Wikipedia:Teahouse

Cullen328, 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

Weird font for foreign language

Revisiting Kasuri, I note that the Japanese language words are now shown in a larger font/typeface. My perception is that although the individual words are larger, the chosen font makes them lighter in "color" (grey vs black) and more difficult to read.

Any ideas about what's going on here? I don't recall seeing other non-English words appear in this manner in other articles. Usually, articles feature a consistent font. The examples shown here for foreign words don't have this appearance. I tried using the recommended MOS:FOREIGNITALIC markup to substitute, but saw no change in the preview. Perhaps it reads differently on different devices? I've never seen this before. Thanks. Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 04:44, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Tribe of Tiger. Using the desktop site on Chrome running on a fairly new Android smartphone, everything looks perfectly normal to me. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:55, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

As an example, tate-yoko gasuri in that article is {{transl|ja|tate-yoko gasuri}}, which Mediawiki converts into HTML <i lang="ja-Latn" title="Japanese-language romanization">Tate-yoko gasuri</i>. You should check what your particular browser does with lang="ja-Latn". It's also imaginable that it does something to the font where there's a "tooltip" (HTML title). -- Hoary (talk) 06:07, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

I suspect I will have to learn to live with it. Cullen328, I checked my desktop computer, and it looks okay there. But, I always read/edit on an IPad, 14.6 software, using Safari as a browser. Also, I am a dummy...I have tried Hoary's suggestion, which I don't understand. Here's what I tried: {{lang="ja-Latn"|Kasuri}} {{tranl|"ja-Latn"|Kasuri}} {{tranl|ja-Latn|Kasuri}} , all are obviously wrong, because I get red Template "text". I don't understand the reference to "a "tooltip" (HTML title)", either.

I assume the {{lang}} template is preferred because it automatically detects the language, per MOS:FOREIGNITALIC? But now, I wonder if other readers on similar devices/browsers are seeing what I am seeing. Or, is my experience an anomaly? Anyway, thanks for your consideration and assistance! Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 02:29, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Tribe of Tiger, I was assuming (wrongly) that you'd be using a computer. I suspect that iOS and Android either don't let you make changes or will make such changes extraordinarily difficult. That aside, where you write "tranl", I'd written "transl". "Title" is an (X)HTML attribute (like "style" within your own signature). Most browsers interpret title text as popup messages; these are commonly called "tooltips". ("Title" is also the name of an (X)HTML tag, but that's irrelevant here.) My simple suggestion is: Use your computer (particularly as, even without reconfiguration, what it shows you does not irritate you). -- Hoary (talk) 03:31, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Hoary, I am so very embarrassed by my tral vs. transl error! So sorry! For the past few yrs, I have been unable to use my desk computer, because of physical problems, just too painful for any length of time. I really miss it, but the Ipad has been a boon, as I can read/edit on the sofa, or in bed...no sitting. I shall deal with the irritation of one article's font! Thanks again. Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 05:53, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

I'm sorry to hear this, Tribe of Tiger; I'd had no idea. I know that Apple likes to keep tight control of the devices that it sells, but does it let you install alternative browsers? (My own Android toy comes with Chrome, but I instead use Firefox Focus and Ghostery.) -- Hoary (talk) 08:35, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Hoary, I don't know. But I do know a tech savvy WP friend, and may ask her! Thanks for the suggestion... Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 22:39, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Tribe of Tiger, it's pretty easy to install different browsers on an iPad. Go to the app store, and download what you need from there. I've used the iOS version of Firefox for years. MichaelMaggs (talk) 07:35, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

MichaelMaggs, oh, thanks so much! My "computer knowledge" is at least two decades behind the times. How simple and wonderful! I will try this, thanks again! Tribe of Tiger ^{Let's Purrfect!} 00:29, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Take a look at a newly created article

Changdeva Temple , I created today, I need a native speaker take a look it for grammer and tone. If something wrong you found, fix it. Huge Earth (talk) 11:26, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

It was moved to Draft:Changdeva Temple minutes after your last edit, with a comment that it is not yet of article-quality. Among other problems, the refs are all just URLs. David notMD (talk) 12:04, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

I've had a look at the grammar and writing; I hope I haven't messed up the meaning of anything (do change things back if needed; I do not know the local geography and may have made mistakes in interpreting your text). I'm not going to attempt to do the references as I can't judge which are likely to be deemed reliable secondary sources. But I personally liked the article and thought it interesting and well-balanced. If you can sort out the references so they show the newspaper/site etc. from which they're derived, then maybe it will be a good addition to WP. Good luck! Elemimele (talk) 12:30, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Hiii,fellow editors, I added some best references; for my edits from newspaper website's articles. I think anyone can go and verify source of information. I think you can move it to main space. If any improvement is needed, I'll try to do it and you can edit this article for its betterment.Huge Earth (talk) 13:38, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

@Elemimele and Elemimele: @David notMD and David notMD: someone moved Changdeva Temple Arti from main space. Will you move it to main space.

STATUS: An experienced editor/reviewer moved it to draft, several editors and the creating editor worked to improve it, and then the editor/reviewer returned it to main space. Congrats on going from creation to approved in one day. For this, and the other articles you have created, please learn how to properly reference rather than just bare URLs. David notMD (talk) 14:42, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

@Huge Earth:, just a hint from a non-teahouse-host! The easiest way to do references is to use the tool in the editor. I use the non-visual editor, so that's the only one I can describe. The top line has the Bold B, Italic I etc. icons, and at the far right end, the word "Cite". When "Cite" is selected, as it is by default, the next row says "Templates, Named references, Error check" If you click on Templates, it offers you a choice of four reference-citation styles. Pick whichever seems most suitable, and a little window will pop up with boxes where you can type all the relevant details. Fill in as many as you can (don't worry that not all boxes are relevant to all references) and the tool will do the work for you. Congratulations on getting this article accepted into main-space! Elemimele (talk) 19:27, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

@Huge Earth @Elemimele I also find Citoid helps. ―Qwerfjkltalk 20:48, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

@User:Elemimele Thankyou for information sir.Huge Earth (talk) 05:21, 17 July 2021 (UTC) David notMD Hiii editor, You said that I have to use different kind of sources not just bare URL's. ok, I have some book reference, but a book don't have ISBN number anywhere on it. So can I use that book for reference without writing ISBN number. Or can't use books that doesn't have in Eng and don't have ISBN??? Huge Earth (talk) 07:21, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Huge Earth. International Standard Book Numbers have been used by book publishers worldwide since 1967, although self-published books may not have them. So, they are not expected for books published over half a century ago, but if a 21st century book lacks an ISBN, that may call the reliability of the source into question. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:49, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@Cullen328: Hi will you address the issue with Jalgaon district article. I tried to cite district census handbook of Jalgaon from 2011. I tried to not write same {{Cite book ... line again and again, instead write just <ref="census 2011">...</ref> but I'm not able to do that.Huge Earth (talk) 04:27, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Huge Earth. Please read WP:REFNAME to better understand named references. Please note that the word "name" must appear in the proper place in the wikicoding. When re-using the reference, a slash must be used in the proper place. So, be careful with your coding. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:38, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Huge Earth, you can quite often find the missing ISBN for a book by looking it up on Amazon. It's almost always included in the Product Details section. MichaelMaggs (talk) 07:42, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

@MichaelMaggs: Hiii but district government's handbooks don't have ISBN??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Huge Earth (talk • contribs)

Need guidance in amending my draft

Hi, I have a written a draft on Myc-induced synthetic lethality taking inspiration from other peoples Wikipedia drafts. I have supported my draft with a good number of references. However, My draft is rejected for the reason being that it sounds like an essay. Also, I have written the draft with a neutral point of view. I have no clue as to what fails my draft as none of the sentences are pointed to support the rejection. Hence, it is challenging to improve the draft. Could I get some guidance on this please? Thanks, Vidhula Vidhula A (talk) 14:42, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello Vidhula A and welcome to the Teahouse. This draft seems to contain some of your own research and conclusions; this is not allowed, per Wikipedia:No original research. See also Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_publisher_of_original_thought. It's an interesting and very detailed draft but you shouldn't include your own research or conclusions here in articles. Rubbish computer (Talk: Contribs) 15:41, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy ping @Rubbish computer. Usedtobecool ☎️ 14:18, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Thanks for your prompt reply. The draft does not contain any of my research or conclusions. I have just made a compilation from other studies the references of which are included. Hence there is no original research involved. That's why I am confused. I am trying to edit the draft but every time the same comment comes back. Could you please specifically tell me which lines or paragraph makes it look like it's my research and conclusion and that this is an original research? At least that will help me improve. Thanks, Vidhula

Hi Vidhula A, combining different sources to reach a new conclusion is classed as original research: see WP:SYNTHESIS. I think the examples cover it nicely on that page. It's better to quote what the sources say and otherwise only come to the conclusion said sources come to. I'll go through the draft and add to this answer shortly. Rubbish computer (Talk: Contribs) 14:29, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

As an example: "The Myc family includes L-Myc, N-Myc, and C-Myc.[1][2][3][4] MYC expression is known to be highly governed by a series of mechanisms that are involved in the regulatory motifs associated with the transcription activity[5][6][7] MYC protooncogene is associated with many signal transduction pathways that are associated with growth.[8][9]"

Here, it appears that you're coming to your own conclusions. There are three statements here, and none of them are necessarily wrong, but they shouldn't be combined in such a way to come to a new conclusion. It can be frustrating, because this may be useful research, but we can't allow Wikipedians to come to their own conclusions, per WP:SYNTHESIS. Rubbish computer (Talk: Contribs) 14:35, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

How to submit changes to a protected page

A page that I would like to update is currently semi-protected, the page is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_series_database Dirk Beetstra has told me that should prepare a draft called TimescaleDB but I am not clear if I should copy the page and modify the content as the draft, or create a draft containing the changes.

There are two sections I would like to change. The first is the table of Timeseries databases, to add TimescaleDB. The citations for this will include existing references [7] and [10] as per InfluxDB and will add a new citation 14

The second is to add additional citation, 14 (and possibly another one or two). The citation I would like to add is this one, proceedings from the Cray User Group 2018 where they state that they added TimescaleDB as the preferred time series database for PMDB (Power Management Database). https://cug.org/proceedings/cug2018_proceedings/includes/files/pap174s2-file2.pdf as I believe that this should provide sufficient evidence that TimescaleDB warrants inclusion on that page.

One other question: would either of these articles be considered appropriate secondary citations? https://www.dnsfilter.com/blog/why-dnsfilter-replaced-influxdb-with-timescaledb or https://labs.consol.de/development/2018/10/31/introduction-to-timescale-db.html

How should I proceed please? Lorilanc (talk) 16:43, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@Lorilanc: welcome to the Teahouse, and sorry you did not get a faster response. A community discussion at Talk:Time series database#RfC on inclusion criteria decided that no individual databases should be mentioned in the article unless there is already a Wikipedia article about them. You should not copy parts of the article and edit them, rather, if (and only if) TimescaleDB meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability you can create a draft about it and submit it for review. Please make sure that you comply with Wikipedia's policies regarding confilct of interestand in particular paid editing, if they apply to you. WP:YFA has more information about creating a new draft article. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 08:13, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

I see that TimescaleDB has been discussed extensively on that article talk page, for several years, and in fact it seems the reason the article was protected is that TimescaleDB was repeatedly being added to the paragraphs you mention. Take a moment to read through the talk page discussions. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 08:19, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@Bonadea: Thank you for confirming. I'd read through the talk page but could not 100% follow the dialogue so hadn't picked up on the decision to require a notable page. I agree that someone has repeatedly tried to shoehorn TimescaleDB onto the page... FWIW I want to assure you that wasn't me, and I appreciate why the page was closed to edits. I have checked out the CoI policies, agree with those entirely, and will be sure to comply (I admit I was not aware of those when I made a past edit to a different company page).

Variability of inclusion criteria according to language

I have been referred to this page by Theroadislong.

I had posted on that reviewer's Talk page the following comment and question:

On 15 July 2021, you wrote (above, in Draft: Joseph Ribas (French author)): "other countries Wikipedia have quite different inclusion criteria". It seems surprising that the criteria for publication of Wikipedia articles can vary according to the language in which they are written. This appears to mean that users of Wikipedia in one language may be viewing articles which are of a quality inferior to that of corresponding articles in other languages. Yet Wikipedia is obviously a global "brand". All articles, regardless of language, seem to have a common format and appearance, a common (globe-like) logo, and a common domain name (wikipedia.org). Users might therefore be forgiven for thinking that all articles, regardless of language, are included on the basis of common, global criteria. I don't underestimate the scale of difficulty in securing agreement on, and then enforcing, a common, global set of inclusion criteria. But shouldn't the adoption of global criteria at least be an aim? Perhaps it is. But I've searched, and I haven't yet found a statement to that effect. (None of the above is meant to imply criticism of the criteria that are used for inclusion of Wikipedia articles in English.)

