Jump to content

Wikipedia:Teahouse

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 71.175.88.163 (talk) at 07:43, 17 August 2021 (→‎Repeating a previous question about hôtels: Suggestion). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Skip to top
Skip to bottom



Is it a COI?

I drafted an article on the Solarian NFT and declared a COI at the top of the page because I own one of the tokens, but have no connection to the company whatsoever. Not sure what level of COI that is or if it is worth mentioning.Should it be deleted? Looking for some guidance thx CaliBuds (talk) 10:24, 14 August 2021 (UTC) CaliBuds (talk) 10:24, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@CaliBuds, I don't think that's a COI. Buying something doesn't make you connected. If you're asking whether you could remove that notification, I think you could.
If you're asking about the article itself, as it's in draft, it doesn't need to be deleted if you want to continue to work on it. The crucial element is proving that this is a notable subject. In order to prove that, you need to find wp:significant coverage of it in unaffiliated wp:reliable sources. That is, more than a bare mention, and in sources that have editorial oversight. Discussions of funding or rankings won't work to prove notability; someone needs to actually be discussing the topic at some length. —valereee (talk) 12:53, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately Valereee, I would disagree. I think part of the reason we put Wikipedia:General sanctions/Blockchain and cryptocurrencies in place is because it is the sort of thing where added exposure (like the creation of a Wikipedia article) could lead to an increase in value for the subject. If a user has the chance to financially gain from promotion of the topic at hand, I would consider that a COI. Bkissin (talk) 19:15, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hm. Fair enough, @Bkissin, I stand corrected. —valereee (talk) 19:26, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies if that came off too aggressive. Not my aim at all! It's more a difference of opinion than anything else. Bkissin (talk) 21:43, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why notified about conflict of interest?

I had created a mainspace article[[1]] few days back, then one of the editors moved that article to draftspace, and also notified me about the conflict of interest. I asked the editor why he notified me about the COI when I have nothing to do with it, but he didn't reply. First of all, I want to know, what is the criteria to add COI or any other tag on someone's talk page? Can any editor on the basis of his/her assumptions add tags on other editor's talk pages? My second question is, is it necessary to write the article, in brief, to get acceptance for mainspace unlike two, three lines?

Lastly, I want any editor to propose the draftspace article [[2]]for deletion, as I don't want to edit that article fruther when the review procedure is assumption-based. Mehmood.Husain (talk) 12:06, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mehmood.Husain, three points. First, the message you got says "if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Jane Frankland, you may have a conflict of interest (COI)" (emphasis added). You say above that you "have nothing to do with it", which I suppose means that you do not have such a relationship. Then you're welcome to say so; perhaps "No, I have no such relationship and therefore have no conflict of interest." Secondly, I often don't want to do any more editing of an article (or draft). A recent example: Shinichiro Kobayashi (which I didn't start, but rescued from likely deletion). This is still very poor, and I'm tired of it; but I don't ask for it to be deleted, because other editors are free to improve it. (You're one of them! Feel free to improve on my work.) So if you don't want to edit Draft:Jane Frankland any more, no need to ask for its deletion: maybe other editors will take over. (Additionally, when you wrote, you said you'd "irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the CC BY-SA 3.0 License and the GFDL": emphasis added.) Thirdly, this then-article, now-draft consists of just two not-so-long sentences; it really did/does need incubation as a draft. -- Hoary (talk) 13:00, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Mehmood.Husain, that notification doesn't mean the person necessarily thinks you have a conflict of interest. Often when newer editors write about living people, current products, or currently-operating organizations, we notify them so they'll know there are policies, just in case. You're free to simply respond that you have no connection and remove it.
I think the draft is worth saving. She may not be over the hump yet, but she's young still. —valereee (talk) 13:26, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hoary I couldn't get this, (Additionally, when you wrote, you said you'd "irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the CC BY-SA 3.0 License and the GFDL": emphasis added.) If you are asking about my connection with the draftartileDraft:Jane Frankland, I already said, I have "No" connection with this article, as I had seen this name on a website, so created a page assuming that she deserves it.
Valereee Thanks for your feedback. I'll try to improve the article in my free time.
I see that when Mehmood.Husain created the draft, he got the title of Frankland's book wrong (it's still wrong). This convinces me that he's unlikely to have a CoI. Maproom (talk) 14:51, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No, Mehmood.Husain, in mentioning the irrevocable agreement, I wasn't asking about your connection (if any) with Frankland. Simply, I was saying this: When you write something for Wikipedia, it's shown (via the history of the draft, article, or whatever) to be your creation. In this sense, it's yours. But it's not yours to remove. If you write a draft about Frankland, but later are infuriated by some aspect(s) of Wikipedia and for this reason want to remove the draft, you normally cannot do so. The "irrevocable agreement" business aside, yes, I did suggest that you should respond directly to the notice you got about the possibility of a "COI". However, when I look at the pattern of contributions by the user who posted it there -- a vast number of edits in a single day (so many that little thought can have gone into them), and thereafter no return to look at questions, such as yours, about these edits -- I now think that it's not worth bothering with. Well, I hope that you are not infuriated by Wikipedia. (Though most experienced contributors to Wikipedia have at some time probably been infuriated by some aspect of it. Certainly I have.) -- Hoary (talk) 23:25, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hoary I got your point, thanks for your guidance. I already checked the edit history of the reviewer's account. The reviewer has done many edits in a single day using different software, that's how he overlooked the facts. Mehmood.Husain (talk) 19:16, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
OK, Mehmood.Husain. I hope that any remaining annoyance soon evaporates, and wish you the best with your editing. -- Hoary (talk) 22:37, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Favourites list

I was wondering if there is a feature or script where we can add articles to "favourite". I'm not looking for watchlist because that only shows recent changes etc., but something where we can click a button and add an article to a favourites list, kind of like a read later thing. Thanks! Nikolaih☎️📖 02:50, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nikolaih. The Wikipedia app for Android and iOS has such a feature: mw:Wikimedia Apps/Reading list browser extension. There is no feature for browsers, except an extension for some browsers to add pages to the app feature but not see the pages in the browser: mw:Wikimedia Apps/Synced Reading Lists#Web browser extension. Special:EditWatchlist shows an alphabetical list of all watched pages so it could be used, possibly in an alternative account if you want the watchlist for its intended purpose in your main account. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:12, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Nikolaih. Any editor can create a subpage in their userspace called "Favorites" or anything like that. You can copy and paste article titles into that page, creating a list of articles that interest you. I have some big long lists of articles I have created or worked on, which you can see on my userpage. Maybe some day I will move those lists to a subpage, but I like my userpage the way it is, even though it is quite long. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:32, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Nikolaih You can also try User:BrandonXLF/TodoList. ― Qwerfjkltalk 09:38, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Qwerfjkl Thank you! This is the closest to what I was looking for! Nikolaih☎️📖 22:14, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

inappropriate removal of unsourced claims

I am looking for a resolution to this conundrum.

Over time, as I have observed certain edits, I have become concerned about the negative impact of inappropriate removal of unsourced claims. The essay Removal of Uncited Material (still a work in progress) attempts to elaborate on Wikipedia:Verifiability. Although the essay is not policy, it suggests that summarily removing unsourced content is only appropriate under certain circumstances.

Another essay suggesting a more cautious approach to removing unsourced content is Wikipedia:Avoiding common mistakes § Deleting..., which suggests moving the unsourced content to the article's talk page for further action (though in many cases, I suspect that would eventually get moved to an archived talk page, arguably as good as deleting it).

A particular bizarreness of the existing policy is that if one editor removes unsourced content, even though it is contrary to this guidance, it appears that it is not permissible to revert the inappropriate removal. The reality is that an editor who aggressively removes unsourced content (meaning they made no effort to evaluate the availability of sources) gets a "free pass" to ignore any guidance suggesting that the unsourced content ought not to have been summarily removed.

