently uploaded a file on Wikimedia; a picture of the Hüis Tolgoi, which can be seen in the relative article. The reason why I uploaded it on Wikimedia is this: it is an inscription on a smooth surface of stone with a depression in the upper part. While, like a painting, it has a rear side with an irregular surface, that part has little to zero artistic and historical value, similarly to the frame of a painting. The "scanner-like" photograph is of the front, inscribed part. That is I considered this a " two-dimensional" historical object/object of art, such as the page of a manuscript, with the copyright belonging to the artist who created it and died in the 5th/7th century. However, they made me doubt this, so I ask you guys what you think? Should we delete or keep the file? Thanks.--Haldir Marchwarden (talk) 09:23, 20 May 2021 (UTC) Haldir Marchwarden (talk) 09:23, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

The way the admins at Wikimedia Commons will see it, is that you've uploaded a photo you found on Twitter, in violation of the rights of the photographer. You may be able to persuade them that the photographer in fact has no rights; but you'll have to make that argument there, not here at en-Wikipedia. Maproom (talk) 12:55, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Maproom you are right, the photo was found on Twitter. The point is, like you hinted at, whether the photographer has rights. How many pictures of paintings and manuscripts taken from the web, and the socials, are there at Wikimedia? But how do you categorize this stele? Anyway, I don't intend to make an argument, if it has to be deleted then it should be deleted. I just wanted to inform the admins of my possible (likely) mistake. It would be nice if you can redirect me to the place at Wikimedia where I can re-post this message. Thanks.--Haldir Marchwarden (talk) 15:56, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Haldir Marchwarden, try Commons:Village_pump/Copyright or Commons:Help_desk. I am biased here. I have a web site from which I sell digital images, scans of out-of-copyright maps. My country, the UK, recognises my "sweat of the brow" in creating, cleaning, rectifying, cropping, recolouring, etc., these images, and regards me as holding copyright in them. US law does not. But both countries regard the act of pointing a camera at someone's face and pressing the button as creating copyright. Maproom (talk) 16:16, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Alright, I'll try there. Thanks.--Haldir Marchwarden (talk) 16:25, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Sandbox

I would like to know if the my texts in my sandbox which I use to practice, will these texts be seen by the public or only the administrators. It is hardly complete and I would like to take more time to practice as I am new and just started today with Wikipedia Adventure. An excellent tool. Appreciate your advice on this. Acariya (talk) 09:31, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

@Acariya They can be seen by anyone. CommanderWaterford (talk) 09:36, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Acariya, Yes, but don't fret if you believe it's available directly; people would have to search our draftspace in order to find yours, so it's out of the way of common public viewing. Panini!^🥪 10:13, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

[Edit Conflict] CommanderWaterford is correct to say that they can be seen by anybody, but only if the person knows or guesses that you have a sandbox and knows where to look for it. Your sandbox should be blocked from being indexed by webcrawlers, so should never be found by any search engine query or accidentally stumbled upon. Nevertheless, because it is theoretically findable you should not copypaste any copyright text or picture to it. If you want to copy the text of a (hopefully reliable) source in order to work on paraphrasing it, it's best to use a text editor on your own device, preferably one that contains no (hidden) formatting codes: something like Notepad rather than, say, Word. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.197.27.217 (talk) 10:25, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

 2409:4043:2E18:BBE9:0:0:9909:3F0B (talk) 09:42, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your advise. It is very helpful.

What next?

Hello

I have created a Wikipedia page, and it is currently in 'sandbox mode' how do I take it out of the sandbox and move it onto the proper Wikipedia website?? Bevbot99 (talk) 11:38, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Bevbot99, at its current state your sandbox will not be accepted. It is overly promotional, has unnecessary external links, and uses terms like 'we' instead of they. If you are trying to create an article about your organization, please take a moment to review WP:NORG (to check if your organization is notable) and WP:COI (if you have a conflict of interest with the things you have written about). Also, you may want to improve existing articles first to get a better feel for how articles work. Sungodtemple (talk) 12:22, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello Bevbot99 and welcome to the Teahouse. You can use this link: WP:SUBMIT. However, your article will be rejected if you submit User:Bevbot99/sandbox in it's current form. "is a charitable organisation that has been very much at the heart of our community since it was formed in 1898. The work we carry out..." is not how to write a WP-article, and your article has no references whatsoever. I'm going to throw some links with relevant info at you, hopefully they'll help. WP:GNG, WP:NORG, WP:COI, WP:YFA and WP:TUTORIAL. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:52, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

It is also a blatant copyvio of this web-page - Arjayay (talk) 12:30, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Even more not good, see WP:COPYPASTE. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:32, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Thank you so much for the feedback guys ... when my boss put me on this mission to transfer some of the history of our charity and our building onto Wikipedia, I really didn't realise what an immense learning curve it would be. I have learnt that not only were we the first place that Anthony Hopkins acted but that Richard Burtons drama teacher and mentor was the chair of our organisation for a while ...and today I learnt that the original huts that the YMCA Port Talbot building started in may have been one of two huts donated to the YMCA but Lady Emily Charlotte Talbot of the family that pretty much founded the town I need to verify that before I add the link to the page about Lady Emily though I will definitely work on toning down the enthusiastic positivity, (its kinda in my nature, which is why I am a natural at publicity for the charity but was a rubbish journalist back when I did that for a living lol) And I will edit the speaking in the first person that my boss wanted me to copy and paste from the webpage out too.... a little bit of objectivity is clearly needed.

So there isn't a 'press button A to go live' thing? Its about it meeting community standards first .....cool .....now I have to work hard to meet those standards I gues (and not let you guys down) :)

Lets put this in order...

• when my boss put me on this mission to transfer some of the history of our charity and our building onto Wikipedia I am afraid we likely have arrived within the scope of WP:PAID. If I am allowed to give you some advice, 99% of the texts written not specifically for Wikipedia are not useable on Wikipedia, because they break one or the other policy. Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Words to watch might be of interest. Maybe WP:PROUD would also be worth a read
• I really didn't realise what an immense learning curve it would be. You're not the first one. I speak from experience when I say that may people underestimate the amount of work it takes to create a new Wikipedia article.
• its kinda in my nature, which is why I am a natural at publicity for the charity but was a rubbish journalist back when I did that for a living lol Being positive isn't bad at all, It certainly can help you in some places. But I am afraid it might be unhelpfull or hindering in some cases, and writing a Wikipedia article is certainly one of them.
• my boss wanted me to copy and paste from the webpage out too As I said above, many texts not written specifically for Wikipedia are unsiutable for it. Not to mention that copying & pasting from other websites can have other problems, too, because of Wikipedia's content license. Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:10, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

please change my old articles name ( new Articles is Darveshpur Shikarpur Bulandshahr Uttar Pradesh)

Dear sir i want to change my old articals name ( new articals is Darveshpur Shikarpur Bulandshahr Uttar Pradesh ) my new articles not showing in chrome browser Thank you for help --Darveshpur (talk) 11:52, 20 May 2021 (UTC) Darveshpur (talk) 11:52, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

You haven't written an article. You have an unsourced draft at Draft:Darveshpur, Uttar Pradesh, and you have what appears to be an attempt at a draft article, misplaced on your user page at User:Darveshpur. The latter has been tagged for speedy deletion, so before it is deleted you ought to move its content to the draft page. You've had advice at User talk:Darveshpur. You also ought to read the advice at WP:Your first article, and the Manual of Style. - David Biddulph (talk) 12:29, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

How many categories are enough?

After asking a previous question I discovered that I am meant to remove "no categories" and "not enough categories" messages myself, but I'm not sure how many categories are needed before I do this. For example, Bing_Zhang seems to have quite a few categories, but still has the message. Should I remove the message in cases like this? if not, how do I tell when to? Many thanks in advance, DirkJandeGeer (talk) 13:35, 20 May 2021 (UTC) DirkJandeGeer (talk) 13:35, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Use WP:COMMONSENSE. In this case it would be appropriate to remove the template. For example, let's say someone makes an obscure article about someone who competed in the 1920 olympics. There is no other information about them. All the categories you could really add are dead people and people who competed in the 1920 olympics. That, in my opinion, would be enough, as there is no other information about them. Sungodtemple (talk) 13:42, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Hey! Could you please clarify my doubts?

Could you summarize the Wiki Guidelines and tell me? Vaibhav Vasanth (talk) 14:14, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Don't copypaste from sources. Always add a WP:RS reference that supports what you add to an article. If you can't reference it, don't add it. If you write about living people, be even more careful. When discussing with other editors, be polite. WP:TUTORIAL and WP:ADVENTURE can be a good start. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:29, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Counter to what you asked for, but see Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines and Wikipedia:List of guidelines. "Polite" is important. Editors who become too argumentative or abusive can be blocked. David notMD (talk) 14:33, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Also don't use alt accounts in a argument or get any advantage at all. All text and content added must be reliably sourced. See WP:SOCK, WP:RELIABLE and WP:PILLARS. TigerScientist Chat > contribs 15:19, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

How to put an article in the translation option?