Theroadislong said that I "might get a more informed response" here, at the WP:Teahouse. So any response would be appreciated. Alan Mattingly (talk) 17:15, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@Alan Mattingly: Welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia policies and guidelines are decided by consensus by its editors and not by the Wikimedia Foundation, who provides the software and appearance of the project. As editors tend to stick to one (or two) different languages, the overall consensus in each Wikipedia will differ. The English Wikipedia has more stringent criteria because it is the most viewed (and edited) language out of the ones available, and there's a sizeable portion of the userbase that can enforce said criteria. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:25, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@Tenryuu 🐲: Thanks for your swift response. I am probably out of my depth here because I know relatively little about Wikipedia, but it somehow doesn't seem right that users of Wikipedia pages which are viewed less frequently (because they are written in less-used languages) tend to be offered articles which are judged by less stringent criteria. Don't editors from different language zones confer in some way from time to time to try to make their respective consensuses consistent across the globe? - Alan Mattingly (talk)

@Alan Mattingly: This is unfortunately one of the downsides of a volunteer project. Editors may sometimes interact with other users in a more global venue on Meta, but that's a dramatically smaller proportion of users on here, who solely peruse the English Wikipedia, and none of its sister projects like Wikibooks, Wikivoyage, or even Wikisource. (Please remember to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~) so that your username and timestamp show up in the signature.) —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:45, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@Tenryuu 🐲: Fair enough. But it's to be hoped that there is at least a set of minimum global standards that editors in all languages are expected to comply with, and a process for trying to enforce those standards. (Incidentally, when I started this thread, I was told not to sign with tildes...).Alan Mattingly (talk) 06:59, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@Alan Mattingly: The most likely way to do so would be to go make a proposal at Meta, but even there I don't find it likely to be accepted, editor discretion and all,
Opening questions are designed to sign on the asker's behalf; all subsequent comments are not. This is because a fair amount of newcomers don't know how to sign, and some don't leave follow-up comments. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 13:07, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@Tenryuu 🐲: Thanks. I've sent a comment to brandproject@wikimedia.org.
How about adding something like "Please sign any follow-up comments with four tildes"? - Alan Mattingly (talk) 16:49, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Review of new page

Hello, hoping you can help me understand how "unreliable sources" are defined when they are not, and how a decision can be challenged. This page is linked to original sources at the BBC, The Shaw Trust Power 100, The Royal National Institute for the Blind, and London Transport campaigns -- all original source material references to this individual.

These are leading UK media and national insitutions. It is hard to see how much credible the sources can be, and how we can demonstrate that the reviewer was incorrect, and have a second opinion please? Thank you.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Dr._Amy_Kavanagh Kookkee Monster (talk) 11:56, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@Kookkee Monster: That decline reason (This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.) is actually overloaded, as it can mean two things (or sometimes a mixture of both):1) Some of the sources are unreliable 2) This draft has reliable sources, but we need more in order to verify everything stated. You can check at WP:RSP if there is already consensus on the reliability of a particular source. Also, please see WP:CITEHOW - So far, the draft has a bunch of external links, but no actual inline citations, which are required for articles about living or recently departed people. Victor Schmidt (talk) 12:11, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Kookkee Monster, and welcome to the Teahouse. Your references may very well be reliable, but that is only one of the criteria: most sources also need to be independent of the subject (for example, the subject's own website may be cited only for very limited information, as explained at SPS). The bulk of the content of an article must be derived from sources wholly unconnected with the subject - not them, nor their associates, employers, or institutions; and nothing based on a press release or interview. Because you have not cited your sources in one of the recommended manners, it is hard for a reviewer to evaluate them; and with hundreds of reviews waiting, in a pile that can take months to sort through, reviewers have little incentive to dig into a draft which is presented in a way that makes this difficult. --ColinFine (talk) 14:39, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Actually, Draft:Dr. Amy Kavanagh has no refs, because what you did was place hyperlinks in the body of the article rather than in reference format. Also, after it was declined, you resubmitted without making improvements, hence declined a second time. David notMD (talk) 14:42, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for the welcome and all the constructive comments. After a refresher reading on how to cite rather than link, (I'd forgotten and wrongly assumed that the links created the references) I went ahead and did 14 citations, fully referenced with dates, links, titles and accessed on details. I hope they can be recovered as unfortunately someone else seems to have not merged but overwritten them. Again, thank you for the supportive comments. Kookkee Monster (talk) 17:48, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

I recommend recreating the refs in your Sandbox, then pasting into article. David notMD (talk) 02:58, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Saber mensur

File information

Description	Saber mensur, in German Säbelmensur
Source	Landsmannschaft Zaringia Heidelberg
Date	1913
Author	Felix Geiger
Permission (Reusing this file)	Landsmannschaft Zaringia Heidelberg

Licensing: By Licensing are all members of the Landsmannschaft Zaringia Heidelberg. How can I put the video on Landsmannschaft Zaringia Heidelberg? https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Upload&wpDestFile=S%C3%A4belmensur_der_Heidelberger_Landsmannschaft_Zaringia_und_Cheruskia_1913.jpg Wname1 (talk) 16:19, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi Wname1 and welcome to the Teahouse. From Commons:Licensing; "Wikimedia Commons only accepts media that are explicitly freely licensed, or

that are in the public domain in at least the United States and in the source country of the work." If media isn't either specifically licensed, or in the public domain, it can't stay on Commons due to copyright issues. Cheers, Rubbish computer (Talk: Contribs) 16:36, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello Rubbish computer "Wikimedia Commons only accepts media that are explicitly freely licensed, or that are in the public domain in at least the United States and in the source country of the work." It is Licensing like you said. What should I do now? Wname1 (talk) 17:04, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi Wname1, I'm not that proficient at Commons terms. You need to provide said licensing if you upload to Commons; it can be complicated, and it may be easier to ask this question on Commons. It looks like the video was deleted as it didn't have proof of the proper licensing. If there is no specification that the work is licensed, it can be deleted from Commons after a set time period. Rubbish computer (Talk: Contribs) 17:08, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@Wname1: If the photograph was indeed taken in 1913 by Felix Geiger, then provided he has been dead for over 70 years, it will now be out of copyright. So one way forward is for you to provide evidence for his date of death and add that information to Commons when you re-upload the file. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:26, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull:I am currently on the way to find out, when that date Felix Geiger died. Regards, Wname1 (talk) 06:41, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull:Now I have the correct name of the person and when the person died. The name is Dr. Oskar Geiger who died in March 12th, 1923. Is it now acceptable to display these videos? Regards, Wname1 (talk) 17:47, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

I'm trying to edit the article about disastrous balloon releases, but my edits keep getting reverted and now I've got a nasty message.

Please help! I'm trying to correct the misimpression given on the balloon release page, which is that these horrors are some kind of romantic or peaceful way to celebrate, when in reality they are polluting, littering, sea-turtle and other aquatic wildlife-killing, bird-entangling-and-killing, disasters. Every time I edit the page some guy named MichaelMaggs, who claims to agree with me, reverts my edits to the original puff piece on how lovely these horrifying events are. I did what he asked, which was to provide citations for every claim I made, and also added the requested reasons for the edits.

And now there's a horrible message on my talk page: Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at Balloon release, you may be blocked from editing. Code Pending (talk) 00:20, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

How is it that the money-interested helium balloon industry's opinion is valid or neutral, but mine isn't? Bettt (talk) 00:34, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

You have been undone five times by four different editors. You have been pointed to WP:RGW and WP:POV. Have you read those links? You should also read WP:BRD and WP:EW. Please discuss your contested changes on the article's talk page rather than continuing to make them.Meters (talk) 00:50, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Balloon release has an Opposition section. Consider adding referenced content there, rather than deleting content from elsewhere in the article and changing the Lead. Given reverts, the Talk page of the article is a place to state your position. David notMD (talk) 00:53, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

David notMD Because the opposition part is below the part that tells everyone how wonderful these horrible events are.

Also I've never seen a reference to WP:RGW and WP:POV before. There's nothing on my talk page about it; where else would those references be? And what are those things?

I'm not trying to be troublesome, just trying to right a horrible wrong. Bettt (talk) 01:00, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@Bettt: Please read WP:Advocacy. Wikipedia is not to be used for righting great wrongs or environmental advocacy, no matter how worthy the cause. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 01:03, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

The link to Righting Great Wrongs, or WP:RGW, is in this edit summary by user:Jasper Deng [1]. The link to WP:POV is on your talk page as neutral point of view policy, left by user:Code Pending in this edit [2]. Meters (talk) 01:10, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

The Lead (or Lede) is supposed to summarize the gist of the article. The lead has a sentence about opposition, and that is elaborated upon - with references - in the article. Removing content that describes balloon events (releases, races) is not the way to approach this. David notMD (talk) 01:51, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Let me correct something; I misspoke. I should have said not that I'm trying to right a wrong, but to correct an incorrect assertion. The wrong I spoke of was the untruthfulness of the assertions in that lead.

The balloon industry shill who wrote that piece talks about how wonderful these things are, claiming they are peaceful or prayerful. Except those aren't facts! Nobody can prove that they are either of these things. The negative side of these events, however, which is everything that happens after the flying litter passes beyond the sight of the observers, is only mentioned way down the page, "below the fold" as it were.

I seek to remove the emotional arguments of the advertising part of the page, which - again - cannot be supported by citations, and put forth the truth about what happens after the balloons go up, for which there are many documented dreadful facts and citations to prove them.

I also put in an image from the US Fish and Wildlife Service, which the photographer offers as in the public domain, showing a strangled bird hanging from the ribbon of one such balloon. This image should share the prime time with the colorful sky full of deathly gasbags. Along with many other such images, of sea turtles and other wildlife harmed by balloon litter. Bettt (talk) 01:59, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@Bettt: If you have concerns about the article Balloon release, then the best place for you to raise them would be at Talk:Balloon release per Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. Try to discuss your concerns in terms of relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines and keep the focus on the content being discussed, but avoid commenting on others who might be involved in the discussion or made edits you might disagree with as much as possible as explained here. Making statements such as The balloon industry shill who wrote that piece talks about how wonderful these things are, claiming they are peaceful or prayerful. and How is it that the money-interested helium balloon industry's opinion is valid or neutral, but mine isn't? aren't really conducive to fostering a constructive discussion of the subject matter, and comments directed towards individual editors like the one you made here can quickly turn a discussion into a WP:BATTLEGROUND or WP:USTHEM type of thing which is not going to help you achieve whatever you want to achieve. Try to assume good faith with respect to the others involved and don't just automatically assume that they're not here just because don't seem to agree with the changes you want to make. Wikipedia is a collaborative diting project and sometimes this means that some sort of middle ground needs to be established through discussion. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:07, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

The article was created in 2008. It has always had an opposition section. Again, it has always had an opposition section. Per Marchjuly, the best place for making a case for changes is the Talk page of the article. Per my suggestion, detailed content with references and images can be added to the Opposition section. David notMD (talk) 07:43, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Köppen climate classification map Amhara Region

Hello, question are there Köppen climate classification maps of Ethiopian regions other smaller subdivisions somewhere in Wikipedia? Dawit S Gondaria (talk) 01:37, 19 July 2021 (UTC) Dawit S Gondaria (talk) 01:37, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@Dawit S Gondaria: The article at Köppen climate classification has many references that are open-access, so you could look there. Alternatively, it might be better to ask the question at the reference desk for science questions, where expert editors may be able to point you to other sources. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:16, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@Mike Turnbull Thanks! Dawit S Gondaria (talk) 15:50, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Published page

FYI

 – Heading added by Tenryuu.

Hello sir/madam I published a page on wikipedia for myself a few months back. and have still not got approval please tell when will I get approval on my created page Regards Divyanshu Tejwani Divyanshu Tejwani (talk) 05:35, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@Divyanshu Tejwani: Welcome to the Teahouse. It seems you misunderstand what Wikipedia is for: it is not a place to promote yourself. You could try some of the alternative outlets listed here. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:10, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Query regarding page details of an Educationist.