Placing the burden on the editor who observed inappropriate removal of unsourced claims by another editor is not really reasonable. The best that WP policy seems to offer is to seek sanctions against the editor making such inappropriate removals, rather than the more obvious approach of permitting a revert of the content removal which shouldn't have been done in the first place. Fabrickator (talk) 03:50, 15 August 2021 (UTC) Fabrickator (talk) 03:50, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Fabrickator:, Can you provide some examples of "inappropriate" removal of unsourced claims. Otherwise, the policy is that if unsourced content is removed, the onus is on the editor trying to re-insert it to provide a source supporting the claim. It also not reasonable to allow someone to add unsourced information and expect someone else to have to search to find a source that supports the claim. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 04:22, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed. Help:Introduction to policies and guidelines/2 (i.e it is policy) says that "Unsourced material may be removed at any time, and it is the obligation of the editor adding material to provide a reliable source."--Shantavira|feed me 08:05, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Even assuming that Wikipedia:Verifiability/Removal of Uncited Material reflected consensus when it was written in 2007, a lot has changed since then. In particular, we've become a lot more insistent on reliable sources. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:10, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Update of my recently-created English-language Wikipedia page Ai Tingting

Hello today. I would like to ask and plead you for this thing that I recently done in the English-language Wikipedia:

Could you please update the page that I recently created in the English-language Wikipedia, namely Ai Tingting, whom she is a Chinese reporter currently working at the China Central Television? In the page, there are three pages of references of her, including one Chinese-language page.

Thank you. talk 04:08, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Courtesy link: Ai Tingting
@Adamdaniel864, what do you mean by "update"? The page has several significant issues currently—please see the tags, and Help:Your first article for more general advice. {{u|Sdkb}}talk 04:18, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, I mean that the page titled Ai Tingting should be connected with other pages for it's information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adamdaniel864 (talkcontribs) 04:23, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Adamdaniel864: I added wikilinks from Ai Tingting to other articles. However, I don't see Tingting mentioned in any other articles, so I didn't create any links to Ai Tingting. (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.) GoingBatty (talk) 04:55, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Adamdaniel864, if this is all you can say about her, why bother creating an article about her? -- Hoary (talk) 05:02, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Adamdaniel864, the article Ai Tingting completely fails to make any claim of notability for this person. All we know is that she is a reporter but there are hundreds of thousands of reporters worldwide. Is every reporter notable and eligible for a Wikipedia biography? No. Only those who have received significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. The current references are passing mentions, not significant coverage, in a source that shows no indications of reliability. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:19, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ai Tingting at AfD, and a report on Adamdaniel864's editing practices has been filed at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard David notMD (talk) 12:26, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Should I add this list of articles I made in my user page?

In my user page I have added a table of articles I have made. But should it be there becuase I don't own my articles (Wikipedia does). I know that I can add any thing in my user page (till I abide by Wikipedia's copyright rules), but I am not sure if it is wrong to add this table. Also, should the title of the section be 'Articles I've created' (current name) or 'Articles I've started'?
(P.S.: I had added this list two to three months ago, when I had only 10 articles.) Excellenc1📞 06:33, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You're not breaking any rules. However, according to the list itself, most are stubs. In my (possibly atypical) opinion, a stub says to the world "The creator thought this merited an article, but couldn't be bothered to create one. This is pretty disappointing, isn't it? Can you make it any better? (Please!)" I'd be a lot more impressed by a list of a dozen full-blown articles than by the same list weakened by the addition of fifty stubs. So I suggest that you remove all the stubs, and, one by one, try converting these stubs into articles, and when you've done that, readding them. Others are welcome to disagree with me, and probably will. -- Hoary (talk) 07:27, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Excellenc1 I'm going to slightly disagree with @Hoary, because a list of what you've started on your userpage serves to show others, but especially you, what you've worked on here, and your area of editing interest. That list can itself be a quick-to-access prompt to you to improve them, and I would urge you to follow Hoary's advice and at least get each one up to 'Start' class. I could have made many thousands of stub articles by now, had I wanted to; it takes very little time. My own list of articles is shorter than yours, but I like having it there so that I can regularly check and update the quality assessments if necessary. Nick Moyes (talk) 09:31, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Nick Moyes: and @Hoary: Most of the stubs cannot be expanded anymore according to me, like articles on departmental councils (Departmental Council of Ain, Departmental Council of Lot, Departmental Council of Calvados are some examples) Excellenc1📞 09:40, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Excellenc1 I'm sure the Council members listed in each stub would be most upset to think that what they do in their role on behalf of those Departments can only ever merit a stub article on Wikipedia. But we shall simply have to wait for independent sources to write about that work before they can be added to expand a page. With regard to one example, Departmental Council of Lot - please never use the word 'currently' in an article. This is especially true of roles that change every few years after elections. Instead, you must say "As at 2021, the President is...", and cite an inline source. As you suggest, these stubs are going to be overlooked and unattended for years to come, once you've stopped monitoring them, at which point the word 'currently' simply becomes misleading. It would help tremendously if you could work through your list of stubs and update how they present information to readers. Thank you very much. Nick Moyes (talk) 09:51, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nick Moyes I have removed 'currently' and added 'as of 2021' in the departmental council articles. (Also I removed the article list from my user page) Excellenc1📞 10:24, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Connect

Can you connect and review my article Eni Çobani to Wikidata and make it public in Google please with a knowledge graph Contributionwikki (talk) 07:29, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Contributionwikki That will happen when the article is formally marked as reviewed or after a period of time(I think 30 days but not certain). Is there a particular reason you are concerned with Google knowledge graphs, that's not something Wikipedia is concerned with. 331dot (talk) 07:40, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome back to the Teahouse, Contributionwikki. You've marked the photos File:Enicobani.jpg and File:Shiheminegjyq.jpg as your own work. Can I ask how you were able to take those photos? It suggests to me that you at least know Çobani or possibly work for her, in which case you need to comply with Wikipedia's conflict of interest rules. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:55, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
 Courtesy link: Eni Çobani   Maproom (talk) 08:41, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Contributionwikki: Today a bot added a link to the English Eni Çobani Wikipedia article to the Wikidata item that has existed for years. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 14:06, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

accused of vandalism for correcting my own page!

I have been trying to put my own photo on my wiki page but bot accused me of vandalism.. whats worse is someone else has put his photo on my page Pankuj parashar (talk) 09:58, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Pankuj parashar. Since you're new to Wikipedia, there are probably lots of things about Wikipedia that you're not aware of. Please take the time to take a look at the following.
  1. Wikipedia articles aren't owned by the subjects they're written about; so, even though you have an article written about you, it's not "your page" per se as explained in Wikipedia:Ownership of content.
  2. Subjects of articles are highly discourage from trying to edit articles about themselves as explained in Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. If you have any concerns about what's written about you on Wikipedia, it's usually better to try and seek assistance from others than try and fix things yourself. For more information on this, please see Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Relationship between the subject, the article, and Wikipedia.
  3. The word vandalism is often misused on Wikipedia by lots of editors, and it's unfortunate that seems to have been what happened in your case. The warnings that were added to your user talk page are worded in a way that tries to cover as many cases as possible and the wording tends to become a bit harsher the higher the level of the warning. In your case, you were issued a level-1 warning the first time you added the photo, but a bit more strongly worded level-2 warning the second time you tried to add the photo. You didn't leave an edit summary when you tried to add the photo each time, so the other editor who reverted you didn't have much to work with and just most likely assumed the worst (i.e. that someone else was pretending to be you). You'd be surprised about how many times a new account shows up with a username that's the same as the subject of a Wikipedia article and then starts to edit said article. Wikipedia has no way of knowing who an editor really is and in such cases some editors automatically assume that account is just going to cause problems.
  4. If you're unhappy with the photo currently being used in Pankuj Parashar, then that's something you should start a discussion about at Talk:Pankuj Parashar. Wikipedia is less concerned about who takes a photo than it is about the copyright status of the photo. So, if you're able to upload a photo in which you own the copyright on as explained in c:Commons:Licensing, then there should be no problem in changing the photo. Please understand though that it's always the person who takes a photo that is considered to be the copyright holder of the photo; so, if you didn't take the photo yourself, you may need the c:Commons:Consent of the person who did. In addition, even if you took the photo yourself, you still may need to email your consent to the Wikimedia Volunteer Response Team as explained here.