How do I put a French translation of an article in the translation option at the top of the article? Excellenc1 (talk) 15:30, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello @Excellenc1: and welcome to the Teahouse. I am not exactly sure if I understood what you wanted to say but if you want the "This article may be expanded with text translated from the corresponding article in French" template to appear at the beginning of the article you should add Template:Expand language at the top of the article. If you want to translate an article from French then you should read WP:Translate. I hope I helped. Cheers, OakMapping (talk) 15:44, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Sorry user, but that's actually not what I meant to ask. In desktop version, the list of available translations on the left of the article. How do I edit that? Excellenc1 (talk) 15:47, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

@Excellenc1: these lists are maintined on Wikidata, a sister project of Wikipedia Victor Schmidt (talk) 15:58, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Excellenc1, If there are no language links yet, click the "add links" button under "Languages" in the left sidebar. Then you put in the language code "fr" for French Wikipedia, and whatever the title of the article is in the French Wikipedia. If there are already other language links in the sidebar, but French is missing, click "edit links", which takes you to Wikidata. At Wikidata, in the top right of the page there will be a box titled "Wikipedia" with various Wikipedia article titles. Click edit, then add "fr" and the title of the French Wikipedia article. Calliopejen1 (talk) 19:54, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

change my old article ( new article is Darveshpur Shikarpur Bulandshahr Uttar Pradesh )

Can someone please change the old user article (new user article is Darveshpur Shikarpur Bulandshahr Uttar Pradesh) --Darveshpur (talk) 16:04, 20 May 2021 (UTC) My user page is not properly displaying or popup one block (contest this speedy deletion). I am not able to understand about that. --Darveshpur (talk) 16:04, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Link to my user Page User:Darveshpur --Darveshpur (talk) 16:04, 20 May 2021 (UTC) Darveshpur (talk) 16:04, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Darveshpur Your user page is not space to draft an article, but a place for you as a Wikipedia user to tell the Wikipedia community about yourself. You may use your personal sandbox (User:Darveshpur/sandbox) or Articles for Creation to draft articles. 331dot (talk) 16:09, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Your content was first moved to a draft and then deleted because it was in part copied from a website = copyright infringement. It's gone. David notMD (talk) 17:27, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia

Can you play a game on Wikipedia like you answer questions??? Eep Crood (talk) 16:08, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Only kinda. The only place I think would be at Wikipedia:Games TigerScientist Chat > contribs 16:10, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

I think you meant Wikipedia:Wikipedia games. The link you gave is to the Wikiproject for working on articles about games. --Jayron32 16:27, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Oops yeah that link. TigerScientist Chat > contribs 19:24, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Am I allowed to make humorous pages?

I want to know If can make pages designed to make the viewer laugh 100%not fake (talk) 16:56, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

This is an encyclopedia. We do have in-joke pages in places the public don't usually see, but none in the encyclopedia itself. And we don't want any in the encyclopedia, please. ◦ Trey Maturin 17:28, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

No. Absolutely not. The purpose of this project is the writing of an encyclopedia, and we have rules against misusing it to humorous effect*. If you write a joke article, you will very likely be blocked from editing, or at the very least, have that article deleted and be scolded for it by a grumpy admin.

*There are some exceptions to this, but I strongly encourage you not to take advantage of those until you've got some experience editing. For example, some editors have joke pages in their userspace, or have written humorous essays which have made it into Wikipedia space. But one needs experience to know when, where, and how such things are acceptable, and you don't have that experience yet. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 17:30, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

my article move new page

sir my old article move to space draft This is my new article {{Darveshpur Shikarpur Bulandshahr Uttar Pradesh}} --Darveshpur (talk) 17:30, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for help --Darveshpur (talk) 17:30, 20 May 2021 (UTC) Darveshpur (talk) 17:30, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

References

Hi Darveshpur. I'm not sure what you are asking about with regard to the draft, currently located at Draft:Darveshpur Shikarpur Bulandshahr Uttar Pradesh. The AfC submission template in it, at the top, contains a big blue link for "Submit the draft for review!" However, the last reviewer's comment left at the draft, after you last submitted it, said "PLEASE add reliable sources before submitting for review". No reliable, secondary, independent sources that treat the topic in substantive detailTemplate:Z21 were added by you after that comment was left by the reviewer.

After you posted your question here, I took a look and finding it was a copyright violation and plagiarism, reverted the draft to before the previously written material was added, hid part of the history, and left notes about this in the draft and at your talk page. Do you have any follow-up questions?--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:55, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

How do I tag a page for BLP

Hi. I'm trying to tag a page for BLP, so it informs those who edit the page that they are editing an article relating to BLP. But I don't see a tag relating to this sort of thing. Is there an issue? Thanks. Seahawks4Life^{TALK—CONTRIBS} 17:59, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Am I allowed to add an image in case you don't know what I'm talking about? Seahawks4Life^{TALK—CONTRIBS} 18:04, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

(e/c) Hi Seahawks4Life. Please see the article talk page template: {{BLP}}. I know of no template that is geared solely for the purpose of tagging a BLP as a BLP, for display in the article itself. However, there are numerous templates related to BLPs that flag some underlying concern. For example, the list next to "BLP-specific" in {{Citation and verifiability article maintenance templates}}. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 18:09, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. I realized there was a tiny glitch that removed what I was talking about for a couple minutes. It's back now. Seahawks4Life^{TALK—CONTRIBS} 18:15, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

@Seahawks4Life: Ah, great. I was actually composing a follow-up. Probably superflous now, but I thought you might be referring to the output of {{BLP editintro}}, which per its documentation:

This edit intro is shown automatically when editing a page categorized as either Category:Living people or Category:Possibly living people. The edit intro is injected into the edit URL by MediaWiki:Common.js.

This means that the page must be directly or secondarily placed into one of those categories. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 18:22, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Discussion

Hello. A member of Rosguill advised to seek help in this section. I wrote an article in a draft about an organization that is part of the largest state university in Russia - Draft:Moscow Center for Consciousness Studies. I want to show here (I was recommended by an experienced participant) several authoritative sources that consider the activities of the organization. References: 1 - this book has a good overview; 2 - this book also has an overview; 3 - this scientific article discusses the organization in great detail. Unfortunately, all sources are Russian. 2A00:1FA1:4301:DA57:889D:A04E:AFC0:DDF2 (talk) 18:02, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi. See Wikipedia:Verifiability#Non-English sources. In sum, sources do not need to be in English (nor available online). All things being equal, if there is an English source and a foreign language source of equal status (reliability, independence, etc.) we prefer the English as a matter of ease of verifiability for our readers, but outside of that, it is perfectly acceptable to use non-English sources. Please note, though, that as a pragmatic concern, doing so may make a review take longer—because the presence of the foreign language sources is likely to cause some reviewers to move along to review something easier for them to access—but it is never a valid reason to decline a draft from acceptance. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 18:30, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for the explanation. It is very important for me that someone speaks out about my sources. Is the literature, books, and scientific articles that describe the organization suitable? And it is very important to me that someone looks at the style of the article and helps to improve the article in terms of style. Thanks! 2A00:1FA1:FA:37C6:E9A6:63D6:9B13:DB0A (talk) 18:50, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

I recommend that you edit the article yourself the best you can, removing any unreliable sources (and content sourced to unreliable sources) and adding reliable sources (and content citing those sources). Once you believe that you have finished the article, you can submit it for consideration by typing {{subst:submit}} at the top of your draft in the code view and saving. Once it is submitted, a reviewer will consider the sources in the article, the tone of the article, etc. and determine whether it is acceptable. People monitoring the Teahouse board here generally do not handle this review process. Calliopejen1 (talk) 19:04, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Note that there are three separate criteria for a source being satisfactory to establish notability: reliability is one, but the other two are independence from the subject, and having significant coverage of the subject. At least a third of your sources are published by msu.ru, so they are not independent of the Centre. Such sources can be used in certain circumstances (see SELFPUB) but they do nothing to establish its notability, and a section which is supported only by non-independent sources generally does not belong in a Wikipedia article. Remember that Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources. --ColinFine (talk) 21:18, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

@ColinFine: I looked at these sources carefully. The first two books, which describe the organization, have nothing to do with MSU. In the third source, indeed, the author of the scientific article is the MSU processor, so it can not be taken into account, I fully agree with you. Then I will replace it with this source - 1, 2.2A00:1FA1:43B5:8B39:87:A5EF:F442:6993 (talk) 07:27, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

question

am I aloud to use a photo from a source if I put a link to it even if I don't get permission? I just wanna double check Thememe420 (talk) 18:45, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Thememe420, as a general matter, no. Certain photos are freely licensed or public domain, but those are special cases, and most images from around the internet don't fit into either category. Calliopejen1 (talk) 18:58, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

rcats

does every redirect need a rcat? i'm a bit confused, as some don't have one, and some do
 2603:8000:9903:663C:7DFC:7C75:B28F:27B6 (talk) 18:47, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Per Wikipedia:Categorizing redirects, every redirect should have one, though I think in practice most do not because no one has gotten around to categorizing them. Calliopejen1 (talk) 18:57, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Also, it's often difficult to find an appropriate category for a redirect. The whole situation is messy. Elli (talk | contribs) 02:27, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Ethical Issues

Hello. I am author of several traditionally published books which have developed new information at academic standards in a given subject area. I am embarking on a project to edit Wikipedia articles on approx. 20 subjects, to start, for accuracy and the inclusion of new and relevant information. In working on the first one I'm finding a number of errors of fact and omissions of relevant information that I will correct based on my own academically documented information. I will also be editing the article in a few instances where something that is said in one para is contradicted in another, other problems that seem to come from creation by committee.