FYI

 – Turned into a section. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:08, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi, I'm trying to create a wikipedia page for my grandfather, although I'm not quite sure as to why it is getting rejected. From my understanding I have mentioned references, his books, published articles, papers etc. If you could help me with identifying what is missing or how I can improve on it, it'll be really helpful. There 3-4 wikipedia pages of other people where the the works of Dr. Bhim S. Dahiya have been mentioned as well, but I'm not sure how to add those in this references list The username is - Dr. Bhim S. Dahiya Dr. Bhim S. Dahiya (talk) 05:44, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@Dr. Bhim S. Dahiya: Welcome to the Teahouse. I see you have started your draft at User:Dr. Bhim S. Dahiya (which is an inappropriate use of one's user page) and Draft:Bhim S. Dahiya. If you are not your grandfather, please abandon this account, as it is against Wikipedia's username policy to impersonate a real person.
To be pedantic, the draft(s) have not been rejected, but declined. Wikipedia is not interested in what your grandfather has to say, but rather what reliable sources have to say about him. If you wish to continue editing, please disclose your conflict of interest on an account with a different name. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:16, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Historic mentions of references Hi, I'm creating a page with the name Dr. Bhim S. Dahiya and it has been declined twice with the reason stated as to lack of references. But the thing is that my publications, books, articles, thesis, research papers, talks lack the availability on internet as back in the day there was more prevalence of offline ways and I don't have a track of every where my books were referred, or where my research papers are being used to teach in universities. The data available, my books, articles on google scholars(posted by others), mention of my scholarship, being an MLA, other positions held are mentioned in the references with a link to there website where it is showcased. I needed help as to what more can I do and how can I make changes so that it doesn't get declined again. Dr. Bhim S. Dahiya (talk) 08:08, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

???? This post starts by "...trying to create a wikipedia page for my grandfather..." but the comment immediately above is written in first person "...I don't have a track of every where my books were referred..." Each account must belong and be edited by only one person. Attempts at autobiography are frowned upon (see WP:AUTO) but not forbidden. David notMD (talk) 08:25, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Not declined twice. You put identical content in two places (User page and Draft), and each was declined once. Delete the User page content and work only on the Draft. David notMD (talk) 08:28, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

See Help:Referencing for beginners for how to create proper refs rather than all that https stuff. David notMD (talk) 10:30, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@Dr. Bhim S. Dahiya: Like David notMD, I'm a little flummoxed with this comment: is Bhim S. Dahiya you or your grandfather? Wikipedia is not a free webhost or a directory. Perhaps you're looking to create a blog or personal notebook to consolidate Dahiya's materials? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 11:36, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Three sites with the same content

, these sites have the same content, but can I use all three of them for citing a paragraph? Excellenc1📞 08:16, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Excellenc1, just use the best one out of all the three because citation overkill ─ The Aafī ^(talk) 09:28, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Excellenc1, if you can figure out which one is the original and which are copies, cite the original publication. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 09:55, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Excellenc1, I agree with the advice you've been given above. However, you might also write a comment on the talk page; something like: "The reference [source₁] is currently cited for the assertion that [assertion]. If this source ever becomes unusable, note that its text is also available at [source₂] and [source₃]." -- Hoary (talk) 07:04, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

References

Correcting error template message

Hello,

Regarding the following Wikipedia page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Woodward), we are seeking some guidance on what needs to be amended to remove this template message below. We do not require a reply specific to working in mobile view or with the VisualEditor.

This biography of a living person needs additional citations for verification. Please help by adding reliable sources. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous or harmful. Find sources: "Roger Woodward" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (December 2015) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

We would appreciate any help you can offer, thank you. SueMmc (talk) 08:45, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@SueMmc: welcome to the Teahouse. There are a couple of points that need clarification before going into the questions about the article. First, when you say "we", what does that refer to? Each Wikipedia user account should only ever be used by one person, and it is strictly prohibited to share accounts. Secondly, what is your connection to Roger Woodward, and to the editor User:TrishLudgate? TrishLudgate asked a similar question which was answered in some detail a few weeks ago, and you can find that discussion in the archives: Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1112#deleting text. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 10:21, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@Bonadea: Thank you for the links. Trish Ludgate and I have both worked with Mr Woodward in the past. Trish also sought my assistance in resolving the apparent difficulty with citing sources. I have not made any edits as yet; however, if I do, they will be under my username. Trish may also make edits independent of me.SueMmc (talk) 11:51, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) SueMmc: the referencing style at Roger Woodward is non-standard – an awkward blend of Harvard-style and the style more usual in Wikipedia. Some of the references, e.g. the first one, are cited in support of no statement. The article could be improved by severely trimming the long lists, some of them unreferenced, that form the majority of the article. Maproom (talk) 10:24, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@Maproom: Thank you for your time in providing some feedback. Would you please provide some guidance on how to best amend the referencing system in this article so it complies with acceptable standards?SueMmc (talk) 11:51, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

I agree that "Selected works" would be of better service than a complete regurgitation of his oeurve. The reference to his complete works is sufficient for readers who want to see everything. David notMD (talk) 10:51, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@David notMD: Thank you for your feedback and efforts in ensuring this page meets Wikipedia formatting criteria. As an introduction, Trish Ludgate and I have both worked with Mr Woodward in the past. Trish also sought my assistance in resolving the apparent difficulty with citing sources. I have some questions I hope you can help with regarding the edits you’ve made. I am keen to keep the extent of the work within the article, but also comply with an acceptable style. To that end, I have included some rationale for the inclusion of content that has been omitted, and I hope that we can come to some consensus so that Mr Woodward's life's work is acknowledged accurately.

Middle Years section - In this industry, the formal recognition of collaborations with conductors and orchestras is a standard component of any musician’s biographical record, yet two paragraphs were omitted in this section. While you qualify this edit as 'name-dropping', implying a casual contact, in this context it denotes a respectful and serious working relationship. If the names supplied in a narrative (with a source provided for each one) are not acceptable, is there another format that would be? Could these names potentially be listed as dot points under various headings, such as Collaborations with Conductors; Collaborations with Composers; Organisations Founded, etc?

Personal life section - Why were the names of Mr Woodward's children removed when other artists’ Wikipedia entries mention them, for example: Kovacevich, Abbado, Brendel?

Thank you again for your time and advice. I look forward to hearing from you.SueMmc (talk) 11:51, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Common practice is for spouses to be named, but not children (or grandchildren) unless those people are themselves subjects of Wikipedia articles. As to what belongs and does not belong in an article, Wikipedia is not supposed to be a compilation of ALL of a person's accomplishments. Articles about scientists do not list all of their journal articles. Articles about artists do not list every show they have been in. Articles about authors do not list every short story or essay, about musicians, not every performance. David notMD (talk) 11:59, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Moving to draftspace

Hi. How can I move an article to draftspace which is not ready to get published in mainspace. Is there any script or easy methods to do the job? Pillechan (പിള്ളേച്ചനോട് പറ) 12:10, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@Krishnavilasom Bhageerathan Pilla, use WP:MOVE. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:15, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

That is for renaming the articles right? How can I move an article into draftspace. Do we have an option for it there? Pillechan (പിള്ളേച്ചനോട് പറ) 12:19, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@Krishnavilasom Bhageerathan Pilla: Moving is renaming, which includes changing the namespace a page is in. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 12:24, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. Will come again if I find it problematic. Pillechan (പിള്ളേച്ചനോട് പറ) 12:27, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

It's for renaming, yes, but also for moving pages from namespace to namespace. When you rename Article X to Draft:Article X by picking "Draft" in a drop-down menu, you move it from articlespace to draftspace. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:29, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@Krishnavilasom Bhageerathan Pilla Here are some scripts: [3] [4]. ―Qwerfjkltalk 17:25, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Thankyou for the information. Pillechan (പിള്ളേച്ചനോട് പറ) 18:37, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Need help in removing copyrighted material

Hello, I tried rephrasing but it seems like that's not enough. Can somebody help me with my Draft: https://copyvios.toolforge.org/?lang=en&project=wikipedia&title=Draft:Jolyon+Petch&oldid=&action=search&use_engine=1&use_links=1&turnitin=0 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Jolyon_Petch Ainamera22 (talk) 12:37, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Need help in adding picture

Hi, how can I add pictures to an article? Meteorological Person (talk) 12:46, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@Meteorological Person: Welcome to the Teahouse. You can read the pictures help page for more information, but make sure that the pictures conform to Wikipedia's image use policy. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 12:50, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Wanting to publish a page for someone.

How do I publish, or request for my article to be published? I cannot see anything on my page about this? It just says draft? Thomas.k12 (talk) 13:22, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy Draft:Craig Greenberg. Not ready yet. You cannot use Wikipedia articles as references, nor his own website. You have a U Mich ref that confirms the university exists, but not that he degreed from there. All this aside, I doubt he meets WP:GNG, nor WP:BIO. David notMD (talk) 13:33, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Thomas.k12 (ec) Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I will be frank, and I apologize. If you were to submit the draft for review using Articles for creation, it would be rejected quickly, as it is just a promotional piece about a political candidate. Wikipedia articles cannot be used to cite other Wikipedia articles, as Wikipedia is not a reliable source. In addition, merely seeking public office does not make someone meet Wikipedia's special definition of a notable politician, so they would need to be notable for something else and meet the criteria of a notable person. Writing a new article is the absolute hardest task to perform on Wikipedia, so you will want to learn as much as you can first, please read Your first article and use the new user tutorial?

If you are associated with this candidate's campaign, please read conflict of interest and paid editing. 331dot (talk) 13:38, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Thomas.k12, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid that, like many beginners, you have plunged into trying to create an article without understanding how to go about it. It's like saying "I'm going to build a house", and then propping up a wall here and a window there, without building foundations or even checking whether the ground is fit to build on. 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. Not one of your references meets those criteria. If you write a single word of an article before you have found the independent references that are a non-negotiable foundation for your article, you are probably wasting your time.

My suggestions would be:

1. put aside the idea of creating a new article for a few months, while you gain experience and understanding by improving some of our six million existing articles.
2. read your first article carefully
3. look for sources that will satisfy WP:NPOLITICIAN (remembering that anything written or published by him or his associates or institutions, or based on interviews or press releases, don't count). If you can't find any, give up on this article.
4. Create a draft using the articles for creation process.

And remember that it is not "a page for" someone, but "an article about" them. It is not in any way for their benefit. --ColinFine (talk) 13:42, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Thomas.k12 OK, I'll say from the get-go that I've never attempted to create an actual article here, and don't really feel any ambition to undertake it. So I wouldn't normally chime in. But here, I want to say something about at least one of your "references." You say your subject graduated from Harvard, and you put in a footnote. But that footnote, linking to the Wikipedia article on Harvard, accomplishes--in the guise of a reference--only what we usually do here with a Wikilink. You're reading an article. It says someone graduated from this or that university, and for the convenience of anybody who might want to look up that university in Wikipedia, the name of the university links to the article about it. It is coded like this: [[Harvard University]], or, if you just want to say "Harvard" in your own article, [[Harvard University|Harvard]]. It is not a reference; it does not back up your statement that your subject attended Harvard. And rendering it as a footnote (as you did) does not make it into a reference (without looking, I'd be willing to bet that the Wikipedia article on Harvard doesn't so much as mention your subject); it only disguises it as one. Uporządnicki (talk) 12:37, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Moving A Page

Hi Community my colleague and I worked on a wikipedia article in a user sandbox and we were trying to publish the article to the main space, we've had challenges in moving the sandbox article Ruby D-Brown/Sandbox/AJ Sarpong to AJ Sarpong to the main article space, your help with this is neede. ThanksJwale2 (talk) 13:54, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi Jwale2 and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia:NBIO covers some relevant information. To publish this article, you need to show significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. WP:NENT also has some useful points for articles on entertainers. Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 14:45, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi Rubbish computer how do I go about rectifying the move or redirect issue, also the article bio in question has significant coverage, all that its needs is to ensure that a correct move is done, thanks Jwale2 (talk) 16:09, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi Jwale2, sorry I didn't get this ping for some reason. The article needs to show significant coverage first, before it can be moved into article space. The standards in article space are much stricter than in draft space, and could see it deleted. Where it is currently, you have much more time to prepare it. Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 17:52, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

