Wikipedia:Teahouse

Gråbergs Gråa Sång, 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

Help me, please

There is a problem of creating a page, because I went on YouTube. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 44CatsGuide (talk • contribs) 18:06, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

@44CatsGuide: Welcome to the Teahouse. Could you please explain how going on YouTube prevents you from creating a page? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:08, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Questions about improving The Principia page.

Hello, I noticed that the alumni section of The Principia page did not cite any sources. In starting to do this process I also noticed that there was a lot of overlap with its partner page Principia College. 1. If it were up to me, I'd probably just have an alumni list on the Principia College page only. Is that a possibility or is that overstepping what others have done? 2. If I can't find references for the alumni section on The Principia page, is it possible to remove them until there are references? Thanks! Archivingperson (talk) 12:31, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

@Archivingperson: One thing I would note is that IMDB is not a reliable source as much of its content is user-generated. See WP:IMDB. If you cannot find an reliable source for a something it would be considered original research and should just be removed. ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 13:17, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

I agree with the idea of having alumni listed at only one of these two articles, and the College page make more sense. The first article links to the second, so people would know to go there. As to the alumni list, very often, lists of notable people (for towns, schools) do not have references. The assumption is that if one goes to the articles about the people, the connection to PC would be there, and referenced. THIS MAY NOT BE TRUE, mostly meaning that the connection to the people having attended Principia College may be mentioned, but not always referenced. Personally, I would err on the side of inclusion. David notMD (talk) 14:32, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

It's possible that at least some of the alumni listed in The Principia attended Principia School but not Principia College, so I don't think one could just blithely merge the two lists at the college page. Deor (talk) 15:43, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

The college list has the benefit of being alphabetical (mostly) and having more references. David notMD (talk) 18:27, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

@David notMD:Thank you all for the responses. In thinking about the notice about the Alumni section "This section does not cite any sources.", would that be a permanent post? If the goal is to remove that notice, then it seems like the easiest thing would be to remove all of the non-cited sources and add them back only when they have a citation or B. Adding a explanation at the top saying something like "Please use citations to the Alumni list when possible"? Archivingperson (talk) 19:30, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

I hazard a guess that it is unlikely that names were added without evidence, but it would be nicer if there was a reference for every name OR the articles about the people stated they attended Principia College AND that was referenced. However, if you look at university alumni lists such as List of University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign people, the great majority of names are not referenced. There is an accepted assumption that the articles about the people confirm their having attended. Do not add something akin to "Please use citations...", as Wikipedia articles do not include instructions on how to edit the articles in question. David notMD (talk) 18:29, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict) That would not be appropriate, Archivingperson. The very first sentence of WP:ALUMNI says All alumni information must be referenced. (This is an essay, not a policy, but most regular editors will support it, I think). --ColinFine (talk) 18:46, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Talk pages?

Hello. I got a comment in a talk page after I submitted my article, but I don't know where to go to respond to this "talk" comment. Please advise. My username is Ajo47. Ajo47 (talk) 15:49, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Ajo47, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm not sure what you're referring to. The only message on your user talk page is a general welcome message: there's no particular reason to reply to that. If you do want to reply, for some reason, either do so on the user talk page of the editor who left the message, or reply on your user talk page, but ping the other editor. Or are you talking about another talk page somewhere else? --ColinFine (talk) 16:27, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

@Ajo47, Hello and welcome to the Teahouse, by any chance do you refer to this Draft:George Ockner and the comment left by Victor Schmidt? If yes then this here is Victor's talkpage. If I’m wrong in my presumption as to what I believe you are trying to ask please do let me know. For further information about talkpages see WP:TALKPAGE. You can also leave a comment at the AFC page. Celestina007 (talk) 16:46, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

Victor's comment is actually on the draft, and it's meaning is clear: needs more references. David notMD (talk) 18:36, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

Um, no. As so often when an article is declined, what it needs is not more references, but better references. Maproom (talk) 08:44, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