Also, this particular article makes positive reference to my book on the subject in its main text. I did not put it there and won't delete it of course, but it confuses my problem:

If I were not personally involved in the subject matter in this way I would have no qualms about making the necessary changes and footnoting them primarily or secondarily to the book that is the source of the information. But in reality I wrote the book, which another editor has complimented in the article, and I'm not quite sure how to handle that. My goals are 1) to use my work to increase accuracy and comprehensiveness in Wikipedia (which is a wonderful tool, among others, for writers of nonfiction), but 2) to be sure that my work is as properly credited as any other would be. I've looked at the COI rules for Wikipedia and think that I can operate within their boundaries, but a result after my editing will be an article that both complements my work and uses it extensively in footnotes, edited by me.

I would appreciate any help in thinking this through. Thank you. Vabookwriter (talk) 18:48, 20 May 2021 (UTC) Vabookwriter (talk) 18:48, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi User:Vabookwriter, and welcome to Wikipedia! The official guideline is WP:SELFCITE, which I assume you have come across. Given how thoughtful you sound here, I think it is likely that you will handle your conflict of interest appropriately. I would recommend disclosing who you are on your userpage if you are comfortable with this, so that your editing is totally transparent. You can also check out WP:COIN, the noticeboard that handles conflict of interest issues, though it is more conflict-driven and confrontational than this board. Calliopejen1 (talk) 18:55, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Vabookwriter, WP:EXPERT may also contain some useful guidance, but you seem to be thinking in those lines already. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:22, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Also, with "traditionally published" I hope you don't mean WP:SPS. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:36, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for those kind responses. I will consider disclosure, and you've confirmed that the answer to a professional problem is to act professionally with the best intention. Re traditionally published: the distinction between traditionally and self-published is increasingly made by active authors as the technology and economics of book writing and publishing keep changing at breakneck speed. A forum similar to this one at the Authors Guild, for example, talks through the intricacies and interdependence of the two forms on a daily basis. Wikipedia mores about self published material will have to evolve as self-pub becomes increasingly legitimate as a tool in the author's output. I have seven traditionally published books and one that was originally trad published, but which I had to get back from the publisher and self-publish to keep its momentum, reviews, Amazon listing, etc. viable. Thanks again. Vabookwriter (talk) 05:32, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Vabookwriter, one more thing. If you check the talkpages of articles you are interested in, they should mention near the top one or more related WP:WikiProjects. These have talkpages of their own, and though some are abandonded, it's sometimes possible to get help and advice from topic-savvy editors there. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:23, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Ehsan Naghibzadeh

Hello, I want to publish my first article and I do not know how it will be published. I wrote it for my friend in his name. The article is neutral and the links for proof are given. My article Draft:Ehsan Naghibzadeh was reviewed but it is still not published and I do not know what I need to do that it gets published? Can you please help? Thanks in advance, Lisa Ehsan Naghibzadeh (talk) 19:05, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Ehsan Naghibzadeh, Reviews can take up to five months. You could ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Martial arts if anyone is interested in reviewing it. Most likely, though, you just need to wait patiently. Calliopejen1 (talk) 19:13, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Ehsan Naghibzadeh, one further note -- this one is still pending and has not yet been reviewed. Calliopejen1 (talk) 19:14, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

A PROBLEM: You chose as your User name the name of the person you are trying to create an article about, at Draft:Ehsan Naghibzadeh. David notMD (talk) 19:57, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

@David notMD; I, Lisa, created the article in his name. However, now I created a new account (Volisa) and rewrote the article again (originally also written by me).. does that solve the problem? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ehsan Naghibzadeh (talk • contribs) 20:05, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Suggest Changes to Republish this Articla

Hi,

I was the major contributor to this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Stevep2007/sandbox_james_heppelmann. It was deleted because the votes came from people not knowledgeable about industry 4.0 and the challenges of introducing new products as companies evolves.

The reason for the deletion was notability; however, the subject is notable.

I am interested in documenting Industry 4.0 companies that are not a CoI for me, because I have worked in the undustry.

Your suggestion would be appreciated.

Thank you Stevep2007 (talk) 19:26, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy link: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James Heppelmann. Calliopejen1 (talk) 19:48, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict)@Stevep2007: I took a quick look. I’d remove the entire career history of positions before he became President. It reads too much like a resume, which BTW was already pointed out in the deletion discussion. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 19:50, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Stevep2007 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia is written by volunteers from around the world and intended for all; there is no requirement that people be an expert in the subject areas they participate in, as Wikipedia primarily summarizes what independent reliable sources say. (there are encyclopedia projects out there where one must be an expert in a field in order to write about it, but not here). As you were told, notability is not inherited. Staff of a company do not necessarily merit articles just because the company meets Wikipedia's definition of notability. 331dot (talk) 19:53, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Declined via AfC end of March. In you opinion, is this draft superior to what was deleted? P.S. I deleted the career history because I agree with Tim T. David notMD (talk) 20:14, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi Calliopejen1 and David notMD - thank you for your thoughtful comments. I also looked more deeply at the awards, obtained by from the web. They might be meaningful to a small audience, but do not add any significant insights. Would you please take another look, and let me know if I should make additional changes. Stevep2007 (talk) 22:03, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Title change?

Is there a way to request the title of the article Menkes Developments Ltd. have the period removed from the Ltd at the end? Thank you in advance. 73.0.114.181 (talk) 20:44, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse.The title of the article does not meet the Wikipedia manual of style WP:NCCORP and it should be moved to Menkes Developments. Since that already exists, as a redirect to Murray Menkes, an ordinary editor cannot move the article over it, so I have put in a Move request to do so. (A Move request is what you could have made, but as I say, your preferred title is not appropriate). --ColinFine (talk) 21:31, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Fixed. The article was created and so titled by Excel23, who clearly likes "Ltd." (see the edit summary). If anyone's wondering, titling an article with "Ltd" (with or without a dot) conflicts with article titling convention. (And ColinFine, you're not an administrator? That's a bit silly.) -- Hoary (talk) 22:58, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the appreciation, Hoary. I've never felt a yen to take on that mantle of responsibility. --ColinFine (talk) 09:34, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

But ColinFine, a licence to kill the possession of the administrative machete, blunderbuss, and mop and bucket don't come with any obligation to use them, or even to carry them around. -- Hoary (talk) 09:40, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Artist page creation

Hello, my great-grandfather Wilhelm Karl Dohmann (*1876 Riga) was a commercial portrait- and landscape painter.

During my genealogy research I found very little regarding his education in the Arts, nor have I been able to establish/proof his place and date of death, so far.

Unfortunately at some point in time an auction house put up the birth and death dates and places of another Wilhelm Dohmann, which is now being used as a reference (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wilhelm_Dohmann_Blick_auf_Stadt_und_Feste_Kufstein.jpg). These dates are close to my ancestor's, but not exact. After consultation with a museum registrar we've come to the conclusion that there are not two painters in the same time period with the name Wilhelm Dohmmann.

I would like to create a page for him, publishing a few cornerstone dates and info, for my personal need for accuracy and maybe a bit of acknowledgement of the "job" portrait painter at the turn of the 19th century.

I have looked at other artist pages and noticed that I am lacking info about his formal education.

I have church book entries relating to his birth, marriage (which includes mention of his trade) and the birth of my grandmother. Also advertisements in newspapers for his studios (Riga and Stuttgart), two other activities, that relate to community activity (as painter).

So far I have created a personal page documenting my art finds on the internet and documenting which ones are owned by family currently. These paintings, together with photos of the family, establish his "provenance".

I would like to know if this information is enough to create a stub, which might in turn yield more connections and info as it is out on the web?

regards, Petra

PS: this is my page: https://wilhelm.dohmann.alsbach.net/ Pisa911 (talk) 20:57, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello Pisa911 and welcome to the Teahouse.

Biographical articles need to be based on significant coverage by independent reports published in what are considered reliable sources. None of the evidence you've mentioned meets these requirements.

Using your evidence to preserve your great-grandfather's work on a webpage and perhaps writing it up at some of the alternative outlets is probably the best thing you can do at this time. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:19, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Your research sounds interesting and commendable, Pisa911; but personal websites such as this, and personal assurances that the writer has seen unpublished documents in Stuttgart, Rīga or wherever, are unusable for a Wikipedia article. If you succeed with your research, then Wilhelm Dohmann (your Wilhelm Dohmann) will perhaps be written up in surveys of art of the relevant period/area/genre, and may then qualify. Please see WP:RS, WP:ARTIST, and WP:COI. As for the misunderstandings that may arise from what's written in Wikipedia Commons, it's common for one name to be shared by two artists (consider Sakae Tamura and Sakae Tamura as a humdrum example); but if you think that you can usefully augment the description at commons:File:Wilhelm Dohmann Blick auf Stadt und Feste Kufstein.jpg, then you are free to do so. (And I mean usefully for potential users of that image, not usefully for publicizing a different Dohmann.) -- Hoary (talk) 23:25, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your speedy replies,

as it stands I will expand my personal page with a Biography showing the facts as I gather them.