No, Jwale2, I'm afraid it does not (have significant independent coverage). If you were to submit it for review at this point, I am certain that it would get declined; therefore moving it to mainspace without a review is a bad idea: at best it would get moved back to draft space. The problem is that every one of your sources is information from Sarpong herself or from her employers. 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. Writing an article starts with finding suitable independent sources - because if you are unable to find any, you know that the subject does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, and you should give up and not spend any more time on it. If you can find those independent sources, then you can write an article - based almost entirely on what those indpendent sources say, not on what the subject says, or what you know about them. I have added a header, so that when you have added sufficient independent sources to establish notability, you can submit it for review. But doing so now would be a waste of everybody's time. --ColinFine (talk) 18:00, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy ping: @Jwale2: Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 18:15, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Article need to be published

How can I get my article published on Wikipedia? I have corrected many things Help me publish it Farahjaved (talk) 13:56, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Farahjaved. Presuming this is about Draft:Muzammil Hameed, unless there are several reliable sources such as newspaper articles or books that have been written about Muzammil Hameed, then I'm afraid there's no way to get the article accepted for publication. Cordless Larry (talk) 14:03, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Literally all your sources are website homepages. This is not acceptable; you need to link to specific articles on those domains. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 15:12, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Farahjaved, and welcome to the Teahouse. Unfortunately, like many new editors, you have plunged straight into the most difficult task there is in editing Wikipedia. This is like starting to train as a builder, and immediately trying to build a house. I always advise new editors to spend several months learning how Wikipedia works by improving some of our six million articles first (I know you've been around for a year, but you've only made a handful of edits). Please understand 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. Just as building a house starts by surveying the ground to make sure it is safe to build on, preparing the ground, and building foundations, writing a Wikipedia article starts by gathering the independent reliable sources that the article must be based on. If you write a single word of an article before finding the sources, you may be wasting your time and effort. Please study your first article and NCREATIVE. --ColinFine (talk) 15:35, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Profile deleted

Following the comment by one of the reviewers, the article was thoroughly revised to meet the guidelines. I'm wondering if it is possible to reactive the deleted draft profile? Thaanks. Conrad Rizal (talk) 15:41, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Ask at WP:Requests for undeletion; timed-out drafts are usually undeleted on request without much fuss. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 15:58, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

The Wayback Machine

Is it possible to search archived web pages in the same way that a regular search engine does? I tried searching on the wayback machine for the title of an article that I know is archived on the wayback machine, but it doesn't find that specific article. When I type something in the search bar what is the wayback checking? Is it just looking at URLs that contain the words or is it checking the full webpage for relevant material? TipsyElephant (talk) 16:05, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi TipsyElephant, kindly take note that you can search for the information you want on the wayback machine using the name if and only if you remember the name if not you need to search for the link of the page which would send you directly to the page.Jwale2 (talk) 17:06, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Block Issues

Hi Community,A colleague of mine just got blocked and he asked me for assistant, this was the message he was sent:

Your IP address has been blocked on all wikis.

The block was made by Bsadowski1 (meta.wikimedia.org). The reason given is Open proxy.

Start of block: 20:25, 11 Kutawonsa 2021 Expiry of block: 20:25, 11 Ɔsannaa 2021 Your current IP address is 102.176.94.145. Please include all above details in any queries you make.

a quick overview on how his account can be worked or how he can get his account back on track to start editing on wikipedia would be much appreciated. Thanks, Jwale2 (talk) 16:22, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi Jwale2, open proxies are frequently used for vandalism and disruption; as a result, any open proxy can be blocked for any period of time. It is easier to use a closed proxy to edit. Try using secure internet, such as most home wifi. Hope this helps, Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 16:38, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

See also WP:OPENPROXY. Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 16:38, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@Jwale2, hello there, and a warm welcome to you, The Teahouse is not a proper venue to seek for an unblock request(and even worse, if you are appealing on behalf of a friend) it is generally incompatible regarding how unblock appeals are handled on Wikipedia, Having said, your friend is most likely caught under a IP range hardblock, I’m not so sure what I can say to you, but thankfully, I do know who can help out, the sysop 331dot is an expert pertaining this sort of problems. Celestina007 (talk) 18:02, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Jwale2 Celestina007 is correct that it is usually not good to ask that another person be unblocked, because we have no way to know who is sitting at the computer, if it is the same person. That is less problematic here if it is only a proxy block, but it is still better for this other person to request unblock, they can read the unblock appeals guide for more information. 331dot (talk) 18:14, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Draft question

 Courtesy link: Draft:Warchild Bezzy
Hello; please i need your help on the article am writing. I submitted it 3 months ago and it was declined but i was not given a clear reason to why it was declined. Can any revise that article and fix the errors please Kendoma (talk) 16:28, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@Kendoma: Welcome to the Teahouse. You have been told at the draft that it will need to pass the criteria at WP:NSINGER. You're going to need to find reliable sources that significantly cover the subject. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:25, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

extra colon in an edit summary

I included an extra colon in an edit summary so now there is a grammar mistake. Is there any way the colon can be removed? Thank you! 73.167.238.120 (talk) 17:02, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi 73.167.238.120, you can't change an edit summary once it's been made. A grammatical error in an edit summary isn't much of a problem. If you want, you can add or remove a space to perform a WP:Dummy edit; this will enable you to clarify previous mistakes. I don't normally do this if I make typos in edit summaries though, unless the meaning of the edit becomes unclear. Dummy edits can also be used if you forget to include an edit summary. Thanks, Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 17:22, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Removal and restoration of NATO codes from rank pages

There is an user that has been removing NATO codes from military rank articles and templates. While only NATO uses the codes, they serve as a way to know the equivalents in other militaries, and removing them from the pages here in Wikipedia only hurts and not helps.

Is there a way to restore the codes without starting an edit war?, which is what I predict the user who blatantly deleted the info will do if we restore them.

(I already asked on their talk page why they removed them, no answer yet.) Mistah B (talk) 17:11, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi Nikolai.Loskov, I would wait a while longer to give the user more time to reply. Generally it's better to move content disputes to talk pages, which is what you have rightly done here. Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 17:24, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Possible Wiki Projects

Hello, can anyone help me to add Draft:Anthon Bosch to possible Wiki projects related to sports, snowboarding, Olympics? Thanks! DyingLightquests (talk) 18:41, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@DyingLightquests, have you checked "Improving your odds of a speedy review" in the "Review waiting, please be patient." template at the top of the draft? Click the blue button. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:12, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång Got it. Added, thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by DyingLightquests (talk • contribs)

publishing an artist Article

hi. I submit twice for publication of "Hesam Fetrati" Article. he is an Iranian Artist. I received: "Possibly notable, but still cites nonindependent sources." I cite some data, (like picture of his artworks) form his website. if I delete the nonindependent cites, would it be accepted? thanks and best regards. Sepehr san (talk) 19:15, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy Draft:Hesam Fetrati. You have paragraphs in the Lead and body of the article that are not referenced. His website should not be used as a ref (last ref). David notMD (talk) 20:28, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Mark organization as having infobox?

Hi! I made an infobox for an organization off the "Organization articles needing infoboxes" list* (American Cheese Society). Now I can't figure out how to remove "American Cheese Society" from the list of "Organization articles needing infoboxes". How do I mark American Cheese Society as having an infobox? Did I make the box so poorly that some automatic system isn't registering it as such?

• also can't get the "Organization articles needing infoboxes" link to work, so it's here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Organization_articles_needing_infoboxes

I would also, of course, welcome any feedback on the infobox itself, if I messed something up.

Thanks for your help! ForHeCanCreep (talk) 21:55, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@ForHeCanCreep: On Talk:American Cheese Society, I removed |needs-infobox=Yes from {{WikiProject Organizations}}. GoingBatty (talk) 22:02, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by ForHeCanCreep (talk • contribs) 22:05, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

My professional baseball career

I'm omitted when searching my name Robert S. McGuire los angeles dodgers and boston red sox? 2600:1700:A020:DB80:8509:DD1A:1228:B2F8 (talk) 23:32, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, IP editor. Are you this Robert McGuire? If so, minor league players are not automatically considered notable. Please read WP:NBASEBALL for the notability standards for baseball players. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:11, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

USING WIKIPEDIA BIOGRAPHICAL MATERIAL IN MEMOIR

I AM WRITING A MEMOIR TITLED HOW TO TALK TO FAMOUS PEOPLE. MAY I USE WIKIPEDIA MATERIAL IN THIS MEMOIR? IT IS IMPORTANT FOR MY READERS TO KNOW WHO MY FAMOUS ACQUAINTANCES WERE OR ARE, AND WIKIPEDIA DOES GREAT BIOS. 2601:648:8400:6400:3CDB:5DA8:A25C:F10 (talk) 23:36, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, IP editor. Please do not type in all caps. Yes, you can re-use Wikipedia content, but you must attribute the content properly. Please read Wikipedia:Reusing Wikipedia content for complete details. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:02, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Creation of page "Perth International Jazz Festival"

Hi! I created a new page titled "Perth International Jazz Festival", originally in my sandbox, then moved it into the mainspace with that title. I can find it via my sandbox (the link is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perth_International_Jazz_Festival) but it doesn't appear in search or the New Pages Feed for review. Can anyone shed any light?

Thanks for your help! Fleur0402 (talk) 01:33, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

At Perth International Jazz Festival. Appears for search on title within Wikipedia. David notMD (talk) 02:51, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Fleur0402. When I search using the Wikipedia search box, your new article comes up instantly. If you are taking about searching on Google or other search engines, then please be aware that new articles are "no-indexed" unless created by users with the autopatrolled user right. Search engines cannot find such articles. The hidden no-index tags will be removed when a new page patroller looks it over, or when 90 days has passed. That's a very good effort as a first article. Thanks. Please add some categories. I am not knowledgeable about the technical details of the new pages feed. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:57, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

It does appear in the new pages feed. You need to filter out all articles created after 2 July to find it. Kleinpecan (talk) 03:22, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Dr. John Pombe Joseph Magufuli

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

There's a biased article on Wikipedia about the late President of Tanzania, Dr. John Pombe Joseph Magufuli. The article is biased with a Eurocentric world view about an African issue. I have made two edits which were repelled by one German editor and one Scandinavian editor.

I am Tanzanian. And I know there's no way a European can correctly portray an African leader and African issues. This is from the deep-seated disdain and ridicule that Europeans harbour about Africans.

How do I resolve this and make sure the late President of Tanzania, Dr. John Pombe Joseph Magufuli gets an accurate account on Wikipedia, without resorting to an editing war?

Here's the Wikipedia page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Magufuli AfrikaMoja (talk) 04:13, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

@AfrikaMoja: Welcome to the Teahouse! Per the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle, your next step should be to discuss the issue on the article's talk page - Talk:John Magufuli - with other interested editors. Be sure to be civil and discuss how to improve the article. Provide reliable sources to support your suggestions. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 04:20, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Article has a long history of WP:POV pushing by WP:SPA editors. Likely WP:NOTHERE. Warned, and now close to being blocked. We publish info that's in reliable sources, and WP:AGF, which is absent here. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 06:43, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

One of the basic principles of Wikipedia is that any editor can edit any article, no matter their nationality or ethnicity, as long as they comply with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. I am an American from California, and I have made major contributions to Japanese, Indian and Australian topics. Tanzanian editors are welcome to edit articles about California. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:57, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

After having had large deletions and additions to the article reverted three times, you have properly opened up a discussion on the Talk page of the article. However, at the end, you state your intent to soon again make the disputed changes. This is likely to be reverted again, and result in you temporarily being blocked. I recommend patience. I also recommend that rather than combining large deletions and large additions into one massive edit change, you approach the article incrementally, starting with smaller (referenced) additions. You may have more success that way. If an editor reverts said additions, then focused discussions can be opened at Talk. David notMD (talk) 12:31, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

REPLY FROM AfrikaMoja (to David above and anyone else who is reverting my edits on Dr. John Pombe Joseph Magufuli).

Whereas it is true that anyone can edit Wikipedia page, it would be constructive to let the experts on a topic to write about it. If I wrote about California while I am a Tanzanian and have never even been to California there are lots of deep issues, connotations, history and meanings I would miss in my account of California. So I suggest you swallow your pride and accept that as a Californian you are NOT in the best position to write about Dr. John Pombe Joseph Magufuli compared to a Tanzanian like me.

IN CASE YOU ARE ADAMANT ANSWER THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS:

1. Why did CHADEMA take Lowassa as their candidate in 2015, despite them CHADEMA having spent about 7 years before that badmouthing him?