I've added some more information about #2 above to your Wikipedia user talk page and about #4 above to your Commons user talk page; so, please look at those posts for more details. If you've got any other questions, feel free to ask them below. -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:34, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pankuj parashar The image in Pankuj Parashar (now removed) was of Pankaj Parashar Journalist.jpg. Note different spelling of name. David notMD (talk) 12:41, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Need advice/suggestions to improve my article

Hello,

I need some help regarding my first Wikipedia article. It initially got accepted and was live on Wikipedia for more than a year but last year it got deleted due to violating Wikipedia policy for articles. Since then I have tried my best and made all the necessary changes and resubmitted it for review but it got rejected multiple times. Any advice or suggestions would be really helpful for me as I am new to Wikipedia and it is my first article. Link of the draft when I submitted it for review last time. Niraj Gera Link of the current state of the draft. Niraj Gera Jain chakshu (talk) 11:08, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Before we go further, Jain chakshu, let's consider the photograph. It seems to have been made as the result of close cooperation between the biographee and the photographer. And we read that it's your work -- that you are the photographer. Would you care to comment on your acquaintance with Niraj Gera? (Robert McClenon brought this matter up three months ago, but you don't seem to have responded anywhere.) -- Hoary (talk) 12:04, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
User:Jain chakshu - The article was accepted in 2018, and then deleted in 2020 as advertising or spam, and the deleting administrator salted it because of too much attention from multiple promotional accounts. I do not know whether the 2018 article was spam, and should not have been accepted, or whether the promotional language was added between 2018 and 2020. I then declined your draft three months ago because it was written to praise the subject rather than to describe him neutrally. So it was not improved much in the past year. It was non-neutral then, and it is non-neutral now. You have not made all the necessary changes. Questions have been asked about whether you and other editors are being paid by the subject or by the subject's promoters, and those questions are not being answered. The advice that you are being given is not just advice because it reflects Wikipedia policy, but it is to declare any conflict of interest.

Robert McClenon (talk) 18:35, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Do I now need to add 10 more citations?

I recently made this very small article titled Lucien Finel, and a notability tag was added to it. It now has 5 citations which sufficiently cite the entire content. So do I need to add more citations just for the notability? Excellenc1📞 13:01, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, @Excellenc1, it's not the number of citations, it's the quality. All of those look like obits? That might be the problem, go to the talk page and open a section and ask the editor who placed the tag about it.
Citing obituaries in respectable newspapers and magazines should not be a problem. Indeed, they're likely to be well-researched, and therefore excellent sources. Maproom (talk) 17:22, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I've linked in the references to the articles for the media. That can sometimes help, as it lets editors quickly see whether some media they may be familiar with is notable itself. All of these were. —valereee (talk) 13:22, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I notice that there's another citation on the French Wikipedia page for Lucien Finel which is from a 1997 story in Liberation. Fabrickator (talk) 00:22, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion with Bonadea on recently-created Wikipedia pages on Chinese figures

Hello. I have to discuss with Bonadea to discuss all about the pages I recently created that is about some Chinese figures which are derived from other webs.

Some pages I recently created does include Li Qianxin, Wang Li (singer) and Ai Tingting. I indeed like those people much. Li Qianxin is the eldest daughter of Li Zhanshu, while Wang Li, with 1980 birth, is a singer, and Ai Tingting, is a China Central Television journalist. I derived all of this from Chinese-language and Chinese-related webs actually. It then become my greatest work in Wikipedia. I don't want all of my works here to be deleted. Please?

Thank you talk 12:27, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

See "Update of my recently-created English-language Wikipedia page Ai Tingting", a few discussions earlier. Ai Tingting is at AfD, and a report about Adamdaniel864 has been filed at ANI. Adamdaniel864 has been notified. David notMD (talk) 12:44, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Adamdaniel864: I moved the articles about Li Qianxin and Wang Li to Draft space (Draft:Li Qianxin and Draft:Wang Li (singer)) to give you a chance to develop them. Li Qianxin might perhaps be notable, but there was nothing in the article to show that she is, and the article about Wang Li contradicted itself (I did explain that on your user talk page). Another editor nominated Ai Tingting for deletion. It is not fun when your articles are deleted, but Wikipedia can't have articles that are poorly sourced or hard for our readers to understand. Articles also have to be about notable topics, and that an editor likes a person does not mean that there can be an article about that person, unless multiple sources have written about him or her. I suggest that you create articles as drafts, see WP:DRAFT, and submit them for review. But before creating more new drafts, you should have a look at the articles you have created that have been moved to draftspace (by a number of different people), such as Draft:Veronika Matyunina and Draft:Islam in Mumbai. All the drafts created by you should be linked from your user talk page, or you can find them by looking at new page creations in your contributions list. Drafts can be deleted after 6 months if they have not been edited. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 13:18, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Bonadea: I indeed take references from Chinese-language webs, I put the webs in the Wikipedia, so that it become more easy for someone to know it. It's originally from Chinese-language webs. Do you believe how age is Ai Tingting? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adamdaniel864 (talkcontribs) 13:35, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Adamdaniel864: No, I have no idea when Ai Tingting was born (if that is what you were asking). Do you understand that you can't add information about a living person unless there is a reliable source to support that information? In fact, that is a general rule in Wikipedia, but it is especially important in articles about living people. There are many notices on your user talk page, asking you to make sure to include reliable sources for all information you add to Wikipedia articles. --bonadea contributions talk 16:50, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cluebot talk page archiving at Talk:British & Irish Lions

Hi, I copied the sample at Help:Archiving (plain and simple) to set up ClueBot III archival at Talk:British & Irish Lions. The archives navbox there is expecting a page at Talk:British & Irish Lions/Archive 1, but ClueBot archived to Talk:British & Irish Lions/Archives/ 1 instead. What did I do wrong in setting this up, and how can it be fixed? Thanks, -M.nelson (talk) 13:00, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello M.nelson, I think it is something to do with the symbol '&' being present in the title of the talk page - see User:ClueBot III#Required parameters (archiveprefix section). I've had a go at fixing it and have moved the archive the bot created. If this doesn't work, it would be worth asking at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical). Best, Pahunkat (talk) 14:56, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Pahunkat, I'll keep an eye on it. -M.nelson (talk) 15:22, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

SysopDectector script

Hello Previously i've installed a script, that helped me to detected Admins easily, like it helped me distinguish between admins and other users using colors, i don't know where to find it again can anyone help me to find it thanks. —— 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 13:18, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Sakura emad:! Might it have been one of the scripts listed here: Wikipedia:User scripts/List#User information? --bonadea contributions talk 13:24, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Bonadea, 😊 wow thank you very much —— 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 13:26, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yesterday I made a page and it came out, that a librarian the vat do again, can you help me please, this was translated by Google

 IsraelMegaCube (talk) 14:33, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello IsraelMegaCube, I cannot see any page creations in your log. If you are talking about something you created on eswiki (the Spanish Wikipedia), unfortunately we cannot help you because this is the English Wikipedia - try talking to an administrator there. Pahunkat (talk) 15:02, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, IsraelMegaCube, and welcome to the Teahouse on the English Wikipedia. This is your first edit on English Wikipedia. I see you uploaded a file to Wikimedia Commons yesterday (a separate project from Wikipedia): that is at C: File:Georgina Mazzeo.jpg: if you have a question about it, I suggest you ask at c:Help:Contents/es. --ColinFine (talk) 15:03, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Asking questions with the Ukrainian-language Wikipedia not to delete my recently created pages