In this specific instance, more references (there were only three at the time of the Comment) AND better references. David notMD (talk) 10:46, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

the invention and important historical developments efforts of Pinned Photodiode

I would like to write in Wikipedia pages the following text but I had a lot of confusions. I am sorry that I made many errors. Can you edit and write in the text in Wikipedia for me ?

misplaced draft

About the invention and historical development efforts of Pinned Buried Photodiode by Yoshiaki Hagiwara The first pinned photodiode (PPD) and the Buried Photodiode (BP) both have a shallow P+ implant in N type diffusion layer over a P-type substrate layer. PPD is always BP. PPD does not have the image lag. But BP may have the serious image lag problem. PPD is also not to be confused with the PIN photodiode.[21]. The first PPD with the no-image lag, the low-surface dark current and the high short-wave blue light sensitivity features was invented in 1975 by Hagiwara at Sony.[1] The evidence is given by Japanese patent application JPA1975-127646 [2], JPA1975-127647 [3] and JPA1985-134985 [4] on the double and triple junction type PPD with the vertical overflow drain (VOD) structures with anti-blooming function capability and Global Shutter function with VOD Punch-thru mode clocking-scheme, achieved the electric shutter function by Hagiwara team at Sony [5]. Sony developed the first double junction type PPD and use it in FT CCD in 1978 [6]. This was the first invention of the pinned photodiode (PPD), a photodetector structure with low lag, low noise, high quantum efficiency and low dark current. Early charge-coupled device image sensors with the single N+P photodiode with the N+ floating surface suffered from shutter lag. The serious image lag was largely resolved in 1978 [6][7][8]developed by Hagiwara and his coworkers in 1987 [9] at Sony by 1987. The PPD was used in CCD sensors in the past analog TV era and is now still used in the present digital TV era in CMOS active-pixel sensors. In 1980, BP was used in ILT CCD by Nobukazu Teranishi, Hiromitsu Shiraki and Yasuo Ishihara at NEC [22][23] They reported in public that lag can be eliminated if the signal carriers could be transferred from the photodiode to the CCD. [24] The BP with the serious image lag problem was further developed and used in ILT CCD by Teranishi and Ishihara with A. Kohono, E. Oda and K. Arai in 1982, with the addition of an anti-blooming structure.[22][24] The BP proposed in 1980 and developed in 1982 by NEC [22][23] reported the serious image lag problem, which was by definition not PPD. BP is not always PPD. [21]. The photodetector structure invented in 1975 by Hagiwara at Sony was given the name "pinned photodiode" (PPD) by B.C. Burkey at Kodak in 1984. In 1987, the PPD mainly developed by Sony [9] began to be incorporated into most CCD sensors, becoming a fixture in consumer electronic video cameras and then digital still cameras.[22] In 1994, Eric Fossum, while working at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), proposed an improvement to the CMOS sensor: the integration of the pinned photodiode. A CMOS sensor with PPD technology was first fabricated in 1995 by a joint JPL and Kodak team that included Fossum along with P.P.K. Lee, R.C. Gee, R.M. Guidash and T.H. Lee. Since then, the PPD has been used in nearly all CMOS sensors. The CMOS sensor with PPD technology was further advanced and refined by R.M. Guidash in 1997, K. Yonemoto and H. Sumi in 2000, and I. Inoue in 2003. This led to CMOS sensors achieve imaging performance on par with CCD sensors, and later exceeding CCD sensors.