2. What is the political ideology governing Tanzania?

3. Why did Tanzania allow multipartism despite only 20% of the citizen saying they want it?

4. Why did Tanzanians (including the opposition MPs in the 2010-2015 parliament) say they want a dictator to lead Tanzania?

5. Why and how was Dr. Magufuli chosen as the CCM Presidential candidate in 2015, despite not being expected at all before the race started?

6. Why are Tanzanians missing Dr. Magufuli todate, and seeing his successor as inadequate to fill his shoes?

7. Why are Tanzanians not dying of COVID-19 despite ignoring all WHO guidelines?

8. What did the Tanzanian former president Jakaya Kikwete tell Wsterners about "gay rights in Tanzania"?

Answer those questions to see how qualified you are to write about Tanzania and about Dr. John Pombe Joseph Magufuli.

FURTHERMORE I provided reliable sources, but those who are reverting my edits think that they know Tanzania and Tanzanian politics and socio-economics better than a Tanzanian, despite being in California and never ever having lived in Tanzania. Therefore if anyone locks me out for telling the correct version about Magufuli then it will be a case of Wikipedia promoting an Anti-Afrikan agenda. May be Wikipedia is NOT the free and neutral platform. May be Wikipedia is no different from the commercial news media such as BBC, Reuters, VoA, etc which are constantly promoting the "Keep the Afrikan down and denigrate him" agenda; and which the Californian editor keeps quoting thinking they have the right info about Magufuli. Their news articles are nothing but hyperboles and out of context.

Therefore the so-called "large portions of text" that I removed were not larger than 3 paragraphs. I removed them because they are irrelevant issue to profile Dr. Magufuli with. Remember that Dr. Magufuli was a Tanzanian President. He was elected by Tanzanians. Not by WHO, not by USA, not by EU, or any Western country. Tanzania is a sovereign state. That means it is free to self-determine its policies, laws, etc. Dr. John Pombe Magufuli was elected to serve Tanzania and therefore his profile should reflect Tanzanian issues.

When yo say Dr. Magufuli was spreading misinformation about COVID-19 who is judging misinformation? The global medical industry is the main driver behind WHO policies, and the global medical industry doesn't want nor understand natural medicine and herbal remedies. So do you expect WHO to go against the Western pharmaceutical industries in favour of natural remedies?

Of course not.

Who are you to say Magufuli was spreading misinformation? Who is dying of COVID-19 between Tanzanians and Westerners? That is what I believe is called "The proof is in the pudding". You may disagree with Magufuli (because you probably think Africans are stupid and ignorant), but look at the results. We Tanzanians are NOT the ones dying of COVID-19, nor have we ever locked ourselves inside our houses.

So please. Let the truth about Magufuli and the other side of COVID-19 be told. You don't have to like it, but it is the truth. Come to Tanzania and see for yourself.

Here are some of skeptical Westerners who came to see for themselves:

1. The VoA guy.

You can see his head was spinning. Because VoA is a propaganda mouthpiece of US govt, and VoA has instructions to denigrate Tanzania's responce to COVID-19 under Magufuli. But he was seeing a different reality and was having a hard time on how to report it on VoA. He even went clubbing. CLUBBING FOR GOD'S SAKE. Clubbing in Dar es Salaam, at the time when his home country Italy was dying like diseased chicken in a hen house.

(a) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLOzsbypSs4

2. The "normal citizen" from German. This guy was just a normal citizen, not sent to Tanzania for propanda purposes:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UuRIv1HTzwA

3. And here are a few Western vloggers:

(a) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wcdeoJ824C0

(b) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tmx6jLN8F34

So my friends from California, from Scandinavia, from Germany and elsewhere outside of Tanzania who have succumbed to stories by Western propandists (VoA, BBC, DW, CNN, etc) what do you have to say against real unbiased reporting from normal poeple you see above?

Do you see how life goes on as usual in those videos? Look at the dates on those videos, what were you doing your Western countries? You were all locked up scared in your houses.

Allow me to tell the real story about COVID-19 and about Magufuli. Not the lies your are being fed by your media. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AfrikaMoja (talk • contribs)

Edits are crass, sweeping, unencyclopedic, full of personal POV and opinion.

Koncorde (talk) 20:51, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Allow me to tell the real story about COVID-19 and about Magufuli. Not the lies your are being fed by your media. @Koncorde: Unless your "real story" is published by reliable sources and is verifiable (bloggers are generally considered unreliable), Wikipedia has no interest in what is purported to be the truth. Please discuss this on the article's talk page. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:49, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Not me @Tenryuu:, there is an unsigned AfrimaMoja comment above mine filled with various claims. Koncorde (talk) 00:15, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

@Koncorde: sigh, my bad. I hate it when people don't sign. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:18, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

@Koncorde: Truth is sometimes crass. Did you read my edits? If yes, which part is a POV and opinion? --AfrikaMoja (talk) 22:34, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

There pretty much isn't anything that isn't tainted. Reliable sources, be they Tanzanian or elsewhere, are required to support your wholesale changes that introduce what can only be described as hilarious claims lauding Magufuli, but for example this is egregious: A whopping majority of Tanzanians appreciate very very much how Dr. Magufuli led the country through the COVID-19 pandemic. Very few Tanzanians are on-board with the u-turn that his successor (Samia Suluhu) has taken on COVID-19. She is viewed as a weak leader who can be manipulated by those who do not have the best interests of Tanzania at heart Koncorde (talk) 00:15, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

I suggest this section be closed, as extended discussions about the article are now properly taking place on the Talk page of the article. I also suggest incremental changes to the article rather than the large addition/deletion of content that has approached edit warring. To AfrikaMoja, "Allow me to tell the real story..." is a wrong approach. The current version represents more than 1,000 edits by scores of editors. Assume many of them are from Tanzania and/or know Tanzania well. I beseech you, work smaller, referenced additions first, rather than your effort to make major changes in one massive edit. David notMD (talk) 09:41, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Hi there, I'm trying to figure out how to edit a page but am new & need help please

I was told this on my page by an editor: "wiki-maintenance: no mainspace categories in user pages"

could someone please assist me with this? there's a button to press "undo" but don't know what I need to do before I press that or if I should press that. thank you in advance for your help. Thomastrainor (talk) 05:11, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

@Thomastrainor: Welcome to Wikipedia. Can you please say where you saw that message and what page you are trying to edit? Your talk page is empty and you have made no other edits from this account that I can see. RudolfRed (talk) 05:16, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Yes, thank you for your assistance. Here is the page I created and am trying to edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft%3AFranki_Love&type=revision&diff=1010433696&oldid=1004568415 Here are the edit notes I received: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Franki_Love&action=history I am struggling to understand what to do to make the article complete & approved. Any assistance would be appreciated. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thomastrainor (talk • contribs)

@Thomastrainor: I assume you refer to this edit by Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars. If so, no, you shouldn't undo that edit for now, as categories intended for mainspace articles do not belong on drafts. Victor Schmidt (talk) 05:58, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

I think @Thomastrainor: is trying to edit Draft:Franki Love from the history page. You should just go to the Draft and continue there. Regards, Ariconte (talk) 06:06, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

@Thomastrainor: You're going to need more sources. Right now, the draft won't be approved. Being nominated for awards isn't enough. See WP:NMUSICIAN and WP:RS. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 06:30, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

@Thomastrainor: Changing the categories to category links on your draft is fine. Alternatively, you may wrap categories in {{draft categories}}. GoingBatty (talk) 12:29, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you to all who have given input. I have found several more sources for the article I am working on. Including, a compilation album that this artist did with a famous artist, main vocalist on a notable tv show, and other sources. I am wondering if there is anyone (such as a volunteer) on wikipedia who can help place the new information in the article to help me do this correctly? Or shall I just give it a go and will it be edited? or shall I ask for help here afterwards to have it looked over? Also, is my article in the correct place of where it needs to be right now? Lastly, the photo I placed was from a website and there is a link to purchase the photo on a photography website. Could I place it on wikipedia with a link to that photography website. Or shall I place a general photo up that I find on the internet that is not for purchase? Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thomastrainor (talk • contribs)

Go ahead and edit Draft:Franki Love to improve it. Pictures are a difficult subject because the copyright of the picture has to allow its use. Look at your talk page: User talk:Thomastrainor for some tutorials on how to edit. Regards, Ariconte (talk) 06:22, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Ariconte I've gone ahead and done a bit of editing. If I choose a photo and contact the person who owns it for approval, is that enough to make the photo acceptable or must I have written permission.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Thomastrainor (talk • contribs)

@Thomastrainor: All permission statements must be directed to WP:OTRS, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for details. Note that copyright normall resides in whoever made the photo (that means the photographer) not the mere subjet, unless transfered by a contract. Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:40, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Should I make this template?

Majority of the links in this template I've made are red links. So should this template be made? Excellenc1📞 07:53, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

@Excellenc1 It looks like you have already made it! The question really ought to be "should you deploy it? And if so, where?" I see little need for a template listing trivial redlinks which are unlikely ever to be made into articles. But on the other hand, it might prompt yourself and other editors to do so. As there is already a navigation template at the bottom of the article on Departments of France which lists those Departments, I see no need to bloat the footer of that article with another template repeating the same list of names, just for the Councils of those Departments. So the logical place to deploy it would be in the eight extant articles on those Councils. But are they really necessary there, when one could simply use the existing Department template and navigate from there to the appropriate Council page? Would having two near-identical templates be a hindrance rather than a help? I actually think it might well be a hindrance, and could cause confusion. But perhaps, better still, would be to ask the question at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject France and see what other users and editors of those articles feel. Nick Moyes (talk) 11:02, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

@Excellenc1: I'd look at it like this: if the redlinks could potentially become blue, go ahead, so the question is whether the individual departmental councils are notable. I have a sense that they probably are, even though the existing articles about departmental councils are not very well-sourced; this is something you could discuss over at WikiProject France. If you do reach the conclusion that the councils are notable, it might be a good idea to then start creating the articles about each council, to reduce the number of redlinks in the template. Like Nick, I don't think Departments of France needs that template, but Departmental council (France) could definitely have it, especially since the table in that article links to the articles about each department, rather than to articles about the departmental councils. In a similar vein, I think Regional_council_(France) might have the template Template:Regional Councils (France) in addition to Template:Regions of France. (The current template shouldn't be removed since Regional_council_(France) is one of the articles linked in Template:Regions of France.) --bonadea contributions talk 11:30, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Questions about - Messaging, Articles, Users, Login

Question Number One:
Please make me correct - can I edit the source of that message I receive on my talk and add my reply message at the end of that and then publishing it?
Question Number two:
How can I submit my article page for review? On Sandbox can I create an article and draft it for the Administrator's review? Thank you for helping Question Number Three:
Can I create multiple articles once I become an autoconfirmed user by Wikipedia Community?
Question Number Three:
In case I use different internet connection (wifi,4G,office net) will the community block me?

 Esmatullah Mohib (talk) 08:44, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the teahouse. In regards of your second question, yes, you may. You can also use multiple networks to connect and contribute to wikipedia. _Signed,Benjamin Borg ^(Talk) 09:13, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Esmatullah Mohib (ec) Hello and welcome to the Teahouse.

1. Yes, you may reply to messages on your talk page, just as I am responding to your message here.
2. You may use Articles for Creation to create and submit a draft article.
3. Yes, one you are autoconfirmed, you may create articles. However, until you gain much experience in doing so, it is recommended that you use Articles for Creation. Creating a new article is one of the most difficult tasks to perform on Wikipedia, so you want to be sure you have the basics down first before attempting to do it yourself without others looking at it. Please see Your First Article, and use the new user tutorial. 331dot (talk) 09:14, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
4. We don't know how you are accessing the internet, unless your underlying IP address is blocked for some reason unrelated to your actions, but having an account should allow you access in most cases. 331dot (talk) 09:14, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

How to create a new wikipedia page ?

 This is me Jarvis (talk) 11:52, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

@This is me Jarvis Start with reading WP:YFA thoroughly. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:07, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Draft deleted but not in logs

I had been working on a draft and was almost done when I returned to find a blank edit space, yet there was nothing in the edit logs or deletion logs. The only reason I could think of for it being deleted is that the person was not familiar with the subject and did not think he was notable since I had not added the outside links yet. Is there anyway to recover the draft or file a dispute without the logs? Jadenealphillips (talk) 11:54, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Jadenealphillips Other than your edit here, your account has no edits, deleted or otherwise, associated with it. Did you perhaps edit the draft without being logged in to your account? Without knowing the name of the draft, I can't answer that with certainty. Did you click "publish changes" to save the draft? (a common source of confusion is that "publish changes" should be interpreted to simply mean "save changes", it does not mean "publish this to the encyclopedia"). 331dot (talk) 12:11, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

I have 3rd party sources for my page

My draft page has lots of independent sources that confirm my page. Why is it not being approved? Tomasivor1 (talk) 12:28, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

I believe the articles about the company written by The Independent, Business Insider & Markets Insider cover these areas listed below & grant the company notability.