But what about the incorrect information on that Wiki commmons image? I have contacted the auction house in the source section and they have not responded. And it irks me to have the wrong info perpetuated to the point that the museum in Riga itself has it on one of his paintings! And they are not replying to my information requests.

Regarding him turning up in other publications, as he was the equivalent of your modern passport or wedding photographer, so highly unlikely.

Thanks and I will investigate the above alternative outlets

PS: I had made a contribution in 2016, which was accepted, but was told today that I need to disclose my COI, I would appreciate it if someone could check my edited userpage and the contribution if it is all ok. Pisa911 (talk) 23:37, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Pisa911, when you talk about "my personal page", I hope that you mean the page to which you pointed us. (A user page in Wikipedia may not be used for such purposes.) Your problems with an auction house and with a museum in Rīga are for you to pursue; neither Wikipedia nor Commons can help you with them. If you can point to a reliable, independent, published source to back you up in saying that something in commons:File:Wilhelm Dohmann Blick auf Stadt und Feste Kufstein.jpg is mistaken, then go ahead and fix it; if you can't, then you can't do anything about it. In the meantime, perhaps you can amass enough material to let you publish an article (elsewhere, not in Wikipedia) that will convincingly distinguish Wilhelm Dohmann from Wilhelm Dohmann and will draw readers' attention to the noteworthiness of the lesser-known of the two. -- Hoary (talk) 00:45, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

yes indeed Hoarytalk, my web page, NOT userpage. I checked alternative outlets, but not sure if they would be appropriate. I assume Wikimedia commons might be a starting point, but I haven't delved deep enough yet to see, if I can contribute, especially with the notability aspect relevant there as well. My insistence that the info is incorrect is based on the signature comparisons of over 20 paintings. But, since I am not a certified art historian, that is of no value, I know. What makes the auction house source for that image a "reliable, independent, published source"? I know they have uploaded loads of images to Wikimedia Commons, but I don't understand how that makes them a reliable source. I do appreciate your input, even if it isn't directly related to publication on Wiki. thanks Pisa911 (talk) 00:57, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Pisa911, I don't make any claim for the credibility of the auction house. Normally I'd suggest that you bring up the matter with the person who uploaded the image, but I notice that he seems to have been inactive since 2017, so you'd be unlikely to get any response. It's not a Wikipedia matter but instead a Commons matter; how about asking at Commons' help desk? -- Hoary (talk) 02:40, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Hoary, I have asked for help there now. But now I have a different question, when I followed the link the help page came up, and when I click on my username at the top, it said the userpage doesn't exist?? Even though it says that I'm logged in. What am I missing?? Do I have to create a new userpage for every wiki group separately?

thanks, Pisa911 (talk) 03:34, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Whereas I (for example) have not only a user page here but also a (perfunctory) user page there, you don't (yet) have a user page there. (Click on this if you want to create one. You are of course under no obligation to do so.) -- Hoary (talk) 05:06, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

edition Draft:Peter Mostovoy

Hi, I would like ask the help to finish by right way my article in VisualEditor. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Peter_Mostovoy . The problem with citation. I don't understand what's wrong. thank you, figelvigelFigelvigel (talk) 21:24, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

In this edit of 5 January, you, Figelvigel added two references. Good. You need a lot more of this kind of reference, for all the other assertions that are made in this draft. Here's an introductory reminder of how to do this; here is a lot more detail. -- Hoary (talk) 04:58, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Alden S Gooch

I published a first draft in 2018 and it was rejected. I submitted anew draft is a user space 5/20/2021. Where do I look for reviewers responses to this? Under the watchllist? Hcgarmstrong (talk) 21:46, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Hcgarmstrong Reviewers will respond on the draft itself, and post on your user talk page. 331dot (talk) 21:54, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy: recreated draft is at User:Hcgarmstrong/sandbox/Alden S Gooch. David notMD (talk) 00:10, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Your attempts at referencing are an absolute mess. Remove the "ref numbers" you incorporated into the text, and move the actual refs to the ends of the content being referenced. Separately, appears you have typed the same or different refs under the section title References. The right was is embed the refs in the text and the refs will automatically show up as numbered under References. David notMD (talk) 00:12, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Declined page submission

 Courtesy link: Draft:Aegean Boat Report

Hi all, I had a page turned down by CommanderWaterford and wanted to ask regarding the following point:

'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). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.'

My question is about what specific links this refers to.

The links I provided (more than 30) were all from published, reliable, secondary sources, which included the United Nations and some 25 news agencies across Europe.

All were published.

Was there a specific problem so I can fix it please?

Thanks so much... Rfrokeeffe (talk) 22:00, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

@Rfrokeeffe This is quite easy to explain - the foremost majority of your sources (and the majority of content) are referring to a controversial theme regarding the greek government and so-called "illegal pushbacks" of migrants and have only in second plan something to do with your organization, so next to it is barely neutral per Wikipedia:NPOV it does not establish sufficient notability per Wikipedia:NORG by independent, secondary, significant coverage. CommanderWaterford (talk) 22:05, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi, thanks very much for the quick response, and I hope you are well.

So I should note that it's not my organisation. I would also note, however, that the 'controversial' issue of illegal pushbacks is absolutely central to the work of Aegean Boat Report and to what's happening in the Aegean right now. Literally every link, aside from the UN's Universal Declaration on Human Rights and Refugee Convention, specifically name Aegean Boat Report, use its work and data and in most cases quote the organisation extensively. All are published sources and are available to an international audience, and all are specifically independent (of the organisation) media companies for wide public consumption.

I'm really sorry. I don't mean to be annoying, but given that, what can I do to improve this so it can be published?

Thanks so much,

@Rfrokeeffe: Welcome to the Teahouse. While I cannot speak up as to whether all the references are all reliable, I was drawn toward the second issue:

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

Links removed.

External links should also not go in the body of the article, and people named in the article are referred to by their surname in subsequent mentions. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:05, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi , thanks very much for this. I will of course address the isecond issue, and I will remove the links from the main body.:

Hi @Tenryuu - I would expect next time a ping since I was explicitly mentioned. CommanderWaterford (talk) 22:08, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

That is a request that I can do as a courtesy, but after seeing your prompt response here there appears to be no need to have done so. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:10, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Rfrokeeffe I Googled the group and only see passing mentions, but no significant coverage. Reiterating and adding to what CommanderWaterford posted - please see WP:GNG, WP:NPOV and even WP:NOTESSAY. (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.). TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 00:15, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Are general and flag officers automatically notable enough for an article?

I recently created articles for retired U.S. Air Force lieutenant generals, which were declined by Nomadicghumakkad due to lack of notability. The drafts are Draft:Robert D. Bishop Jr. and Draft:Bruce A. Wright. In the past, I've created a couple dozen articles similar to these two and they were accepted.

Until February 2021, guidelines given by the WikiProject Military History at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Historical SOLDIER essay stated that holding general or flag officer rank was considered enough to be notable enough for an article.

After having a discussion with the person who declined my article, we both came to the conclusion that current guidelines were unclear whether my articles should be created or not. He said that the new guidelines appear to follow the ones at WP:BIO, but that he felt that those standards were likely too rigorous because the media is unlikely to cover senior military officers unless there is a major event. He suggested that I ask about this topic here.

Essentially, my question is, are military officers of general or flag rank automatically notable enough for a Wikipedia article anymore? Or did the change in guidelines in February 2021 make it so that is insufficient to be considered notable? Gunwriter (talk) 01:07, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Gunwriter. There is no such thing as "automatic notability" on Wikipedia, and the ultimate test of every topic is the extent and quality of the significant coverage that the topic has received in reliable, independent sources. I happen to think that many or most general officers are notable but people who want to write articles about them must do the work to actually identify the reliable sources instead of speculating that they probably exist. Special notability guidelines are intended to identify a topic likely to qualify, but do not guarantee that they actually will qualify. And a notabilty guideline for general officers has never been approved, as far as I know. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:45, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

It's worth emphasising, I think, that notability is nothing to do with "this person has made a valuable contribution to society". It's just the criterion that allows us to establish a narrow-enough scope for the project that we're working on, when every article takes up volunteer maintenance time (e.g. in reverting vandals). I don't like the full listing of "Education" and "Military assignments" because Wikipedia biographies shouldn't look like CVs or listings on a personal website. What we need reliable sources for is really to explain which parts of the figures' education and military careers they are best-known for or were most impactful in or in which they brought some new or unique perspective. I'm not seeing notability from the sources given, so whether the topics are notable depends on whether other sources exist. — Bilorv (talk) 13:40, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

There was a guideline for "presumed notability" of military personnel, but it has been depreciated (still viewable here. So they know definitely need to pass WP:GNG. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:48, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Incoherent message

N MMM MM,M M LAIKUANCHAO (talk) 01:24, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

LAIKUANCHAO, your (short) list of contributions suggests that you're having lots of fun. It's not clear that you intend to contribute to the encyclopedia; but if you do, you may wish to ask questions here about this. -- Hoary (talk) 02:45, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Help to remove article from my sandbox