Hello. Could you please help me to ask the Ukrainian-language Wikipedia so that the Ukrainian-language Wikipedia would not delete all my recently-created pages, especially of Ай Тінгтінг (Ai Tingting), whom she is a China Central Television journalist? All of the Ukrainian-language Wikipedia pages that I made is the greatest for me, and the pages should also be connected with the Chinese-language and Chinese-related webs about them. Thank you. talk 14:57, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No, Adamdaniel864, English Wikipedia has no influence or standing at Ukranian Wikipedia. But if your attempt at creating an article about Ai there is anything like Ai Tingting here, I'm not surprised that the people at uk-wiki are deleting it. --ColinFine (talk) 15:11, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How can the people at uk-wiki are deleting it? I'm also an editor of the Ukrainian Wikipedia. My knowledges stretches from China to Slavic or English. I'm even editing new Ukrainian-language pages on oversea things. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adamdaniel864 (talkcontribs) 15:14, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Adamdaniel864: For questions about what is happening on uk-wiki with uk:Ай Тінгтінг, please read the notice on that article and ask on uk-wiki. (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.) GoingBatty (talk) 15:33, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

New Wikepedia page of Mine

Hello , This is Peer Tehleel Manzoor i am a social activist & Cyber Security Researcher , i am not able to see my Wikipedia page despite of being featured into various news media websites or portals , kindly help me to get my page viewed on google Tehleelmanzoor (talk) 15:02, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Courtesy link: Draft:Peer Tehleel Manzoor Deleted under G11 by Deb. Victor Schmidt (talk) 15:21, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Tehleelmanzoor, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid that, like many people, you have a fundamental misunderstanding of what Wikipedia is: it is an encyclopaedia, not social media or a platform for promoting anything. If there is sufficient independently-published material about you (not by you) that meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, then somebody could write an article about you. If such an article is written, it will not belong to you, it will not be in any way for your benefit (and Wikipedia has no interest in enhancing anybody's SEO or online presence), it will not be under your control, and it will not necessarily say what you want it to say. You are strongly discouraged from writing it yourself, though not forbidden: see Autobiography for more.
What you have created is your user page, which is for you to share information with other Wikipedia editors about your interests and activities as a Wikipedia editor. User pages are not indexed by search engines, and may not contain something that looks like an article, so your user page will probably be deleted soonhas been deleted. Please use other platforms to promote yourself, not Wikipedia. --ColinFine (talk) 15:21, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Correcting wrong, objectionable and/or missing information

My bio page contained incomplete and incorrect information. My edits were rejected. Parts of the page that were there before my edit were also removed. The resulting article contains errors of fact, objectionable material, and is missing most periods in my life. Can you help me correct this?Jay Aargh (talk) 16:21, 15 August 2021 (UTC) Jay Aargh (talk) 16:21, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jay Aargh, and welcome to the Teahouse. This is presumably about Joel Rosenman? Please note that it is not "your bio page": it is Wikipedia's article about you, and must conform to Wikipedia's criteria, not necessarily yours. At the same time, we would like it to be an accurate summary of what has been published about you. Please see WP:AUTOPROB for recommendations on how to proceed. --ColinFine (talk) 16:39, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone help me with this template? I'm trying to enable the archiving notice in {{talk header}} when the {{auto archiving notice}} is disabled. - Qwerfjkltalk 17:42, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind, I made a few mistakes but (I hope) it's working now. ― Qwerfjkltalk 22:51, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My edit was reversed

I made an edit to the page "Theta Phi Alpha."

I am a member of Theta Phi Alpha, and was the National Historian for six years. I wrote the history book we published for our 75th anniversary.

The Siena Medal is presented to a notable woman. In 1945 the recipient was Alleta (Mrs. Thomas) Sullivan, mother of five brothers killed in action on the same day in World War II. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sullivan_brothers

The Wikipedia article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theta_Phi_Alpha says that the 1945 Siena Medalist was Thomas Sullivan, FATHER of the five Sullivan brothers.

Last night, I corrected it. Today I received a message from an editor that it had been changed back because my correction was "not helpful."

I will be happy to provide a copy of the page of the 75th anniversary book concerning Mrs. Sullivan’s award and, if necessary, the original 1945 citation.

I have notified our National President of this matter and she expects that it will be corrected. 71.72.33.91 (talk) 18:23, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The name on that list comes from this website: [3], although confusingly that site also says that the award went to the mother. Since you are connected to the organization, perhaps you can get that source corrected and then update the Wikipedia article. RudolfRed (talk) 18:32, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
To be specific, the ambiguity arises because the source says mother, but uses the father's name "Thomas F. Sullivan". Your edit seems constructive and I would support it, however asserting that your president expects it to be corrected, reeks of entitlement. Please note Wikipedia:Wikipedia is a volunteer service. None of us are paid to do this. Shushugah (he/him • talk) 18:37, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Neither the article nor the source says anything about the medal being awarded only to female recipients. The source ([4]) is a bit contradictory – it says that the 1945 recipient was "Thomas F. Sullivan – Mother of five sons lost off Guadalcanal on the U.S.S. Juneau in World World War II". It is more than reasonable to assume that there is an error in the source, and the obvious conclusion is that "Mother" should be "Father"; it would not be acceptable to change the name to "Alleta Sullivan" unless a new source is produced, since that would be original research which is against Wikipedia policies.
That being said, of course errors should be avoided if possible. It sounds like the book you mention would be a source that could be used to fix this issue. There is no need to provide a copy of the page, but the bibliographical information including the page number where the info can be found would be sufficient. You can post it here, or at Talk:Theta Phi Alpha. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 18:38, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It wasn’t my intention to sound entitled. It was the source material that she expects to be corrected. In those days, most married women used their husband’s name in print unless they were notable for their own achievements; IMO Mrs. Sullivan is the only awardee who was chosen for something that happened to her. Her first name was virtually unknown. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.72.33.91 (talk) 20:17, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How to change the title of a page?

How do I get this page title (and link) revised?

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Elma_(hamlet),_New_York&action=submit

It's incorrect. It should be "Elma Village (hamlet), New York" not merely "Elma (hamlet), New York." It's confusing because it implies the hamlet and township have the same name. NY State cites it incorrectly as well (in a 1995 listing), so that's probably why the page was written that way.

I didn't see this issue covered in the help page(s), but then that area is kinda tedious.

Thank you in advance for any help.

/Brian Szafranski webmaster Elma NY (USA) Historical Society www.ElmaNYHistory.com  [[User:Brian Szafranski|Brian Szafranski]] ([[User talk:Brian Szafranski|talk]]) (talk) 18:52, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Brian Szafranski, hello and welcome to the Teahouse, to change the name of an article you only need to use the “move” function and move into a new title(name). If the name of the article has been a cause of controversy, rather than unilaterally moving the page yourself you can go to WP:RM and request the article title be changed. Furthermore am I wrong to presume you have little trouble in signing your comments? If yes, it’s no problem and very easy to fix, I used to have those problems too in 2016, but it’s extremely simple to learn, you see, all you need do is add four {{tildes}} at the end of any entry you make and you would have successfully signed your entry. Celestina007 (talk) 19:44, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Brian Szafranski: Is there a reliable source that supports your renaming? Even your own website doesn't make reference to "Elma Village". Perhaps the article should be renamed to "Elma (New York village)". ~Anachronist (talk) 19:37, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Brian Szafranski (talk) 20:39, 15 August 2021 (UTC) When I tried to edit a section with errors earlier today I clicked on "edit source" and a field came up which was empty (missing all the existing content). Great! I repeat the process, and get the same thing each time. If it's not working correctly I haven't the time to fix it (nor even know how).[reply]