Contain significant coverage addressing the subject of the article directly and in depth. Be completely independent of the article subject. Meet the standard for being a reliable source. Be a secondary source, primary and tertiary sources do not count towards establishing notability. Tomasivor1 (talk) 12:32, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Tomasivor1 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The publishers might be reliable, but the sources themselves are not. They are announcements of routine business activities, which does not establish that Cloudrovia meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. What is needed are independent reliable sources with significant, in depth coverage of the topic that goes beyond a brief mention, announcement, or the company website(which is not independent). Please see Your First Article for more information. 331dot (talk) 12:37, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Tomasivor1: The Business Insider and Markets Insider articles appear to be similar to each other. I hope you can provide more significant coverage for Cloudrovia besides them not hosting Parler. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 12:40, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

The draft only cites two sources. The first does not mention the subject, and the second is the subject's own web site. You'll need to do much better than that to establish that the subject is notable enough to warrant a Wikipedia article. Maproom (talk) 12:48, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

My Wikipedia page is gone and I want it back.

I had this wikipedia page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Juliano since 2014 and I got no notice why it was removed. I want to resolve this and have it back up ASAP please. 65.128.179.244 (talk) 12:40, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy: Deletion discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tony Juliano, dated June 2021. David notMD (talk) 12:44, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

(ec) The article(not just a "page") was deleted per the result of a deletion discussion, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tony Juliano. It is up to you to monitor any articles you are interested in; the only notification requirement is for the creator to be notified(and they were, though they have not edited since 2012). Unless you have new information that the discussion did not consider, there's not much you can do. 331dot (talk) 12:46, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, anonymous user. I may be wrong, but I interpreted your question to mean that you are Juliano, and the deleted article was about you. If that is so, then, please understand that Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not a business directory or promotional site. The article in question was never "your page", it was Wikipedia's article about you, and it could be kept only if you met Wikipedia's criteria for notability - most of us do not, and Wikipedia will not have articles about us. If you can find the reliable independent published sources which talk about you in enough detail to ground an encyclopaedia article, we could have an article, but it is clear that the participants in the deletion discussion that David notMD linked to looked for such sources last month, and could not find them. --ColinFine (talk) 13:55, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

@ColinFine, that was indeed what came to mind as soon as I read their comments.
@65.128.179.244, unfortunately, as already mentioned to you the article wasn’t ever yours, it was an article about you written by an editor here, it appears the article didn’t meet our notability threshold and as a result, it was deleted. Furthermore your tone comes off as authoritative and I take it you are one and the same person as the subject of the deleted article, No? (I may be wrong) but if yes, did you give financial assistance to anyone to help create the article? Did you create the article yourself? In any case, an article on yourself is not necessarily a good thing. Celestina007 (talk) 16:01, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

BLP problem

Eric Joyce

I am quite new to editing. I have edited a number of BLPs with care. At one, my edits keep being reversed by an unsigned user using a VPN. The user is abusive, but the main thing is that they keep inserting a clear libel and providing nonsensical references. Not sure what to do next, really. SteveCree2 (talk) 13:18, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

It looks like things are going as they should, with you making the correct decision to discuss on the talk page and another editor becoming involved. If the IP editor continues to revert over the next day or two and does not engage in discussion, then you can report them for Wikipedia:Edit warring. Also, just to avoid any confusion in the future, seeing an IP address instead of a username just means the editor isn't logged into a Wikipedia account. It has nothing to do with VPNs. -- Fyrael (talk) 14:26, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Oh, looks like you've already started something on the edit warring noticeboard. That notice you put on the Joyce talk page should go on the user's talk page though. -- Fyrael (talk) 14:28, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

@Fyrael: Where is the discussion on WP:AN3? --David Biddulph (talk) 14:41, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, I didn't actually check the board. I made a bad assumption upon seeing their notice on the talk page. -- Fyrael (talk) 14:43, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Apologies. I've now raised the edit warring claim at the noticeboard and informed the user at their talk page. SteveCree2 (talk) 15:03, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

If you find yourself having problems with an IP address user persistently vandalising an article, and it's obvious vandalism (not a valid content-dispute), you can also request that the page be semi-protected at [5]. This is very straightforward and no-stress, but prevents IP users from editing (for the duration of the protection). Elemimele (talk) 20:21, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

IMAGE

Hi!

I was wondering whether I could use this image in a Wikipedia article on the same topic. Unfortunately, I do not know whether this is under CC, or public domain, since there appears to be no information provided about the license.

Thanks, Danglerofhell (talk) 13:28, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

@Danglerofhell: Hello, welcome to the teahouse.

The image is allready uploaded to commons as File:Mars Géolocalisation.jpg, which indicates that it came from NASA. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 13:50, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Questions about notability for article

Hello. I recently wrote an article called Draft:MPB Group Limited that was rejected for sounding like an advertisement. I have since made some edits. However, I have been informed that my article (which I have not been paid for, nor do I work for MPB) doesn't reach the notability quota. Can someone explain to me why that is?

I have looked at other articles of a similar vein, and they contain similar content. To not breach OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, I wish to point out that I'm not questioning the existence of my or anyone else's articles, I'm just curious as to why those passed the set rules and mine did not, despite similar content. Wiki page on OTHERSTUFF says: "In consideration of precedent and consistency, though, identifying articles of the same nature that have been established and continue to exist on Wikipedia may provide extremely important insight into the general concept of notability, levels of notability (what's notable: international, national, regional, state, provincial?), and whether or not a level and type of article should be on Wikipedia."

If anyone could help me out, that would be wonderful.

Best  Prospero1623 (talk) 14:05, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi Prospero1623, I'm just going over the draft now. The Daily Express isn't a reliable source. If there are other, published articles that don't establish notability etc then they may need to be improved or taken to WP:AFD. Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 14:20, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Link Draft:MPB Group Limited Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 14:21, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Per WP:NWEB, the subject needs to be notable and of historical significance. You need sources that are independent but also reliable. The Daily Express, for example, is unreliable because it is a tabloid and frequently sensationalises content. Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 14:25, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi :@Rubbish computer:thank you for your insights. I have had some help from other user 9as well as yourself) on source classification re: notability/reliability, and I will work on separating them appropriately and seeing what is suitable. Thanks for your help, it's appreciated.

To answer another part of your question, Propspero1623, the whole point of other stuff exists is that Wikipedia contains thousands and thousands of articles which would not be accepted today, but not many of our editors are keen on spending the time going through them. If it were just a matter of nominating them for deletion, it wouldn't be so bad, but some are actually substandard articles about subjects that are actually notable, and the proper action there is to bring them up to standard (or at least move them to Draft space so that they can be brought up to standard without polluting mainspace). The upshot is: the existence of an article in English Wikipedia does not necessarily imply that anyone has ever reviewed or approved it. --ColinFine (talk) 15:11, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi :@ColinFine: thank you, that's very helpful. I'm still not entirely clear on the concept of notability, but your explanation makes sense. I have since been advised that I have almost enough sources for the subject to be considered notable. Thanks.

@Prospero1623, to yet address another part of your statement, you seem jittery, or rather, too conscious about the potential COI/UPE possibility in this article, now, whilst I do not support either, both aren’t necessarily in violation of our TOU in so far as you follow to the latter what is contained in both WP:COIDISCLOSE & WP:PAYDISCLOSE, what would invariably get you in trouble is actively or deliberately being evasive about both. Celestina007 (talk) 15:47, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi :@Celestina007: Thank you for the links.

Few quick questions - User permission

1. How can I check, if I'm eligible or I become an autoconfirmed user or not?
2. Can I create my user page before I become the autoconfirmed user?
 Esmatullah Mohib (talk) 17:07, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

@Esmatullah Mohib: 1) The conditions for autoconfirmed are having an acocunt for four days (96 hours) and having made at least 10 edits. I can tell from Special:Contributions/Esmatullah Mohib that you have 10 edits already, and from your user log that you created the acocunt yesterday, so are not yet 4 days registered here. You can expect to get autoconfimed on the 23th of July around 8:15 am UTC. Regarding 2), you can create your userpage at anytime you want, or you could also refrain from doing so, provided that your userpage complies with WP:UP. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:14, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

@Esmatullah Mohib: Hello Esmatullah Mohib, welcome to the teahouse.

The autoconfirmed user right is automatically added to your account after you've been here 4 days and made at least 10 edits, you don't need to aply for it. You can check what user rights you have at Special:UserRights or by clicking the "User rights" button at the bottom of your contributions page. At the moment you've made enough edits to qualify for the right but have only had this account for 1 1/2 days, you just need to wait a bit longer for it to be added.

You do not need to be autoconfirmed to make your own user page, it only applies to making new articles. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 17:22, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

@192.76.8.91 and Victor Schmidt: Thank you so much for you cooperation - I need to read them all— Preceding unsigned comment added by Esmatullah Mohib (talk • contribs)

Notability Help

Hello, I read that Wikipedia is very strict about notability criteria. I would like to know if this person can have a page on here. He already has a page on German Wikipedia. https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Georg_N%C3%A4der

Thanks! Centrereded (talk) 17:16, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Centrereded. Because that article has nearly 60 references, it is very likely that an English translation would be accepted. Please read Wikipedia:Translation for complete details. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 18:46, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello please help me publish an new article

 Shabs.17 (talk) 19:05, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Shabs.17, hi and welcome to the Teahouse! Please have a look at Wikipedia:Your first article and let us know if you have any questions! Calliopejen1 (talk) 19:07, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

I see you have created Draft:Zakir Hussain (politician), Draft talk:Zakir Hussain (politician), Template:Zakir Hussain konta, and Template talk:Zakir Hussain konta. Please do not create the same article in different places. Kleinpecan (talk) 19:27, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

And please note Shabs.17, that Draft:Zakir Hussain (politician) has no sources at all, and even in its one sentence is far from neutral. No Wikipedia article should describe anybody as "patriot", "congress warrior", or "working towards betterment of society" unless it is directly quoting and citing a reliable sources wholly unconnected with the subject. My advice to new editors who plunge straight into trying to create a new article is that it is like trying to build a house after one day apprenticed to a builder, or to perform a violin concerto after your first violin lesson. I advise putting the project aside for a few months while you learn the trade of editing Wikipedia by making small improvements to some of our six million existing articles. It likely that you will both have a less stressful and frustrating time that way, and that you will add much much more value to Wikipedia by doing so. --ColinFine (talk) 21:23, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

how can one add photo to wiki entry if not the creator of the page?

 ABVD79 (talk) 20:14, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

@ABVD79, hello and welcome to the Teahouse, your question is somewhat difficult to comprehend but are you asking if you can add an image to an article you yourself did not create? Then the answer is yes. Celestina007 (talk) 21:31, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, ABVD79, and welcome to the Teahouse. The creator of an article has no special privileges with respect to that article: in most cases, any editor (including one who has not created an account) may edit any page. However, all edits must be in accordance with Wikipedia's principles; and further, we resolve disagreements by consensus, so any editor may revert another editor's changes (anywhere) if they don't think the edits improve Wikipedia: see BRD for how this works.

In the case of images, the above still applies, but there are added complications. With certain limited exceptions, all images added to Wikipedia articles must have been freely licensed by their copyright holder; which means in particular, that most images found on the web cannot be used in Wikipedia. See image use policy for more on this. Any image that is already in Wikimedia Commons may be added to a Wikipedia article; otherwise an image must first be uploaded (normally to Commons): see the Upload wizard. --ColinFine (talk) 21:30, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

@ColinFine, thanks for expounding on this for them. Celestina007 (talk) 21:37, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Question

Can I submit this draft for review? Draft:Prende TV ItsJustdancefan (talk) 20:45, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

@ItsJustdancefan, hello and welcome to the Teahouse, I have replied you on my tp please do not ask multiple questions on multiple places, the answer is yes you can but it would be declined as the sources are mere announcements. Celestina007 (talk) 21:22, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Article declined because it doesn't meet the inline citation requirements.