Hello kindly l want to create another article from my sandbox but l have article waiting for review what am l suppose to do this the article ( john kiarie waweru )

   User:Ngangaesther/sandbox Ngangaesther (talk) 02:08, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

You can either delete the whole article by editing it, or create a new sandbox. Heart ^(talk) 02:14, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi Ngangaesther. I have moved the page to Draft:John Kiarie Waweru. This is a better location for it from the start. So, while that move has freed up your sandbox, I suggest you don't use it for creating another draft, but create your next draft directly as a draft, in the format [[Draft:Name of Subject]]. Meanwhile, your post indicates you have submitted it for review but you have not. To do so, post at the top of the page and save this code: {{subst:Submit}}. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 05:04, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi again Ngangaesther. In this edit you did not add {{subst:Submit}} to the page and save. You added it to the edit summary and saved, and so the page remains unsubmitted for review.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 06:53, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

need review of edits: 2601:441:4780:320:A45D:2D50:225A:BFFE

need review of:

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2601:441:4780:320:A45D:2D50:225A:BFFE ..... 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 03:25, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

@0mtwb9gd5wx: They seem ok to me. If you disagree, you can revert the edits and discuss it on the article's talk page. See WP:BRD RudolfRed (talk) 04:01, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

I am a 30/500 user but I still haven not been designated an "extended confirmed" user

I have had this account for more than 30 days. As of writing this question, I have exactly 500 edits. Based on the article below, I thought this meant I would be automatically be designated an "extended confirmed" user.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:User_access_levels#Extended_confirmed_users

I've logged in and out, tried a different browser, all that jazz. I still cannot edit articles that are extended confirmed protected, and the only user group I'm in is still just "autoconfirmed user".

Is there a delay? My 500th edit was over 24 hours ago. The above article mentions nothing about a delay and describes the process as automatic.

Do some of my edits not count? The above article makes no mention of certain edits not counting. The only thing it says about this sort of concern is that even deleted edits (of which I have none) do count.

Is this a glitch?

Is the problem something else I haven't considered? Paco2718 (talk) 06:28, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Update: After posting this (my original post here was my 501st edit), my account is now extended autoconfirmed. If anyone can offer an explanation, cool. Otherwise, feel free to remove this post. I may do so myself if no one offers an explanation.

Do not remove posts from Teahouse, even your own. David notMD (talk) 11:05, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Draft Article

Hello, my draft article got rejected. I'm not too sure how to improve it. Would it be possible for a wikipedia editor to either give me detailed instructions or edit it themselves? I hope that's not too much to ask of you. I assume my draft article will be visible on my talk page. Thank you in advance! Maahir S (talk) 06:35, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Maahir. I assume that you are talking about Draft:Kiran Bir Sethi. The references are all bare URLs which are definitely suboptimal for reviewers. Start by fleshing them out per Referencing for beginners. But many of those URLs are links to sources that are not reliable, so eliminate those. The phrase "thought leader" is mumbo jumbo that doesn't belong in an encyclopedia, and is a big red flag for reviewers. "Global luminary" is a similar overtly promotional marketing and advertising phrase that signals to a reviewer, "decline this draft ASAP". "Key influencer" is a similar phase that signals that a draft is an advertisement. Wikipedia is not a venue to crank out promotional garbage about various people. It is a neutral encyclopedia with standards. "Unenthused with the system, Kiran decided to curate her own school." Gimme a break. That is not how an encyclopedia article should be written. Clean up your draft radically, and remove 100% of the advertising and marketing. Is anything left after you do that? Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:22, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Orh and oad

Sir oad are rajputs of odisha and the sons of Raja bhagirathi rajput. Someone is changing our history and giving false statement about us the person name is chariotrider555. Kindly help us thank you Rohitsinghoad (talk) 06:48, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Rohitsinghoad. Caste warriors are not welcome on Wikipedia. Spend some time studying Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Understanding and following those carefully is the key to success in editing Wikipedia. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:27, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

At Orh, your edits have been reverted (reversed) by several editors. The place for a discussion is at Talk:Orh. There are previous discussions there, so also read those. David notMD (talk) 11:10, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

need your guidance

am kind confused l wanted to ask for review on my article but l can only publish it

   Ngangaesther/James Mathenge Kanini Ngangaesther (talk) 07:52, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: James Mathenge Kanini   Maproom (talk) 08:20, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Ngangaesther, the article has to demonstrate notability. Currently it does not. -- Hoary (talk) 11:58, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Category display at the bottom of pages

What in the world happened to them? They just got enlarged horrendously! Did I miss a CSS change or this is a bug? 125.167.116.83 (talk) 08:10, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

It's a known problem. See this Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#Font_sizes_all_over_the_place Follow up Apparently it has been fixed but you'll have to wait for it to bubble through the system. - X201 (talk) 08:19, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

How to change article name? List of musicians using Amharic in their music to List of musicians using Amharic vocals

Good day, question i created a article Draft:List of Amharic musicians. A reviewer changed the title to List of musicians using Amharic in their music and then approved the submission. I'm glad the page got approved, but i think a better/shorter title would be, List of musicians using Amharic vocals that way you remove in their music which unnecessary, since musicians is already in the title. So my question is, can the title be changed, and where to ask for it? Thank you Dawit S Gondaria (talk) 09:51, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Dawit S Gondaria, seems like Fuhghettaboutit moved the article. Since they're active here, I can ping them for reasonings as I have now. Panini!^🥪 10:16, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

I think it was me who moved it. The new name is shorter, clearer, and not tautological. Maproom (talk) 10:20, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Definitely an improvement, thank you very much! @@Maproom: Dawit S Gondaria (talk) 10:58, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Endorsements Box

I am currently in somewhat of an edit war on 2022 New York gubernatorial election. While there are five candidates running for the Republican nomination, only one, Lee Zeldin, has been road tripping and actively campaigning. He has picked up endorsements from a handful of county chairs, U.S. Representatives and the former Secretary of State. Whenever I try to put an endorsement box, I have gotten my edits removed by the same user for a few reasons. First, I was told that I was not having a neutral point of view, after that, it was that my articles were not reputable since they were local sources (what national papers comment on county endorsements in the first place??), and now, I am told to wait until other candidates have endorsements before putting the correct box in place.

The article itself says "Nick Langworthy has stated that the party intends to pick the GOP gubernatorial candidate in June of 2021". Considering that is the end of May, I would like to put this information on the page. How can I make the appropriate edits without getting banned as I have been threatened?

Zeldin is the only candidate with endorsements, and the selection process supposedly happens next month, so I do not think it is wise to wait for other candidates who are not the frontrunner to get endorsements written by big papers to put the frontrunner's endorsements in. I hope this makes sense. Capisred (talk) 13:10, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Capisred. The proper thing to do to avoid edit warring is discuss the matter—I see there's some discussion at Talk:2022 New York gubernatorial election#3 small sources re-added regarding "Zeldin endorsements" but if someone disputes your changes then you should be discussing only, and not edit the article in the meantime. Continuing to revert just makes people annoyed and treat you less respectfully, which in turn makes it much less likely you will be able to make any improvement to the article. A revert with no edit summary like this is definitely not acceptable, because it doesn't progress the conversation in any way, and it will come across as very rude. It seems to me that you don't understand the other person's point of view, as questions like what national papers comment on county [endorsements] in the first place?? miss the point of what they are trying to tell you, so you would do better to learn what they actually think before asserting that your opinion is better than theirs. — Bilorv (talk) 13:31, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

I don't think my opinion is better than theirs, I actually think it is worse. I was told to establish a consensus on the article's talk page, and I posted an explanation and waited a couple of days but got no response from anybody. I just tried to bring up the sense of urgency (due to the selection process being less than a month away) on the talk page under another user's section, so maybe I can get some positive input there and progress some conversation that warrants a response. Thank you! Capisred (talk) 14:16, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

@Capisred: thanks for the reply. Just to clarify, because perhaps my wording at the end was a little bit rude: when you revert without an edit summary, the subtext you're conveying (whether you mean it or not) is "my opinion is better than yours". If you don't get feedback after starting a discussion, which happens a lot and can be frustrating, you need to look at the next place to escalate it to. It seems like you've found one that could be relevant. Some others: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics/American politics; Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics (same project, a level up); Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard (if the question is specifically "is this source reliable for this information?"); Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard. You can just leave a note "Please see the discussion at [X page] about [this topic]" or you can start a discussion there (though mind not to make it harder to follow by spreading non-trivial discussion across multiple pages). — Bilorv (talk) 20:46, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Accident

Hello Wikipedia I have made a mistake which I regret, accidentally I might have posted some names into an article by accident while using my monitor thinking it went to my best friend as he wanted to know more about my friends, therefore, I instantly deleted them and my question is Will this have any repercussions or can I just delete my account and be done with this story as I know it is Illegal therefore I am regretting this decision CyberAquila (talk) 13:11, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for asking here, CyberAquila. All edits are public unless suppressed by a trusted volunteer—you can see them by clicking "View history" from an article page—however, it's unlikely that many people would look there or see it, aside from any editors monitoring the page. I've requested oversight to delete the edits from the page history (if any admin reads this beforehand, you can WP:CRD#4 it). — Bilorv (talk) 13:22, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