Wikipedia is all too foo-foo-OCD for me, and I've been programming for nearly 50 years. If it's not obvious and intuitive much less working correctly then I haven't the time and patience to learn it at my age. I only needed to fix some obvious errors (which never should've been there in the first place), but I don't need to waste my time learning something I'm never going to use again. Sad. Brian Szafranski (talk) 20:39, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Brian Szafranski (talk) 00:20, 16 August 2021 (UTC) BTW, when is Wikipedia going to no longer requiring users to work with code? I gave up coding when Windows replaced MS-DOS. Why is this website stuck in 1985? I have better things to do with my time than learn coding just to make a few simple and overdue revisions here. The nonintuitive coding here should've been obsoleted here long ago. More than sad. Brian Szafranski (talk) 00:20, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The WYSIWYG editor only works on articles and drafts by design. We have a cheatsheet for source editing. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 00:34, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Brian Szafranski, it takes no knowledge of coding to notice that a comment here is conventionally signed (with four consecutive "~") at its end, and not at its beginning as well. (Like a letter, come to think of it.) And really, Mediawiki markup is extraordinarily easy: you yourself have demonstrated above that you know how to get boldface. Still, if you have better things to do with your time than to edit Wikipedia (as I can easily believe), then please don't waste that time here. -- Hoary (talk) 07:09, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Brian Szafranski, fwiw, there's a newfangled gadget that allows visual editor to be used on talkpages to some extent, check Preferences > Beta features. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:28, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Is it possible to block editors with conflict of interest?

Can I have editors who are harassing me blocked from editing my page? A well known former wikipedia programmer and now editor has, and has enlisted other editors to monitor and vandalize my page. This person was an employee of mine before he began at Wikipedia and I personally fired him for abuse as my system admin. He later slandered me on his website. He was forced to take his remarks down but under the protection of Wikipedia, he has been able to impact my reputation with the help of a few other editors. Looking at the history of my page identified them and their unfounded reversions and claims sock puppeting. What channel at Wikipedia would be the best to get a block on their ability to monitor, edit and at times vandalize my page? Toddmeagher (talk) 19:42, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Toddmeagher: I don't see anyone vandalizing User:Toddmeagher. If you are referring to the article Todd Meagher, that is not "your" page and you have no business editing it because you have a conflict of interest. Any substantive changes should be proposed by you on the article talk page. I see unsourced additions that have been correctly reverted, no vandalism. The page is now protected anyway. If you have behavioral concerns about other editors, post to WP:ANI for administrator attention. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:48, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Anachronist, the problem is they make some serious allegations here that may indeed need to be looked into. @331dot, Nick Moyes, Cullen328, and ColinFine. I’ve looked at this question for a while and whilst Anachronist has been gracious enough to reply I still feel worried about this question. Honestly I’m not too sure what to make of this. is this an OTRS related business? There seems to be potential outing here. What are your thoughts? should this be discussed and verified off wiki?(to avoid potential outing) or can this be handled here on-wiki?. Celestina007 (talk) 19:54, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Celestina007: As an OTRS volunteer myself, I can tell you that contacting OTRS usually serves no purpose that cannot be served in public discussion. There are vague references to a former employee without identifying the person, which doesn't quite cross the line into outing. The Todd Meagher page doesn't have any recent vandalism in it as far as I can tell. And it is now semi-protected indefinitely. There's no recent activity that is block-worthy. So there isn't really anything more to discuss. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:08, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Anachronist, you are correct, i think for now I’d add them to my watchlist and see how that goes. Celestina007 (talk) 20:56, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I think that BDD or another Arbitration Committee member should look at this. Toddmeagher was blocked for 4-1/2 years for legal threats and unblocked by BDD on August 9 as a result of off-Wiki communication with ArbCom. The hint at outing is troubling as is the resumption of conflict and the ownership attitude regarding Todd Meagher. I see no obvious vandalism of that page. What I see in the history is IP editors adding unreferenced or poorly referenced content and experienced editors removing it. If any editor has a grudge against Meagher, they should not edit the article. Talk: Todd Meagher is the place to discuss the content, and that page has been silent since 2017. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 20:14, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Toddmeagher, please do not remove comments that other people have already responded to. Please see Template:Strikethrough for acceptable methods to revoke a comment. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 21:46, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please feel free to leave a message on my talk page or ping me at Talk:Todd Meagher if needed. Semi-protection should head off potential trouble here. Todd, we can deal with misconduct as it arises, but probably no admin is going to be willing to ban someone proactively based on previous conflict. --BDD (talk) 15:02, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

How do I report vandalism on Wikipedia?  WinnipegMA (talk) 22:53, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@WinnipegMA: WP:AIV Bkissin (talk) 22:55, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@WinnipegMA, and also read WP:VAND For More information. —— 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 23:11, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please help me in editing the title of a Biography

I want to change the title of a page that goes by the name Anukulchandra Chakravarty to Sree Sree Thakur Anukulchandra. I have inserted the proper sources to the page but still not finding the Move option to change the name. I can edit the body, but the title is untouchable. What should I do? Souvikghoshias (talk) 23:13, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Souvikghoshias. Your edits to Anukulchandra Chakravarty violated a core content policy, the Neutral point of view, so I reverted them. As for the title, "Sree" is an honorific which should not be part of the article title. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 23:24, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Supplement citation of offline source with unofficial URL

In the citation for what would otherwise be an offline source, should I include an unofficial URL?

Example: a magazine that is no longer published but has back issues on an ad-heavy website that’s not the magazine’s official site:

  • Karpinskaya, Tatiana (2013-09-18). 100 лет со дня рождения знаменитой финской балерины Люси Нифонтовой [100th anniversary of the birth of the famous Finnish ballerina Lucia Nifontova]. Spektr [ru; fi] (in Russian). Helsinki. p. 12. Retrieved 2021-08-09.

Example: an archived document not available online, but which the archive transcribed for me several years ago, and I uploaded a scan of the transcription to FamilySearch:

Or is it best to leave out URLs that don't lead to the official publisher of the cited source? Lee Choquette (talk) 23:34, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am not seeing specific guidance on this at Wikipedia:Link rot. It seems it is not explicitly forbidden, and I personally would say you can/should link to the unofficial sources as long as you do cite properly. One additional concern is that those links will go offline very quickly too, so I'd preemptively make an archive of those links already too. Shushugah (he/him • talk) 23:58, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I will! Lee Choquette (talk) 04:24, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
My opinion is you cannot use the unofficial website. There are additional problems with using an unofficial source:
  • Barring definitive proof to the contrary, the original source is presumably still copyrighted. The unofficial source is therefore guilty of copyright violation. Wikipedia does not allow links to such violations.
  • Even if it turns out there is no copyright issue, the next problem is that Wikipedia must only link to reliable sources. In this case, the source is actually the unofficial website. Unless the website is deemed to have (among other things) an editorial staff known for fact checking, you can't link to that website. After all, the copy on the unofficial website might be altered, or be of a magazine article since repudiated by the original magazine. --Larry/Traveling_Man (talk) 16:50, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism (Tracking Places)

hello 👋 i am wokring on Special:AbuseLog as well as other places, my quesstion is how can i find specific Abuse Codes that detects Pure Vandalism?

and also i will really appreciate if you can add some places for me, that helps me to track vandalism to revert them.
Thanks —— 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 23:39, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Special:AbuseFilter lists all the filters. You can also try using Special:RecentChanges with the bad faith filter turned on. Kleinpecan (talk) 11:06, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Kleinpecan Yes Dear i know it lists all of them but not all of them is necessary for me. —— 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 12:53, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Sakura emad I use these filters (if it helps). ― Qwerfjkltalk 11:29, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Qwerfjkl Dear thank you alot
and they're mine (Normal, Pre-advanced, Advanced) —— 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 13:04, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How do I change my Wikipedia Username?