 Mogulaminu (talk) 20:56, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

I wrote a Wikipedia article, and it was declined because it doesn't meet the minimum inline citation requirements, I have tried all I could to work on the reference, but I can't seem to get it right. I need somebody to help me. Here is the link to the article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Becky_Olubukola

@Mogulaminu, welcome to the Teahouse, although of no relevance, I’m proud to say I’m Nigerian too(or at least I carry the green passport having lived here 20+ years) Ah, okay to answer your question, an article is retained on mainspace because it meets our notability threshold which is roughly ascertained by WP:GNG, Wikipedia is built on the bed rock of verifiability from reliable sources see WP:RS unfortunately if those reliable sources aren’t present then there isn’t any helping we can do as we do not create sources so until such a time the subject of your draft article possesses reliable sources that substantiate notability claims we are unable to accept the article into mainspace. If I may ask, in what capacity are you and the article's subject related? Celestina007 (talk) 21:17, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Keep this up and you are looking at an outright reject. Please see WP:COI and what Wikipedia is WP:NOT. Celestina007 (talk) 22:38, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Celestina007 Thank you for your response and I am happy to know you are a Nigerian. I actually have no ties with the subject, I read about her and her achievements in the real etate industry and she is someone who is quite notable around here, I tried to read about her on Wikipedia but noticed she has no page here. Hence, the reason I tried to create the page.

Conflict of Interest Disclosure

Hello,

I work for a magazine and am hoping to edit Wikipedia profiles of individuals referenced in our coverage with relevant links, but I am having some trouble figuring out exactly how to express my conflict of interest as someone who works for the magazine. Do you have any advice for how specifically/where to convey this as I edit posts?

Thank you for your help! Julia.Knoerr (talk) 20:59, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

@Julia.Knoerr, hello there and welcome to the Teahouse to properly disclose a WP:COI please see WP:COIDISCLOSE. Celestina007 (talk) 21:09, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks so much! To disclose my role as a paid editor, which talk page would I use? Is there a way to do this for all of my posts (previously, I had created a user page and disclosed conflicts of interest, but my posts were still reverted).

@Julia.Knoerr, just because you disclose your role does not mean that your edits will not be reverted. You've appropriately disclosed your conflict, but your edits haven't been helpful, so they are getting undone. Calliopejen1 (talk) 21:39, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Indeed, Julia.Knoerr, your language reveals some misunderstanding about what Wikipedia is. First, please note that Wikipedia does not contain "profiles" - not one. It contains encyclopaedia articles, which are very different. 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.

If your magazine is regarded as a reliable source - that is, it has a reputation for fact-checking and editorial control - and your writers are unconnected with the subjects in question, then it could be used as a source for citations in articles, supporting particular claims in the articles: but it would be regarded as a COI for you to add them, and you should rather make edit requests. Adding external links to articles which point to your magazine, as well as again being a COI if you do it yourself, is very likely to be inappropriate. --ColinFine (talk) 21:55, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

I agree with ColinFine that Julia.Knoerr should be making talk page requests for edits, rather than editing the pages directly. That said, I don't think the approach (basically all of their article space edits have been a form of "am article in The American Prospect said ...:") is going to make any headway here, as it looks like they are here just to promote the American Prospect. Julia.Knoerr, I left you a note on your user page about how to properly declare as a paid editor (interns qualify for that category). --- Possibly ☎ 00:06, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Insert Picture in Biography

Hi everyone. Im trying to complete the biography for Constanza Navarro Meza. I am having trouble completing it. Can anyof you please be so nice to me and help me complete the article about her?

I want people to find her as Constanza Navarro Meza. I would like to insert a picture of her and appear her article officially in Wikpedia and not just a sample page. Can you help me please? Gelowiki21 (talk) 21:47, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Gelowiki21, and welcome to the Teahouse. I have added a header to your sandbox (it is still a user sandbox of yours, even though you didn't use "sandbox" in its name) so tha you can submit it for review when it is ready. However, it is nowhere near ready for that, because it does not have a single cited source - these are essential for biographies of living people; and especially so when there are extraorinary claims. Please read WP:YFA and NARTIST carefully. I also suggest you read my answer to #Hello please help me publish an new article five questions above, which is very relevant to you. --ColinFine (talk) 22:01, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi ColinFine thank you for your help. What do you need from me in order to have this biography published? Please help — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8801:2397:BB00:F892:7E00:2228:29D6 (talk) 22:07, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Published third-party sources that corroborate the article's claims. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 22:45, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

@Gelowiki21 As you are the subject's father, you do have an extremely obvious Conflict of Interest. You should most definitely follow the instructions in that link to declare your COI, but also consider not trying to write an article yourself about your daughter yourself, but leave it to someone less 'involved'. It is not acceptable to attempt to use sources like Facebook, LinkedIn or Instagram, but only to rely on independent news media or properly published books/magazines which have written about here. If you can't find such sources right now there cannot be an article, and it's therefore simply WP:TOOSOON, but one day she may well become Notable in Wikipedia's eyes once those detailed and in-depth sources are available. I hope she does well in her acting and singing career, and continues to make you proud. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:32, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

You are right, thank you very much

Copying an article into sandbox for rewriting

I want to revamp a poorly written article on a topic I'm interested in. I don't think I'll be able to make every change in a single day, so I wanted to rewrite the article in my sandbox and then copy over my changes once I'm done, in order to avoid the article being an absolute mess while it's still in article space. My question, therefore, is whether or not I am allowed to copy the entire article as it currently exists into my sandbox without violating Wikipedia's policies on copyright.

If you want to know for some reason, the article in question is Rinu. Mlb96 (talk) 22:32, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

@Mlb96: You're allowed to do that, but I suggest you make small changes to the live article. It would be a shame if you spent days to rewrite the whole article and your changes were reverted. GoingBatty (talk) 22:42, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

I'm not terribly worried about that, the article has only 39 edits in about 16 months. The last edit was almost two months ago. Nobody seems to care about this article. Mlb96 (talk) 22:59, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

The article gets around 800 views per month, so clearly people DO care about it. I also recommend doing a section at at time David notMD (talk) 01:15, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Creating a talk page

I'm a newly enrolled Wikipedia editor, although I've been a professional editor in 'real life' for many years. I want to flag an issue with the content of a section in one of the articles, so I clicked the article's red "Talk" link. As far as I know, that means there is currently no Talk page for the article, so I expected that clicking the red link ought to create a Talk page for the article. Instead, I'm prompted to create a User Talk page for me. That isn't what I want to do - my comments need to be anchored to the article, not just to my username. How do I do that? Editingfrank (talk) 23:19, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi Editingfrank. There’s no record of you making any edits with this account to any Wikipedia pages other than the one you made here at the Teahouse. Did you try to create the talk page using another account? If you did, then it would be easier to help figure out what might have happened if you can give the name of the article whose talk page you want to create. — Marchjuly (talk) 23:24, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Editingfrank (ec) Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm not sure what link you clicked, it could be the "talk" in the upper right corner which is for your user talk page as you found, but article talk page links are(if using a computer) at the top left of an article, immediately above the article. If you look at Joe Biden as an example, it should be next to the "article" tab. 331dot (talk) 23:28, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Editingfrank - I've created your talk page for you, with a welcome notice. Don't know why you got that notice but you shouldn't get it now. As for your query, You can create a new article talk page by clicking on the red link, and adding your comment with a level 2 header ==Title of section==. Mjroots (talk) 10:16, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

reopening an edit request

An edit request was not answered because there were no reliable sources. After, I provided what I believe is a reliable source. How and when will the edit request be granted? Thanks! 73.167.238.120 (talk) 23:56, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! Since this is a volunteer project, people work on what they want to do, and it's hard to estimate when something will be addressed. If you would like to share the name of the page where you made the request, we'd be happy to look at it and provide some guidance. GoingBatty (talk) 01:08, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

The page is Talk:Columbine High School massacre. Besides the request referred to above, there is an additional request which has not been answered at all yet. Thank you! 73.167.238.120 (talk) 02:26, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

The {{edit semi-protected}} template is what you should use to get editors' attention. In the "# of victims killed" section, remove the |answered=yes parameter to reopen the request. In the "fix last name" section, add the {{edit semi-protected}} template. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 02:36, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

User:Dr._Mohammad_Eyvazi

Hello, I created this page([[ and was trying to publish an article but it has been rejected. Please help me to understand the process. I've been working on this for a few hours, watched few YouTube videos but still can't figure this out. Dr. Mohammad Eyvazi (talk) 00:32, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Dr. Mohammad Eyvazi Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You edited your user page, which is not article space or space to draft an article. As it seemed that you were using your user page as a social media style page, it was deleted. You may use your personal sandbox or Articles for Creation to draft an article. Be advised, however, that Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell the world about themeselves. We are interested in what others say about you, not what you want to say about yourself. Please review the autobiography policy. To succeed in writing a Wikipedia article about yourself(which, while not forbidden, is discouraged) you need to set aside everything you know about yourself and only write based on the content of independent reliable sources. Most people have great difficulty with that. 331dot (talk) 00:40, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you very much for helping me with this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nazanin Kar (talk • contribs) 00:52, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Currently at User:Dr. Mohammad Eyvazi/sandbox/Dr. Mohammad Eyvazi (محمد عیوضی), declined, not rejected. No references. David notMD (talk) 01:18, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Is there a Wikipedia article on the French anti vaccine passport protests?

Hi. I feel like the French protests against the vaccine passports is major news and probably deserves to be on the Main Page, yet I cannot find anything about it. Is anyone else aware of any mention on Wikipedia about the protests in France? BurritoQuesadilla (talk) 05:18, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

BurritoQuesadilla, I just quickly skimmed through the COVID-19 pandemic in France article, it doesn't seem to mention such protests. If you have good sources you could add it. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 10:21, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion even though everything nuetral

Hi there! Would LOVE some guidance. I read through how to write a good, neutral article. I wrote the piece about a colleague with just the facts. And yet, I it still got taken down bc it "reads more like an advertisement." Short of removing facts (books he's published, places he's performed etc), I don't know what to remove to make it seem less advertising. This guy is a super awesome, talented colleague and has certainly accomplished enough (and then some) that people search for him on the internet. PLease help!! I want to follow the rules and I want to be successful in publishing about him. Thank YOUUUUU! Iedit4life (talk) 05:18, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Bryonn Bain   Maproom (talk) 07:07, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Find more that is written ABOUT him; documenting what he has written/performed is useful, but does not establish notability in the Wikipedia sense of the word. David notMD (talk) 10:07, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

How to not let Wikipedia become a political site

I know that Wikipedia is not fully reliable but now questions are raised if it is fully unreliable, why? And how can we make Wikipedia a neutral site and not let it become a political site which promotes parties or a site which represents its own ideas but represents facts which are neutral and sourced? ExclusiveEditor _{Notify Me!} 05:56, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

ExclusiveEditor, we do so by following the relevant rules and policies about neutrality, verifiability, due weight, reliable sources, etc. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 10:24, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Search Engine

Hello, Just wondering seems name isn't coming up when someone tries Wikipedia search engine. Is there anything we can do to be added into search engine please? Also, I tried uploading our logo into the site and the site isn't allowing me to do so, what can be done? Looking forward to hearing from you soon. Regards,

Azande Society  Azandesociety (talk) 06:20, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Zande people is an article, and it has links to related articles such as Zande language and Zande literature. But there does not appear to be an article Azande Society. David notMD (talk) 10:13, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Azandesociety, you seem to have tried to create an article at User talk:Azandesociety, but that's your user talk page, not a place to create an article, and so it was deleted. Please see Help:Your first article for instructions on how to do this properly, but see also Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. Cordless Larry (talk) 17:56, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Does this article need citations?