And it's now been oversighted, by the way, so the edits are no longer public. — Bilorv (talk) 14:13, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Agreed Measures for the Conservation of Antarctic Fauna and Flora

Hi! I was looking for some assistance on improving the Agreed Measures article to hopefully have it upgraded from a stub ASAP for my University of Sydney course! Any advice/tips would be much appreciated! Bambixie (talk) 14:04, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Bambixie Given improvements to article, I upgraded classification from Stub (dating back to 2007) to B-class, and changed importance from mid to high. Kudos for your quality work. David notMD (talk) 14:30, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Yep, B-class looks like the right choice. For feedback, Bambixie, I'd say making the lead as simple and accessible to a non-expert reader is the only thing I can suggest. Thanks for your work here—I've seen a lot of student editor assignments and a lot result in only small tinkerings, but this is really useful and I think one of the three best student expansions I've ever seen. — Bilorv (talk) 21:18, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Portal:COVID-19

Hello, can someone take a look at the references section? There is a CS1 error: unsupported parameter. I would do it, but unfortunately wouldn't know where to start. Thank you for your time. Lotje (talk) 14:23, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

@Lotje: An error like that indicates that a template for the Citation Style 1 is used but with a parameter that this template does not support. You need to check which reference generates the error and then look at the wikitext which parameters are used. At his point, I see no error message like that, so it might already have been fixed. See Help:CS1 errors for more information. Regards SoWhy 14:41, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

@SoWhy: thanks for the advise. You are correct, it is no longer in the Category:CS1 errors: unsupported parameter Lotje (talk) 15:01, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Uneditable page?

Hello again. Those who've read my previous entries may be aware that I try to extend Swedish lists of tv series for kids and young adults. I was about to get started, but at one page I can't edit, and I was hoping someone could help me solve why.

Unfortunately, I cannot upload any helpful images. But if you visit the first link below, you can see that the page is editable. But if you visit the second link below, you'll see that the other page is not editable, for some reason. I don't know why, but if it could be made editable somehow, it would be very helpful.

(In the first link, please scroll down to section five, titled 'Program'. In the second link, please scroll down to section two, titled 'Artiklar i kategorin "Barn- och ungdomsprogram i Sveriges Television"')

Any help would be very much appreciated, so thanks in advance!

https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/SVT_Barn#Program_som_visats_i_SVT_Barn

https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kategori:Barn-_och_ungdomsprogram_i_Sveriges_Television Denkichu (talk) 14:26, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

DenkichuThe second page is a category page - you don't add information to such pages by editing them, but by adding the relevant category at the bottom of the relevant article. - Arjayay (talk) 14:31, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

How can I improve this submission?

Hello, so I just submitted a draft (Draft:Johnny Yin) for submission a few minutes ago. Most of my information is from the Chinese Wikipedia page, however, since it isn't sourced/referenced, I deleted some paragraphs. What do you suggest or advise to improve this submission? I asked this in the WikiProject Afc help desk, but I think that wasn't the right place to ask. Thanks Seantseng918 (talk) 14:34, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Changing Password

Hello, Guys, May I get help for how to change the password. The current password is not safe enough and I would like to use a stronger password Mighty Asgardian616 (talk) 14:44, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Under "Preferences" (at top of page), there is a button there you can click to change your password. RudolfRed (talk) 14:46, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Deleting a Draft

I would like to delete the article that I currently have in draft status ("Randy Bishop") and start over. Can you please advise how I can do this?

Thanks. 70.77.206.61 (talk) 15:19, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

As long as you are the only contributer to the draft, you may put {{db-g7}} at the top and an admin will be along shortly to delete it. Please dont forget to login before doing that. NW1223 | Howl at me 16:01, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Reliable sources

is indulge express is a reliable source for Wikipedia? Ramesh012 (talk) 16:09, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Ramesh012, and welcome to the Teahouse. WP:RSP says of The Indian Express The Indian Express is considered generally reliable under the news organizations guideline. However, that does not necessarily mean that its Indulge Express section is regarded as reliable. I suggest asking at WP:RSN - and it is helpful to indicate what kind of information you are looking to support, as reliability sometimes depends on this. --ColinFine (talk) 20:22, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

On Chai's newest record "Wink"

Hello! This question may seem kind of trivial, but I was wondering if someone could help add a page for Japanese rock quartet Chai's newly released record WINK. I've been excited for a WINK page as I am both a fan of Chai and editing for Wikipedia! I would thoroughly like to assist in making this page happen if anyone wants to help get it started.

With sincerity, Quail & Metal Quail & Metal (talk) 16:13, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Quail & Metal, and welcome to the Teahouse. You might find somebody here willing to work with you on that, but probably not. You might have better luck asking at a suitable WikiProject, such as WP:ROCK or WP:JAPAN. but the most valuable thing you can do if you want this article to happen is to start doing the legwork, and find the reliable independent sourcs which talk about the record: these are a non-negotiable necessity for an article, so if you cannot find them (because it is TOOSOON) then you'll know to shelve the project for the time being. (I see there are a couple of references given in Chai (band), but I don't know whether any of them meet the triple requirement of being reliable, independent of the band, and having WP:significant coverage of the record rather than just being routine announcements. -ColinFine (talk) 20:35, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Paolo giani margi page my contribution

I have added yesterday my article with a lot of sources and link, but the control remove it. I can't understand why? Is there possibility for me to add my contribution? The sources are not good enough? 91.80.22.86 (talk) 16:22, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

I don't see any sources you added to verify the edits were true. See WP:Tutorial. TigerScientist Chat > contribs 16:43, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

(e/c) Unless you are User:Gomba80, who made a reverted contribution to Paolo Giani Margi, I don't see any other contribution under this IP. If you are the mentioned user, you should discuss such huge changing to an article on its Talkpage beforehand. --Maresa63 ^Talk 16:49, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Maresa63 They made 1 big edit but it was 100% unsourced. TigerScientist Chat > contribs 17:11, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

@User:TigerScientist, you're of course right! I didn't mention it, because you already did 😉. --Maresa63 ^Talk 17:33, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Oy! At Paolo Giani Margi, a large amount of content has been added eight times and reverted eight times because of a complete failure to follow referencing procedure. Seven of those were by IP addresses, mostly with no references, then the most recent by User:Gomba80. If you are indeed Gomba 80, I recommend you study Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners, and then practice in your sandbox creating portions of what you want to add to the article. When properly written and referenced, copy a portion into the article. Add n Edit summary in the space at the bottom to describe what you did. I add that the article was created by User:Lugnuts, who is the editor who has been reverting your improper additions, so you may want to leave a comment on Lugnuts Talk page, describing your intentions. It is important that all statements of fact about PGM be verified by references. David notMD (talk) 19:06, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

how to revert newly-created template

I would presume one "reverts" the creation of a new template by deleting it, but I don't really know how to do that.

The template to be deleted is {{New link}}. (This exercise has at least served to make me aware of the {{tlx}} template). ;-) Fabrickator (talk) 16:40, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Fabrickator, you have to be an administrator to delete pages. I have tagged the page for speedy deletion under criterion G7, or author requests deletion. Sungodtemple (talk) 17:36, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

@Sungodtemple: To be clear, {{New link}} was created by User:Caferkiyak1985, not by me, in conjunction with the creation of spam content. See Special:Contributions/Caferkiyak1985. Fabrickator (talk) 18:49, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Visual Editor do not work in Wikipedia in English

Simple question. I would like to know for what reason Visual Editor does not work in English Wikipedia but in the rest of Wikipedias [German, French, Italian, Spanish] actually do.

--Mauriziok (talk) 16:46, 21 May 2021 (UTC) Mauriziok (talk) 16:46, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

What do you mean by not working? It works fine for me. TigerScientist Chat > contribs 17:09, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

@Mauriziok: Which page are you attempting to edit? The visual editor isn't enabled everywhere. (Notable places where it isn't enabled are all talk pages(including noticeboards) , pages which contain something else than Wikitext, and I believe the Help namespace.) Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:28, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

@TigerScientist: @Victor Schmidt: It doesn't show that option in any kind of page, a-n-y. A mean, I can only see the option [Edit] between [Read] and [View history]. I see that I can also press [alt-shift-e] to activate Edit but if I press [alt-shift-v] to see if might work Virtual Edit the page doesn't respond, nothing happens. I don't know what is going on here. I repeat, this problem only happens here in English, in the others Wikipedia works perfectly. So... --Mauriziok (talk) 17:54, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

@Mauriziok: Check your preferences. Under "Editing" make sure that the checkbox "Temporarily disable the visual editor while it is in beta" is not checked, and that the dropdown labeled "Editing mode:" below it is set to "show me both tabs" (You can of course also set it to something else, but each editor has its (dis-)adventages, and I believe haveing the ability to choose makes it easier) Victor Schmidt (talk) 18:01, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

@Victor Schmidt: Problem solved. All right, perfect. I saw wich was the problem. Thanks (Y). --Mauriziok (talk) 18:37, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

MW previews

On wikipedia, when you hover over an article link, it shows a preview. How do you do that? I have a wiki on Miraheze (which uses MediaWiki and updated MW in october 2020) and I want to do the same thing. 🔥LightningComplexFire🔥 16:56, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