Where do I go, and is it even possible for me to do it? Sparklestern (talk) 00:11, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Sparklestern:, WP:RENAME. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 00:14, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why do Academics' insist on drawing conclusions and being disagreeable about it?

As an amateur, I've studied Ancient History and Religions for more than 30 years and have adopted a wait and see stance on so much of this. I am open to the idea that humans had visitors but we can not prove it. 2601:1C0:5A00:3510:6864:D411:97F8:9699 (talk) 00:48, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a question? ~Anachronist (talk) 02:43, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Image not adding in Wikipedia page.

hello wikipedia i want to add image on page but Wikipedia not allowing me to add img on ho his page. he is asking that this image is not capture with your mobile , what can i do here? Junaidbackspace (talk) 01:11, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Junaidbackspace, first, this image that you want to add: is it already at Wikimedia Commons (or English-language Wikipedia)? Secondly, if it's for the article Jeune Wali, Saroke, then I suggest that you forget images for now and instead add reliable sources to the article. If you don't do so, then it may well be deleted, with or without images. -- Hoary (talk) 05:03, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Table/rowspan formatting problem

I'm trying to add the 2021 comic-book nominees to List of Dragon Award nominees, but the shaded header for 2021 ends up one column too far to the right. Here's what the result looks like: User:Akuchling/DragonTableError; scroll down to the 2021 nominees to see the problem. I think there's something wrong with the rowspans for the header tables for 2018 or earlier, but I haven't managed to fix it using trial and error. Do you have suggestions for debugging this? Thanks! Andrew Kuchling (talk) 01:42, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Akuchling:  Fixed by adjusting the rowspan for the 2018 entries. I trust that you'll provide a reference for 2021, and explain why the table doesn't include entries for 2019-2020. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 02:53, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Help with visual editor

Hi, I've recently being working on expanding the history section of the Wolfenstein article and today when I went to publish my edit I've been working on for a couple days I got this error message that said 'Error contacting the Parsoid/RESTBase server (HTTP 404)' and I have no idea what it means, if someone could explain why this might have happened and what the error message means, it would be a big help. Thanks. Huey117 (talk) 07:51, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Huey117, I have no idea, but if you don't get a good reply here, you can try Wikipedia:Village pump (technical). Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:31, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Gråbergs Gråa Sång, I ended up fixing it by copying my edit, opening the article on a new tab and posting it in that tab; I'm not sure what happened but it could be because I left the visual editor open for so long?Huey117 (talk) 09:39, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Huey117 For all I know, it could be. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:42, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Creating a discography from artist's page

Hello, Would you please provide some guidance on how to set up a link to a new discography page from an existing artist's page? I sought permission to do this on 6 August in the Talk:Roger Woodward page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Roger_Woodward - in response to issues raised by editors regarding the long lists in the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Woodward article. Thank you. I appreciate your advice. SueMmc (talk) 08:21, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@SueMmc: Welcome to the Teahouse! You could create Draft:Roger Woodward discography per Wikipedia:WikiProject Discographies/style, and then submit it for review per Help:Your first article. Happy editing!  :@SueMmc:GoingBatty]] 13:33, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much GoingBatty. We really appreciate your help. SueMmc (talk) 07:42, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How to get my page approved by making references better?

 Courtesy link: Draft:David Seekola

Hi,

My recent page got declined due to insufficient references. My question is, how do I make my references more reliable or what can be done specifically to get my page approved? CharissaGovender (talk) 08:35, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

CharissaGovender Your draft was declined because it has no independent reliable sources with significant coverage to support its content. Wikipedia is not for merely telling about someone. A Wikipedia article should summarize only what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a subject, showing how (in this case) it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person. Please also note that we don't use external links in the body of an article. Theroadislong (talk) 08:50, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@CharissaGovender Based on this google search [5] I don't think you can create an acceptable WP-article atm per WP:BASIC. Of course google doesn't know all, but it's up to you to find the usable sources if they exist. Consider WP:TOOSOON. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:05, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

rowspan TBA/NA

How do you put TBA or N/A in a rowspan of 3? when I try to do it the TBA doesn't show up (see my second to last edit on Ella Anderson)

TrevortniDesserpedx (talk) 09:23, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Trevortnidesserped: Like this, which is similar to the rowspan for "2021". Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 13:37, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Reference for the page

Hello, Can anyone please explain what all can be added as a reference for my page. My page was rejected saying no reference. Reference or citations means what all can I add? 83.110.210.173 (talk) 13:14, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse! At the top of your draft is a box explaining why your draft was rejected, with lots of links to helpful information for you to click and read. I suggest reading Wikipedia:Reliable sources and Help:Your first article if you haven't done so already. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 13:39, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Heads Up - Terry Pratchett's page is just a swastika right now.

Terry Pratchett's Page Issue

I guess someone doesn't like the guy? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_Pratchett

I wasn't sure where to report it, so I came here. 216.154.21.239 (talk) 13:51, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The page looks fine to me and hasn't been edited this month. Am I missing something? S Philbrick(Talk) 13:52, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I should have thought about template vandalism, looks like others are on top of it. S Philbrick(Talk) 18:54, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Happened to Terry Wogan's page too for me, but it seems to have passed now. It covered the whole screen so I couldn't click anything. (Hope I've reported this right, I'm not too well-versed with this part of the site.)

SomnoticAgama (talk)

Same thing happened to me on a page I just edited https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucian_W._Dressel - What the heck?! Niftysquirrel (talk) 13:57, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Also happened to Terry Gilliam. It didn't seem to happen to any other pages I clicked on.

SomnoticAgama (talk)

According to this discussion, someone had been vandalising templates to convert them to swastikas. Admins have reverted it. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:59, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
And the vandalizing editor indef blocked. Account appears to have been created with edits and time to achieve auto-confirmed status, solely to then vandalize templates. David notMD (talk) 15:21, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Could

 2A00:23C5:3082:AE01:D1D:8BED:ED51:15AA (talk) 13:57, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse, do you have a question? Zudo (talkcontribs) 14:45, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Need Assistance

My company has an article page, but we are having issues, as every single change that we do on the article to meet the changes that the company passed and make the article very updated for the readers, the guy that created the page just not accept the changes. However, he doesn't have any copyright rights to our brand, so how we can solve it?

Because some of the information posted there is pretty old, and we are not informing the readers right. Another question is if we can request the deletion of the article, in this case, due to copyrights issues, if yes how we can do it?

Please, help us understand it, because this is bringing issues for our company as some leads, customers, and etc sometimes get confused about it when checking on Google and finding this article not updated. Acpmadeira (talk) 14:39, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Courtesy link: Telecom North America
@Acpmadeira: Welcome to the Teahouse! Wikipedia has an encyclopedia article about your company, which your company does not own. Since you have a conflict of interest (COI), you and other employees may not edit the article directly. Instead, you can declare your COI on your user page and suggest improvements on the article's talk page with the {{request edit}} template, while providing independent and reliable sources. If there are copyright issues with the article, please provide the details on the talk page as well so they can be fixed. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 14:53, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
To reinforce that guidance, you have been editing the article directly since February 2020. Stop. Instead, declare your paid connection on your User page and limit your efforts to proposing changes on the Talk page of the article. I see that the article was created in 2009 by Handrieu, who is currently reverting your changes to the article, so I suggest you either engage Handrieu on that editor's Talk page or invite that person to the Talk page of the article, in an attempt to reach consensus. Per your copyright question, any content copied from copyright protected sources must be deleted. However, the company cannot demand that an article about it be deleted. David notMD (talk) 15:27, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

AfD Before

Before you nominate an article for deletion, where do you find out if it has been through an AfD before? Thank you for your help! FiddleheadLady (talk) 15:34, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@FiddleheadLady, if it was at all recent, it will be mentioned with a link in a talk page banner. —valereee (talk) 16:16, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
And even if it's not, the discussion should be listed if you hit "What links here?" (at left). Johnbod (talk) 16:27, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@FiddleheadLady: There is a search box on the AfD page where you can search past discussions. Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion#Search_current_and_archived_AfD_discussions_by_topic RudolfRed (talk) 16:26, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you everyone, this is really helpful! I will bookmark that as well. FiddleheadLady (talk) 17:57, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

refusal

 MeynyLux (talk) 15:48, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, you have just refused the publication of a new article on Kleos Space, but I work for Kleos and all the content actually belongs to us. We wrote the press releases and website content. How can we fix this?