This article has no citations, but does it need any? I did not make it, just asking. Excellenc1📞 06:46, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Absolutely. Preferably some university published books on the French political system. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:53, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Infobox YouTube personality

Not sure, if this is the right venue. Would like to ask if it is acceptable to embed/include Infobox YouTube personality inside singer/musician/actor/actress infobox? A rundown on what are included when the Infobox are embed/included into Infobox person or Infobox musical artist, the channel name + url, years active (when the channel was created), genre, subscribers, total views, and creator awards (if any). Of the information, only subscribers and total views are sourced using primary source which is basically the channel about page. Majority if not all of the articles, I have seen such inclusion, there are zero mentions in the article lead or body to show its notability. Imo, such information are trivia and catered only to certain audience and possibly violating WP:NOT as well. Hence, if it is okay to remove it under circumstances as such the article lead and body doesn't show it's notable enough for such inclusion? — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 07:41, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

@Paper9oll: Welcome to the Teahouse! If the person is well known as both a musician/actor and a YouTube personality, then it might make sense. However, if a musician's record company just posts their videos on YouTube, then the YouTube infobox isn't necessary. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 12:25, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty Hi, what if the YouTube Infobox contains the musician/actor personal YouTube channel that are not published by their record company/agency? If the person is only well known as an musician/actor and coverage for their YouTube channel is only from unreliable source and mostly from self-published source, the Infobox shouldn't be included right? — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 12:42, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

@Paper9oll: If the person is only well known as an musician/actor, then the Infobox YouTube personality shouldn't be included. GoingBatty (talk) 12:51, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty Understood, thanks a lot. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 13:04, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

How to get your wikipedia article 100% approved

How to get your wikipedia article 100% approved; cause all my article has been deleted;and I wanna make an article that was 100% approved in Wikipedia. Usurpation2 (talk) 10:15, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

There is no 100% working cooking recipe for Wikipedia articles, as non-notable topics cannot have an article here, no matter how hard you try. Victor Schmidt (talk) 10:18, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

You have created articles in mainspace that were then nominated for deletion because of major flaws. I suggest you use the Articles for Creation process instead, as that will provide expert reviewer comments on your drafts. Only after you succeed in moving several articles through AfC should you consider going back to creating articles directly. David notMD (talk) 10:37, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

@Usurpation2: Welcome to the Teahouse! If you haven't done so already, I suggest you follow the instructions Help:Your first article (which includes the AfC process David notMD mentioned above). Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 12:21, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

I see that Usurpation2 has been blocked as a sock. Doug Weller talk 12:49, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

What If someone tells your a Sockpuppetery even though your not the user of the Sockpuppetery

What If someone tells your a Sockpuppetery even though your not the user of the Sockpuppetery;what would I do?or I'll just explain to them that I'm not. His Usurpation2 (talk) 10:23, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

@Usurpation2: See here: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/SPI/Guidance#Defending_yourself_against_claims. You might also want to review WP:SOCK. Victor Schmidt (talk) 10:45, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Update: User has subsequently been investigated and is now blocked by a CheckUser for sockpuppetry. Route of appeal is given on their talk page. Nick Moyes (talk) 12:25, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Music

How do I go about joining a project please? Anything and everything music :) FlowerMoon593 (talk) 13:30, 21 July 2021 (UTC) FlowerMoon593 (talk) 13:30, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Add yourself to Wikipedia:WikiProject Music/Participants, have a look around at Wikipedia:WikiProject Music, see what you'd like to do and have fun! Dutchy45 (talk) 13:57, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

how to remove subcategory from parent?

I am familiar with categories and categorisation, I often use wp:HotCat.
I want to remove Category:Italian television series debuts from Category:Establishments in Italy, however the hotcat shortcuts are not there at the bottom of the page and when I opened it up for editing no categories were there at all! Instead a banner says there may be a template and to see wp:FAQ/Categorization for details. Can anybody explain what I need to do or at the very least point me to the relevant part of WP:FAQ/Categorization cause I don't see it? Thank you. Dutchy45 (talk) 13:42, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

It seems likely to me that you may need a consensus for this, as the categories that cat is a part of are added through a template ({{Nationality television series debuts or endings category}}) which doesn't add them verbatim, but gets the country name from the page name and programmatically adds Category:foo-ish television series, and Category:Establishments in foo where foo is the country name extracted from the page title, as well as Category:Television series debuts by country.

You might be able to get away with removing the template (which is the entire contents of the page) and manually re-adding the relevant categories and portal links, but I'm not sure you should do that, as it may break some tracking used by others. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 14:03, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

2 questions regarding writing of content

I have 2 questions.

1) I am working as the operational marketing manager of the UBports Foundation. I noticed a page container what I suspect is outdated information about the UBports/Ubuntu Touch software (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_mobile_operating_systems). When asking around internally the reply was that: "Wikipedia has nearly banned contributors from our community before, they want edits to be done by a third party". Since we are an open source project and managed by a non-profit foundation, and since we happen to know the technical specs of our product best I am wondering how we can help increase the quality of information on the Wikipedia site without getting changes reverted or banned? Should we hire a third party to replace the efforts of our community members? Please advice.

2) The other question is: I am the author of approximately 12 books about open source and Linux. I am not interested in self-aggrandizing in any way but it would be nice to know at what point a person would qualify for his or hers own Wikipedia page. Jeroen Baten (talk) 14:46, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Jeroen Baten Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Regarding the first question, if you are employed by the Foundation, you are required by the Wikipedia Terms of Use to make a formal declaration of that, please see WP:PAID for more information. If you hire someone to make edits for your orgnanization, it is no different than doing it yourself; they too would need to declare as a paid editor and as they would also have a conflict of interest as you do, they would be unable to make direct edits and would be limited to edit requests(with regards to COI related edits). Please understand that Wikipedia is not interested in what an organization wants to say about its own products; a Wikipedia article summarizes what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a topic. If no independent sources write about your products on their own(not press releases or routine announcements or any materials put out by the organization), they would not merit inclusion in Wikipedia.

Regarding the second question, if you meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable author, as shown with significant coverage in independent reliable sources, you would merit a Wikipedia article. It is strongly advised- though not forbidden- that you not attempt to do so yourself, please see the autobiography policy. Please also understand that a Wikipedia article is not necessarily desirable. 331dot (talk) 14:54, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

I've placed some of this information on your user talk page. 331dot (talk) 14:55, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

After my editing a page it says that the page preview has a problem , how to sole it

 KSV9 (talk) 14:47, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

@KSV9: Assuming you are referring to your edit to Andhra Pradesh United Teachers Federation, you had added extra space to the very beginning of the article, which indented the whole text and renders it in a different font than normal.

Here is a similar piece of text which shows the effect. An IP user has just sorted this out for you. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:58, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

@KSV9: Hello KSV9, welcome to the teahouse.

I'm assuming you're talking about Andhra Pradesh United Teachers Federation? If so the issue was that you had an extra space at the start of the paragraph - I removed the space and now it's displaying properly. Starting a paragraph with a space tells the wiki software to insert a set of pre tags, which casue the text to display as fixed width font in a box. for example:

this text has no space at the start of the line

this text has a space at start of the line

See WP:PRE for more information. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 15:01, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Reliable source

I am confused about my addiction to a page being taken down due to the citation being an "unreliable source" even though the source was from the actual website of the place the Wikipedia entry is from. Can someone explain? The wiki page- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holland_Road_Baptist_Church ScrappyArden (talk) 15:11, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Having a connexion to the subject makes a source unreliable by default. One of the things we look for when assessing a source is if they are independent of the subject. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 15:26, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Well no, WP:ABOUTSELF etc. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:31, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

@ScrappyArden Afaict by the edithistory [6], you didn't provide an WP:Inline citation first. Then you did, and I reverted that because I didn't see the content supported by your link. Note also that the article is about a building, it may have stance on things like loam, but Tim Vellacott's stance is not necessarily the buildings stance. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:30, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

@ScrappyArden Welcome to the Teahouse. This edit of yours referenced a source that is not available for verification at the moment. Additionally, just one mention in one sermon might be too much focus on one topic. I would prefer to see other sources writing about the church's stance on potentially controversial or unusual issues before adding such a statement. Otherwise it might just become a long list of its stances on all sorts of issues, big and small. But I would definitely want to be able to check the statement for its veracity, which is not possible whilst their webpages are not functioning properly. Nick Moyes (talk) 15:35, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for explaining. I guess it's just painful because I was offered conversion therapy there and they continue to hide their views. I just wish more people knew so that they wouldn't have to go through the abuse I did. I understand why it couldn't be added, I wish they didn't go through so many lengths to hide their views from non-members — Preceding unsigned comment added by ScrappyArden (talk • contribs)

I sympathise, ScrappyArden. But it sounds as if what you are trying to do is RIGHTGREATWRONGS, which is specifically not what Wikipedia is for. If you can find an independent reliable source about what they do, then you could add information based on that source. Ideally we require reliable published sources for everything; but for information which may be contentious (whether in favour of the subject or against them), it is even more important, and required to be independent of the subject. --ColinFine (talk) 16:10, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Dealing with Editors that have Different Personalities

Hi there,

I've been an editor on Wikipedia for quite some time - reaching my 1000th edit today! However, I very much still feel new to the whole process of being a solid editor. I just wanted to ask, what is everyone's approach to when there's a particular editor that you don't seem to collaborate as well with? This particular editor seems to somehow follow all my edits edits and either changes them consistently or undoes them. I know there is nothing wrong with this but their comments in the changelog are interpreted by me as passive-aggressive and self-righteous. APNOneTwo (talk) 15:28, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, @APNOneTwo. Without knowing the details, or how long you feel this has been going on, it's hard to say. But the simple thing to do is just to go to their talk page and ask them why they are reverting your edits. Maybe offer a few WP:DIFFS and seek some understanding from them. They should be able to explain their rationale, or you may feel they haven't justified their actions well, and could then escalate it. But we all have different personalities , and so engaging with the other person to understand why they do something is always sensible. We don't allow editors to WP:HARASS others by following them around without justification, as this simply makes them feel hounded, and they could be blocked for that. But it's quite justifiable to find an 'iffy' edit and then to go check if the person's other edits are all of the same type. Oftentimes, just by asking, one can learn one is doing something the wrong way and that there is a better way of making changes. I hope this rather vague answer is of some help. Nick Moyes (talk) 15:41, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for responding @Nick Moyes, I really appreciate your insights here. Upon looking at their contributions, they're just one of those very active editors that focus on particular pages because I am not only the one subject to their editing style and reversion. I guess it makes sense with the Olympics starting soon, the uptick of editors will no doubt be increased. I did take a look at their talk page but felt they were not approachable to communicate about any potential differences in editing opinions. For now, I am just doing what I can to improve my writing and content without too much hassle. --APNOneTwo (talk) 15:47, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

@APNOneTwo: Another option per the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle is to start a conversation on an article's talk page, and invite the other editor to join the conversation. Hopefully other editors will also participate and you can all come to a consensus. You can also post on a WikiProject talk page to ask others to join the article talk page conversation. Hope this helps! GoingBatty (talk) 15:47, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

@APNOneTwo I don't think anyone here ever wants to put off another editor from contributing, yet oftentimes that's exactly what can happen. The medium of text is never rich with nuance or subtlety, yet that's what we have to work with. I've just had to work through another editors additions of images to a wide range of articles. I know they're editing in good faith, yet they needed a steer as to what was and wasn't OK to do. Eventually I felt it worth leaving an explanatory note on their talk page, and I do hope I haven't put them off by so doing, or made them feeling I will be stalking them forever. One really useful trait here is the willingness to apologise if one gets the 'wrong end of the stick' - it calms down so many situations. All the best, Nick Moyes (talk) 16:10, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

How can I add another translation to a page?

 Faridrajaee1 (talk) 16:09, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Faridrajaee1, and welcome to the Teahouse. If you mean that you would like to create an article in a different-language edition of Wikipedia by translating an English one, please see translate us. If you mean that there is already an article in another edition of Wikipedia and you want to link them up, you pick "Languages" in the side bar, and edit the Wikidata entry. That is straightforward if the articles in the two languages cover the same scope; but it is problematic when one article in one language corresponds to two or more articles in another language. If you told us which article you are talking about (and which foreign-language article, if that exists already) it would be easier. (To make it easier to tell us, note that you can link to an article in English Wikipedia by putting its title in double square brackets, so [[Bradford]] displays as Bradford; and you can link to an article in another Wikipedia by putting the language code on the front with a colon before and after it, so [[:de:Bradford]] displays as de:Bradford, and links to the German article. Don't forget the initial colon!) --ColinFine (talk) 16:18, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

I need some help with copyediting

Hi there! Straight to the point: I've recently been working on these articles: Aluminé (town) and El Huecú. I need some non-pro copyediting to make them better, but not GA nominating or so. The first one may need more work, since I did a significant expansion. The second one I wrote it years ago and other users did correct it, but some expansion has been made, which means that there sure are some grammar problems and such.

It's only copyediting. The rest is okay, since I'm an experienced editor, though not a native English-speaker. Any help will be appreciate. You can write me if you got any questions. Thanx in advance!--Gunt50 (talk) 18:47, 21 July 2021 (UTC)