If I'm understanding this correctly, shouldn't it do the preview automatically? I didn't create a preview for my articles and it has a preview. TigerScientist Chat > contribs 17:08, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

TigerScientist, I don't know what you mean by "I didn't create a preview for my articles and it has a preview" 🔥LightningComplexFire🔥 17:11, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

By preview, I mean this: 🔥LightningComplexFire🔥 17:15, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

It should automatically create a preview like the picture. Your page does not have a preview? That is very very strange. TigerScientist Chat > contribs 17:20, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi, LightningComplexFire, what you're seeing is the Popups extension, which implements the Page Preview functionality. In order to us this feature, you would have to make sure that that extension is installed on your MW. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 17:24, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

@LightningComplexFire: Popups is listed at https://meta.miraheze.org/wiki/Extensions#Other_Extensions so you should be able to enable it on your wiki. See Special:Version for the current extensions on a wiki. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:02, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Fails WP:NLIST

I recently submitted a page on [of Development Zone of Myanmar]. This page was rejected with Fails WP:NLIST. I cited from only a legal document of Myanmar Government. I cited the documents in both English and Burmese Language. And I am wondering why it is flagged with Notability#Stand-alone_lists Thanks. Punwath (talk) 17:25, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Punwath, see WP:GNG. Lists still need to have a few independent, reliable, and secondary sources. Your draft, unfortunately, has none. Sungodtemple (talk) 17:30, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Sandbox - Stub Article Suggestion

Hello - I'm doing research on Australian film and TV. I have posted a stub suggestion in my sandbox. How do I get feedback on it? Thank you! Ajcwritwiki (talk) 17:29, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

I don't see any stub suggestion in your sandbox. Could you clarify? Sungodtemple (talk) 17:33, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy: Content appears to be at User:Ajcwritwiki/sandbox. You had also created it at the Wikipedia Sandbox, which is frequently blanked. David notMD (talk) 19:20, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Feedback: Too many of your refs confirm he has acted in stuff, but are not at-length descriptions about him. Rather, in-name-only mentions. Given that in "Between Two Worlds" he 'plays' a brain-dead, potential heart transplant donor, I don't imagine that reviews are going to elaborate on his acting. David notMD (talk) 19:28, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi

 GordonFunnyRedBananaHatAmongus (talk) 18:26, 21 May 2021 (UTC) Uh hi — Preceding unsigned comment added by GordonFunnyRedBananaHatAmongus (talk • contribs) 18:27, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi. This is the teahouse where editors ask questions. Next time ask a question about editing. Have fun! TigerScientist Chat > contribs 18:50, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Paolo giani margi page someone expert could helpme

Some one who is just very good with the editing could edit for me? 91.80.22.86 (talk) 19:47, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

This article history shows a sorry story of a struggle with Lugnuts over what has alternated between a mere stub about Paolo Giani Margi and a partially/obscurely referenced and verbose portrait of the same person. I agree with Lugnuts. Possibly you are related to Gomba 80; but even if you aren't, please read the welcome message posted on Gomba 80's talk page. (And if you are Gomba 80, please make sure that you're logged in as Gomba 80 before you edit.) Here's a sample reference of what Lugnuts reverted: 10^ Paolo Giani Margi on the book “ ABC of the Sport Horse” By Giulia Iannone, Progetto Cultura, being updated, ISBN 978-88-6092-733-0. No such book exists. The book possessing ISBN 978-88-6092-733-0 is instead Iannone's L'ABC del cavallo sportivo; but how is Margi "on" it, and in what sense is it "being updated"? Is Margi perhaps quoted within it? It's a book of over three hundred pages; on which page(s) within this large book can this information be found? And no, you don't type "10^"; instead, you insert a reference as it should be inserted, and then the Mediawiki software used by Wikipedia will do the formatting and numbering for you. -- Hoary (talk) 22:16, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

When I wrote the comment above, I hadn't noticed the presence of an earlier thread, #Paolo giani margi page my contribution. If you want to ask further questions, please ask them in that thread or in this one; please do not start yet another thread. -- Hoary (talk) 22:53, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

I've tried to communicate with the editor (see User talk:109.52.248.24), but they jump from one IP address to another, with some of them being blocked. Clearly this isn't how to write an article. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 08:25, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

TWA makes my head hurt

So long story short, I found out about WP:TWA, I think it's cool, I get stuck because I already made a userpage, I do so much testing and find the problem. Ok so when you create a account, does a bot or a editor give you the join the teahouse or TWA notification on your talk page. If that is a bot, why when I made this account, it didn't send to me. It is just frustrating I won't ever ever be able to complete the adventure on this account. TigerScientist Chat > contribs 20:10, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

@TigerScientist: there isn't a bot for recommending The Wikipedia Adventure to people. There is HostBot, which automatically welcomes some editors - others are manually welcomed instead (the reason for this is to avoid spamming every new user with talkpage messages - only editors who have edited for a bit and haven't been manually welcomed get the automatic welcome). However, it doesn't recommend The Wikipedia Adventure.

Also, you should be able to do TWA even with an existing userpage. Elli (talk | contribs) 20:16, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Elli thank you. I have done so much testing and maybe it is just me but I can't (I have already had this conversation). Is there a reason why Hostbot won't reccomend TWA? TigerScientist Chat > contribs 20:22, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

nevermind TigerScientist Chat > contribs 20:31, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

@TigerScientist: indeed, I just tried and you can complete the first adventure. Just make sure to leave an edit summary alongside the edit you make to your userpage. Elli (talk | contribs) 20:19, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

I tried again and added a summary and guess what! it didn't work. TigerScientist Chat > contribs 20:47, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

@TigerScientist: could you possibly post a video (screen recording)? I'm kinda confused how you're getting stuck. Elli (talk | contribs) 21:00, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

I haven't downloaded a screen recording thing and you know this conversation is getting way too long over some worthless virtual badges on a page so I'll just not talk about TWA again. TigerScientist Chat > contribs 21:02, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Fair. TWA does have some issues... the original maintainers are I'm pretty sure no longer around, and the site has changed since it was introduced. Elli (talk | contribs) 21:07, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Antarctica in World War II

I have finally submitted my large draft Draft:Antarctica in World War II to Articles for creation. I believe that this one would be best to go through the review stage. I am not looking for an early review, I would just like some help with some formatting as I find the Argentine expedition section a bit off. If anyone could quickly help with that section it would be appreciated. Thanks in advance and happy editing. Gandalf the Groovy (talk) 22:06, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

@Gandalf the Groovy: Only thing I noticed in the Argentine section was that the two subsections were at different heading levels, which I fixed. Hope it helps. RudolfRed (talk) 22:24, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

@RudolfRed Thanks! Gandalf the Groovy (talk) 22:28, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Refs 7, 8 and 41 are URLs. David notMD (talk) 00:58, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Scribal errors and printing issues

Good early afternoon Teahouse! I am lately interested in the article Typographical error. The article deals mostly with what is in modern days commonly called a typo, but scribal error and printing error redirect to that same article. I believe the philologic and technological (e.g. unprinted letters at the borders of a page or similar) aspects would merit either better treatment in this article or a separate one. I tried to improve the philologcal aspect, which is somewhat more interesting to me, but I had some troubles finding good sources for both and thought that bringing up the matter in relevant projects or to editors more familiar with these subjects would be helpful. The main problem is that I can't find a project that's really relevant. Any advice or links to articles that already deal with these specific aspects that I may be missing are welcomed. Personuser (talk) 22:25, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Most (not all) WikiProjects are more or less moribund. I understand what you're proposing to write about but am no expert on the matter (and have no knowledge of any centuries-old language or handwriting convention), so can't help. I'd look for articles on related subjects and look through their recent histories for the names of editors whose contributions have been particularly well-informed and constructive. (Don't be misled by mere numbers of edits.) Contact one editor on their own talk page. Don't contact a second editor until you've got a response from the first, or until a couple of weeks have gone by with no response. And ignore this suggestion if somebody manages to suggest a promising WikiProject: the talk page of a relevant WikiProject showing signs of life is indeed a better place to ask. -- Hoary (talk) 23:03, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

@Personuser: You could start a discussion at WP:TYPO project talk page, perhaps other editors in that project will share your same interests. RudolfRed (talk) 23:13, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Thank you both for the suggestions. I already checked a bit related articles for refs and productive editors and will take a closer look and wait for eventual other answers before bothering someone (some articles are really good, but probably mostly written years ago). I am slowly learning that WikiProjects aren't always as promising as they look, but activity can be easily checked. Some errors from centuries old copyist seem quite similar to modern day errors by random people on the internet (or by myself), but it's hard to find a source addressing the subject outside of a specific field, which is probably a common problem with "multidisciplinary" subjects. For topics related to the printing process I'm a bit more afraid the subject may be covered elsewhere under some differet name and in a more general or unrelated to meaning way. Members of WP:TYPO surely have a lot of personal experience about this, which isn't acceptable, but some of them may know about (recent?) relevant sources, so it makes sense to drop a discrete message. Personuser (talk) 00:57, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

I think a case can be made for a "Scribal error" article that is complementary to "Typographical error". The two may have some overlap, and make reference to common features, such as to haplography and dittography. But if you imagine "scribal error" having a starting point of ancient manuscripts and working outwards from that focus; and "typographical error" have a starting point of, say, post-Gutenberg printing; then that is probably sufficiently different for a separate article. The proposed "scribal error" might well, for instance, additionally have a subsection of what ancient copiers and scribes did when they made a mistake in copying holy texts (e.g. leaving them to decay in the desert). Why not consider trying a Draft:Scribal error? Feline Hymnic (talk) 14:15, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Question regarding citing sources using footnotes

I received this notice: "The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes."