Thanks!

Courtesy: Draft:Kleos Space declined 16 August and apparently on its way to Speedy Deletion for copyright infringement. If SD'd all history of the draft will vanish. MeynyLux is welcome to try again, but first must declare PAID, and second must understand that press releases, websites, interviews and other company or employee generated content should not be used as references except for simple facts such as location of the company, and that such primary sources do nothing to establish notability in the Wikipedia meaning of the word. David notMD (talk) 15:58, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@MeynyLux: The Wikipedia meaning of "notability" can be found at Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). See also Help:Your first article. GoingBatty (talk) 16:11, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@MeynyLux It is possible the image you uploaded to Commons might also be put up for deletion. It appears to be based on a mirrored artwork of the earth with your company's satellites added to it. Unless that image was public domain, it seems likely you have at least not conformed with attribution licencing. You also appear to have given away the Kloeos company logo for anyone to use or abuse as they see fit, even commercially. Did you really mean to do that, too, and was your CEO Andrew Bowyer aware you had done this? You might wish to request its deletion from Commons if you were overcome by keenness to promote your employer, and not feel that was not intended. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 16:39, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Help getting re-review

Re-submitted an article for re-review, but has been 9 days now. Have I done something wrong? Here's the draft: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Institute_for_Human_Rights_and_Business#References Haley St. Dennis (talk) 16:10, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Haley St. Dennis: Welcome to the Teahouse! You resubmitted it properly. As stated in the yellow template, the issue is that "This may take a week or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 536 pending submissions waiting for review." GoingBatty (talk) 16:14, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

changing a Page name of a draft

I created a draft page and submitted it, immediately told me that there was another page with same name, how do I edit/change the name of the page while in draft? Btrahey1979 (talk) 16:13, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Btrahey1979: Is it Draft:Back Home Again? It is possible that you accidentally double clicked the submit button (I have done that) and the second click failed because it already got submitted from the first click.
If you get this conflict because someone else actually created a draft of the same name while you were creating yours, then what I would do is copy my text into my clipboard or local text editor, and look at the other draft. If it's the same subject, I'd work on improving that one, and if it's a different subject, I'd create one under a new name, and paste my text into it. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:20, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) @Btrahey1979: Welcome to the Teahouse! On Wikipedia, renaming is called "moving" - see Wikipedia:Moving a page In your case, I suggest you move Draft:Back Home Again to Draft:Back Home Again (film). Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 16:21, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Adding to a Wiki page/COI?

I am the President of the non for profit organization the Society of American Graphic Artists (SAGA). While I was VP I put together a list of all the past members of this organization based on exhibition catalogues from 1916 to present. I would like to add those names to the SAGA Wiki Page along with adding a line to each of the member's pages stating that he or she was a member of the Society of American Graphic Artists. Since we are a volunteer organization I have yet to find anyone else to do this task, therefore I, as president, have been doing it. Is there a conflict of interest in doing this? I am not related nor knew any of these past printmakers. Thank you. SAGAdeann (talk) 16:18, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@SAGAdeann: This is a case of "ask for forgiveness instead of permission." It's OK though.
You're basically doing minor maintenance edits, which is fine. With a conflict of interest, you are free to make corrections to spelling, grammar, numbers, and lists. You can revert obvious vandalism. And you can add citations to reliable sources that are independent of your organization, if those sources give significant coverage of the organization. For anything more substantive, you should propose your change on the article's talk page. You can preface your proposal with the tag {{request edit}} to cause your request to be listed on a category page that is monitored by some editors. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:24, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@SAGAdeann: Welcome to the Teahouse! I am worried that a list of all members of a 100-year-old nationwide organization may overwhelm the article with too much detail. You can also disclose your affiliation with SAGA on your user page using {{UserboxCOI}}. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 16:28, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@SAGAdeann: See also WP:LISTCRITERIA. GoingBatty (talk) 16:31, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@GoingBatty: It seems that notable members (who have a Wikipedia article already) are being added. I found only two redlinks, which I have removed. The affiliation is already disclosed with the username (Deann at SAGA apparently) but a user box would be helpful. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:49, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Anachronist: A short list of notable members is fine. I was responding to SAGAdeann's desire to publish "a list of all the past members of this organization" in the Wikipedia article. GoingBatty (talk) 17:10, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Recently, I had an edit entry removed for lack of reference. Specifically there is a song named Suzanne by Leonard Cohen, in the section under cover versions I wanted to add a link to the wiki entry for Francoise Hardy who sang a french translation on her “Comment te dire adieu” album.

Mrs Hardy Is an incredibly famous singer that began her career in the early 60s and up until 2018 and so her cover of the song, being also in French, is well worth mentioning and relevant.

Since there is already a wiki entry for this album where the song is clearly listed, why are other citations needed for my entry to just create a link from Suzanne to the cover version on the FH album?

And if a citation is needed, what kind of citation should I get? Where do I get it from? The album was mass produced in 1968 And had a major hit on the album and I am literally holding a copy of my hands. Do you have to have a citation for linking every major album release just because you want to link an existing wiki entry to another?? This makes no sense. It’s not like I’m talking about some minor piece of work by my neighbor. I’m talking about an incredibly well-known album famous throughout France with a cover version of a well-known song I just wanted to make a link from one existing wiki page to another.

And by the way, all my edit said was “Francoise Hardy <link to her wiki> released a french translation cover on her Comment Te Dire Adieu <link to this album on wiki> album in 1968”

Thats all I added. Nothing interpretive. Not a new wiki page. Just linking her cover version to the discussion already existing on the Suzanne page Tarheel1994 (talk) 17:07, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Tarheel1994: Welcome to the Teahouse! The Suzanne (Leonard Cohen song) article has a section for "Notable recordings". Such sections are not meant to be an exhaustive list of all covers of a song. The criteria for whether a recording should be included is at WP:COVERSONG. You don't have to show the version exists, but that it is noteworthy. Maybe you could provide a reliable source showing that Hardy's recording was on the French charts, or a review that provides significant coverage of her recording? Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 17:34, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Tarheel1994: The Comment te dire adieu (album) article has a link to the Allmusic review, where the review describes her recordings as "fine, haunting French interpretations". GoingBatty (talk) 17:38, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Goingbatty:-brilliant! Thank you!

 Nthakar.04 (talk) 18:29, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cloud Computing and SuperComputing should not be using Same Ferrous Lines for automobiles or GOpros,or streetlights or corridors for DOT, these instruments are too powerful injuring people and infants and children..are you a drunk bartender or what??

 2600:8801:10:E00:CC9D:4C2A:D8EB:4AE1 (talk) 18:41, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse! The purpose of this page is to request help with Wikipedia. Did you have a question about Wikipedia? GoingBatty (talk) 18:44, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikidata why not appearing?