However, I did add footnote citations. I need help understanding what I did wrong per Wiki standards.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Glen_Lerner

Thanks in advance for your input and help.

JDL-author (talk) 23:10, 21 May 2021 (UTC)JDL-author JDL-author (talk) 23:10, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

@JDL-author: you have this At the age of 5 Lerner’s father went to prison for double murder and was not released until 1989. They remained close until his death. Growing up with a father in prison had a profound effect on Lerner and he attributes it to making him the fighter that he is as his father’s incarceration led to serious financial issues and the family living on welfare. with no citations. Same in the Philanthropy section. Elli (talk | contribs) 23:12, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Some of the refs are interviews. What Glenn says about himself in not considered verification of content. David notMD (talk) 02:06, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Use of the terms "Rejection Sensitive Dysphoria" and "RSD"

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

Hi team, I don't really know how to do the editing and what have you, but I did notice when looking up "dysphoria" as part of a discussion with the moderators of an ADHD forum that the terms Rejection Sensitive Dysphoria and RSD were linked with ADHD, which just happened to be the very point of our discussion. In short, this term was coined by a sole psychologist, and as far as we've been able to research it has not been independently verified, peer reviewed or otherwise cited other than back to the original piece it was coined in. We believe that, while our fellows do suffer from emotional dysregulation and do tend to be sensitive to rejection, the use of this term invalidates other, more serious conditions and usage should be discouraged until such time as more rigorous research becomes available. How would we best approach this?

- D. Leon Adams 49.227.127.192 (talk) 03:47, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

The first place to bring it up would be Talk:Dysphoria. If there's no reaction, or if you think that the reaction is underinformed or otherwise unsatisfactory, you might advertise the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Psychology. If nothing much still happens, there are other avenues. -- Hoary (talk) 05:24, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

My opinion is be bold. RSD is mentioned at the Dysphoria article as being an aspect of Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, but at that article, there is no mention of RSD. Based on this, I recommend deleting all mention of RSD at Dysphoria. If an editor reverts this deletion, then the proper step after that is to start a discussion on the Talk page. David notMD (talk) 09:27, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

@David notMD: - I'm surprised it's not brought up on the ADHD article; I wouldn't consider it an obscure symptom by any means. I hope some verifiable sources pop up in the future to warrant its inclusion. --Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) 10:58, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

At PubMed (U.S. Library Medicine) I see a lot of lit about Rejection Sensitivity, a bit about RS in context of ADHD, but no mentions of "Rejection Sensitivity Dysphoria". David notMD (talk) 11:25, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Username

Can we use images in username signature? Powerful Karma (talk) 09:38, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

@Powerful Karma: No, see WP:SIGIMAGE. Victor Schmidt (talk) 09:41, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Two darts

In the last year I have worked two drafts List of Studio C episodes and Rugrats (2021 TV series) but there be there be other drafts for these articles I just wondering if these are isolated cases or have this happened a lot Fan Of Lion King 🦁 (talk) 10:19, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi Fanoflionking. It's not an uncommon occurrence, and because of that, in a variety of places where we talk about creating articles, drafts, etc. we try to insure against this taking place. For instance, the last sentence of the first paragraph of Help:Your first article is: "Please search Wikipedia first to make sure that an article does not already exist on the subject." Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:45, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Removing content added by own.

Can a editor remove the content added by him even two years later of addition and would he not receive any warning for removal of content. ExclusiveEditor _{Notify Me!} 11:23, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi ExclusiveEditor. Context is so important here, it's imposible to hazard a guess – I can postulate multiple scenarios where this would be absolutely appropriate and absolutely the exact opposite, so you would need to inject specificity into this. If this is about something that actually occurred, what was it; if not, propose the scenario (including what content, in what article, with what edit summary). Sorry, but it's really that variable.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 11:29, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Think in the article of a company, a editor adds history of that company with good sources. Then after two years he removes the context added by him saying that he had added that context two years ago and now he wants to remove the context added by him. This is a fictional scenario not real. Also I would like to specify that he only removed the context added by him and not of others. ExclusiveEditor _{Notify Me!} 11:35, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Going with your premises, that the edit summary indicates no plausible rationale (e.g., "...the sources don't actually verify what I wrote here"), and the content, besides being reliably sourced, appears quite relevant and properly written – such that no one would is likely to think something like "bad rationale, but this really doesn't belong as a matter of editorial discretion, because X" – treat this at base no differently than if an editor blanked sourced content because they wanted to (you would "treat this differently", insofar as the edit summary you leave, but not in the result, which would be a revert). There is no dispensation for self-removal, and it is a fundamental precept here that when we edit we give up all rights but for our free copyright ownership, requiring suitable credit attribution upon reuse. In other words, the answer to the original quesiton posed is, "no". Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:01, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Typo in a “Blocked” article

Is it best to just wait out those types of articles? JGrammerSecure7 (talk) 13:38, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

@JGrammerSecure7: Welcome to the Teahouse. I'm not sure what you mean by "waiting out" (as some articles have been indefinitely protected), but you're welcome to leave an edit request on the article's talk page stating the typo found (providing the sentence it's found in would be helpful) and what it should be changed into. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:26, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

This article is being considered for deletion in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policy.

I New Wikipedia Author. I Have create a User Profile https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amitava_Nag. After the publish my profile showing error. Please help us. NKwisi01 (talk) 13:40, 22 May 2021 (UTC) Nitin

NKwisi01, Wikipedia does not accept "profiles". It has unbiased articles, reporting what reliable independent sources have said about the subject. The sources currently cited in Amitava Nag report what Nag has written or said, and so are not independent. The article is in danger of being deleted, unless someone can find and cite some independent sources. Maproom (talk) 14:23, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

(e/c) Hi NKwisi01. This is not an error. The headline text you excerpt comes from the articles for deletion discussion banner, informing anyone seeing the article that it is being considered for deletion, with a link to the deletion discussion being held at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AMITAVA NAG. You can explain there your reasons as to why the article should not be deleted (I recommend reading Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions before visiting that AfD). One overarching tip is that such grounds for keeping this article should be based in applicable policies and guidelines, such as that the subject is actually notable, based on the existence of suitable reliable, secondary, independent sources that treat the topic in substantive detailTemplate:Z21, and that the subject thus warrants an encyclopedia article. Please note that your use of the word "profile" can just be a manner of speaking, but it is often used when people have a misunderstanding about Wikipedia, conflating it with social media; and it often correlates with the writing of promotional articles that read as commercials for the subject, rather than neutral encyclopedia articles, summarizing (in proper paraphrase) what the world had previously written about the subject, in the types of sources I referred to previously. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:27, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Rejection of article

The article on Abdulkareem Moh'd Jamiu Asuku was rejected for publication for "not having enough coverage". This to me is not correct. The article cited independent sources and linked them appropriately. Some of the articles I saw on the Wikipedia do not even have such coverage.

Please can it be reconsidered and published? Shadrachlaw (talk) 13:43, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy link: Draft:Abdulkareem Moh’d Jamiu. Clovermoss (talk) 14:00, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

@Shadrachlaw: Welcome to the Teahouse. The reviewer is stating that the references used do not provide demonstrate notability of the subject. Another issue is that the citations are being done properly; please see WP:EASYREFBEGIN for help on how to properly cite. The Philanthropy section is also inappropriate for an encyclopedia, which is why I'm assuming the reviewer mentioned a tone issue in the draft. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:24, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

I want to edit a biased section in a page

 Courtesy link: Shlomo Rechnitz

I discovered what I think is a negatively biased section while I was researching something else. So I investigated that, made what I considered to be changes that made the entry neutral and someone else came and undid them. I wrote back but got no response - maybe he didn't see it or is too busy? I'm not happy that the entry makes Wikipedia into a hit job on a living person, so I want to change it. - it is the worst thing I've ever noticed since I started using Wikipedia - I think that was the end of 2001.

And in that page, a Wikipedia note says this: "Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous."

So now to my question. Should I write a note in the Talk page of that entry, announcing my intention to do this and provide evidence and ask for comments? (I have already written that, but although I've corrected a lot of things on Wikipedia over the years, they've all been minor tweaks, so I don't recall ever using a Talk page, but I saw someone else do it. And I've never asked a question here before.) So what's the right protocol and how can I know that anyone will see it? What's the best way to see if anyone is interested in helping to correct what I consider is egregious bias. Photoloop (talk) 14:12, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Photoloop, you removed extensive well-referenced content from the article, in an apparent attempt to whitewash it of criticism of the subject. Smntstatus restored it all, rightly in my opinion. If you think that the criticism is unwarranted, and can provide references that outweigh those already cited, you should argue your case on the article's talk page. Maproom (talk) 14:33, 22 May 2021 (UTC)