Why is the wikidata article https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q107640445 not appearing on google ? Ajobs19 (talk) 19:27, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ajobs19, I have just nominated d:Q107640445, and the duplicate d:Q107966188 that you also created, for deletion. Neither Wikipedia nor Wikidata may be used for promotion. If you are in any way connected with Lovepawz you have a conflict of interest; and if you are in any way paid to write this, then you must make a formal declaration of that fact, or you will be breaking Wikipedia's terms of use. Once you have made that declaration, you should focus on finding the independent sources that are a non-negotiable requirement for Wikipedia to have an article on a subject. You might also like to remember that if Wikipedia does end up with an article on Lovepawz, that article will not belong to the company, will not be controlled by the company, will not necessarily say what the company would like it to say, and should be based almost 100% on what people unconnected with the company have published about it, not on what the company says or wants to say. --ColinFine (talk) 20:04, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Removing link to non-existent article

Hi: some articles contain names or subjects that are red in color, because in the editing section they are surrounded by double brackets but in fact "link" to non-existent articles. When I find these, I remove the brackets but leave the rest of the sentence untouched. On occasion, the removal of these double brackets is reverted by others, despite there being no article to which to link. Is there a policy that these "ghost links" should remain in place even though they do not take the reader anywhere? Or, is it proper to remove the brackets when there is no article to which to link? Thanks. Ballinacurra Weston (talk) 21:29, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

These are called "red links", and are covered in Wikipedia:Red link. Generally, if there is any plausible possibility of an article being developed, a red link should be retained.
For example, in John Marshall Harlan II, there is a redlink to Ella Wendel. Wendel and her family were prominent real estate investors, akin to Donald Trump and his family. She merited an obituary in the New York Times, and her intestate death is covered in books, including textbooks. She likely is sufficiently notable to merit an article (the possibility is certainly plausible, to use the words of the guideline). A redlink like that should be maintained. TJRC (talk) 21:36, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
As a practical matter, should an article names Ella Wendel be created, it would be very easy to search/find all matches of a person with that name even without a red link. For more ambiguously named topics, it's harder to say. Before removing a red link, I try to see if alternate topics/names can be found instead, for example the Spanish Federación Regional Española de la Internacional is a red link, whereas its translated name Spanish Regional Federation of the IWA is a blue link. ~ Shushugah (he/him • talk) 21:47, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Ballinacurra Weston, redlinks are helpful to Wikipedia because they tell other editors, "This might be an article worth writing." Don't remove them unless you're convinced the subject isn't notable. —valereee (talk) 01:16, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

thanks all, I've learned my lesson Ballinacurra Weston (talk) 01:25, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Checking Previous Deletions

Hi, I'm looking to nominate an article for deletion that I believe would be uncontroversial, seeing the lack of sources and notability. However, WP:PROD specifies that I should only nominate an article for PROD if the article has never been nominated for AfD or PROD before. Is there any way I can check if this is the case? I checked the View History and Talk Page of the article, and couldn't find much. I use Twinkle, if that helps. Courtesy Link: Doom Shall Rise

Thanks, Gageills (talk) 01:29, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Gageills: Generally an AFD discussion will be listed on the article's talk page, at the top. Or better, you can go to the WP:AFD page, scroll down a bit, and type the article name in the search box (it's case-sensitive).
In this case it qualified for speedy deletion per WP:A7, so I have deleted it. ~Anachronist (talk) 03:39, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Great! Thanks for the help :-) Gageills (talk) 03:52, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) @Gageills hi there, and welcome to the Teahouse! To check for previous AfD discussions, you can use a search query. I made a little page at User:EpicPupper/AfD Search. For example, if you want to search the page you linked, you can put in "intitle:Doom Shall Rise". Do note the "intitle:", this is very important. You can see there on that search that there were no AfDs. In terms of previous PRODs, Twinkle will automatically check for AfD and PROD tags on the talk page (although this is not 100 percent accurate), so you can usually just check the AfDs. Hope this helped! 🐶 EpicPupper (he/him | talk, FAQ, contribs) 03:56, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

New to Wiki, publishing a page, help!

 Courtesy link: Draft:Ganignunt Aiemsakul

My friend is disappeared in 2002, the case is now open. I'm working on spreading awareness, linking data, and sharing information. I've created a draft in wiki, and would like to publish it or submit it for the approval process. I can't figure out how to do this. Findganignunt (talk) 01:32, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have gone ahead, submitted and rejected the draft as it is counterintuitive to the purpose of Wikipedia WP:NOTADVOCACY. I appreciate your situation however this is not the place for this kind of activity. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 02:01, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Except that wiki is full of information related information like the page created, how exactly does this information get published? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disappearance_of_Jennifer_Dulos https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Hae_Min_Lee https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chandra_Levy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Steward_Davis — Preceding unsigned comment added by Findganignunt (talkcontribs) 02:38, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Findganignunt: One difference is the tone of the writing. It's important to write Wikipedia articles in the style of an encyclopedia article instead of as a request for help. GoingBatty (talk) 03:03, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
And please read WP:RS. You cannot use user-generated sites as reliable sources. The Charley Project fund raising page (used three times) is not a reliable source. A reddit page is not a reliable source. The fan page for America's Most Wanted is not a reliable source. The MoCo show (used three times) appears to be personal blog and is not a reliable source. Meters (talk) 03:20, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Since you are the person's friend you should also read WP:COI. Meters (talk) 03:22, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
We have articles for cases such as this where there are sufficient independent reliable sources to show that the particular case is notable. I am not seeing that here. We have an almost 20-year old disappearance case. It's tragic, and unsolved, but there is little independent coverage. Meters (talk) 03:27, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It has been cleaned up now and the sourcing and tone are much better. The fact the police have recently reported a new tip and now believe her to be dead helps somewhat with notability. Meters (talk) 03:51, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My post was removed and someone said I was trying to promote

I didn't want to promote but I was kinda explaining the account and I really only need my wiki thing up for at least 10 hours so I can get what I need to happen which is trying to get my Twitter verified somehow. I'm just 13 so you also can't expect a wiki paragraph that I write to look good OverLord Official (talk) 05:31, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OverLord Official, we hope that paragraphs look good, but we don't demand it. After all, we can make them look good, if they say something worth saying. What you wrote in your sandbox read in part If anyone knows me and sees this then add anything that is NOT info at all. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not some kind of "social media" proving ground or playground; any sensible 13- or 83-year-old knows the difference. -- Hoary (talk) 05:49, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How to change page name and the associated redirect page

Trevor Kirczenow MacDonald (health researcher) redirects to Trevor MacDonald (health researcher) but really the title of the main article should change. Trevor Kirczenow wrote a book with his married name, MacDonald, but since then has gone by his legal name Kirczenow. I was going to update the page with information about the upcoming Canadian general election in which Trevor is a candidate under his legal name Trevor Kirczenow and don't know how to properly update the article title. Thanks! Dharmabum (talk) 05:46, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Dharmabum Hello! However, there is one other thing to consider: WP:COMMONNAME. If you think that supports a change of article title, you should probably use Wikipedia:Requested moves because of the existing redirects. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:23, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Repeating a previous question about hôtels

Sometime in the past I had asked this question in the Teahouse: What will be the heading for the translation of Liste des hôtels de région de France (list of regional 'hôtels' in France)? When I had previously asked, I was asked by an user what were the names of the individual buildings (regional parliaments) in enwiki on their articles, to which I replied that only one article on these regional 'hôtels' are made (Hôtel de Courcy) which leads to no conclusion. I don't remember if someone had given an answer to that query, not sure, but can I get an answer now (becuase I don't think regional hôtels is an apt title)? Excellenc1📞 07:02, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Based on the French article, I would suggest "List of regional-council headquarters in France". Avoid "hotel", which is misleading. 71.175.88.163 (talk) 07:43, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Can I make someone else's draft?

Can I extend this draft and publish it? Excellenc1📞 07:09, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Excellenc1, there's no rule against your extending it. Its creator (who does not "own" it) hasn't edited it for two months, and may have lost interest in it. However. I'm not confident it can ever qualify as a published list. Maybe another Teahouse host can advise? Maproom (talk) 07:28, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand what encyclopedic value an expanded version would have. -- Hoary (talk) 07:35, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Want to know about semi protected articles

 Ziraar Ali (talk) 07:22, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Have you read WP:SEMI? --David Biddulph (talk) 07:28, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you mate@David Biddulph Ziraar Ali (talk) 07:42, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]