[22] Reference to be added by proper numbering: [1] Yoshiaki Hagiwara, “Invention and Historical Development Efforts of Pinned Buried Photodiode”, Proc. of the International Conference on Electrical, Computer and Energy Technologies (ICECET) 9-10 December 2021, Cape Town-South Africa Should be linked to the following site for details. https://202011282002569657330.onamaeweb.jp/AIPS_Library/P2021_ICECET2021Paper75_PWD_897_992_647_542_870_423_776_till_Dec_10_2021/ICECET2021_Paper75.pdf [2] Yoshiaki Hagiwara, Japanese Patent Application JPA 1975-127646 on N+NP+NP-P+ Triple Junction Type Pinned Photodiode with Back Light Illumination with the CCD/MOS Buffer Memory for Global Shutter Function. Should be linked to the following site for details. https://202011282002569657330.onamaeweb.jp/AIPS_Library/3_JP1975-127646_NPNP_triple_junction_Pinned_Photodiode_Patent_32_pages.pdf [3] Yoshiaki Hagiwara, Japanese Patent Application JPA 1975-127647 on N+NP+N Double Junction Type Pinned Photodiode with Back Light Illumination with the CCD/MOS Buffer Memory for Global Shutter Function. Should be linked to the following site for details. https://202011282002569657330.onamaeweb.jp/AIPS_Library/4_JP1975-127647_NPN_double_junction_Pinned_Photodiode_Patent_22_pages.pdf [4] Yoshiaki Hagiwara, Japanese Patent No. 1215101 (Japanese Patent Application JPA 1975-134985) on the Pinned surface P+NP double junction type Pinned Photodiode on N-type substrate wafer (Nsub), forming a P+NPNsub triple junction dynamic photo thyristor type PPD with the VOD function. Should be linked to the following site for details. https://202011282002569657330.onamaeweb.jp/AIPS_Library/5_JP1975-134985_PNP_double_junction_Pinned_Photodiode_on_Nsub_Patent_7_pages.pdf [5] Yoshiaki Hagiwara, Shigeyuki Ochi and Takeo Hashimoto, Japanese Patent Application JPA 1977-126885 on Electrical Shutter Clocking Scheme with OFD Punch Thru Action. Should be linked to the following site for details. https://202011282002569657330.onamaeweb.jp/AIPS_Library/6_JP1977-126885_Elecric_Shutter_Clocking_Scheme_by_OFD_Punch_Thru_Action_13_pages.pdf [6] Yoshiaki Hagiwara, Motoaki Abe and Chikara Okada, "A 380H X 488V CCD Imager with Narrow Channel Transfer Gates", Proceeding of the 10th Conference on Solid State Devices, Tokyo 1978, Japanese Journal of Applied Physics, Volume 18 Sup 18-1, pp. 335-340 November 1979. Should be linked to the following site for details. https://202011282002569657330.onamaeweb.jp/AIPS_Library/9_P1978_Pinned_Photodiode_1978_Paper_by_Hagiwara_7_Pages.pdf [7] Yoshiaki Daimon-Hagiwara,” Advances in CCD imagers”, an invited paper at CCD’79 international conference at Edinburgh, Scotland, UK September 1979. Should be linked to the following site for details. [8] https://harvestimaging.com/pubdocs/089_2005_dec_IEDM_hole_role.pdf [9] https://www.sony.com/en/SonyInfo/News/notice/20200626/

YoshiakiHagiwara19480704 (talk) 16:12, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

This isn't the place for an article draft. Please read the advice at WP:Your first article. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:30, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

YoshiakiHagiwara19480704 You have made more than 50 edits to Photodiode. All of them have been reverted, by nine different editors, some for copyright infringement, and you have been short-term blocked from editing the article. It appears you want to add content and references to state that you invented the pinned photodiode circa 1975. You have started a discussion on the Talk page of the article. I STRONGLY recommend you stop any attempts to edit the article until consensus is reached on the Talk page. David notMD (talk) 18:44, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

To answer you initial question, Teahouse Hosts are here to advise, but not to be co-authors. David notMD (talk) 10:44, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Citing a reference within a footnote

Good day, Teashop Hosts. I wonder if someone can help me with inserting a citation within a footnote. Specifically, if you would glance at the article on Duncan Napier, you will see four footnotes under the heading "Notes". The first of these reads as follows:

Most of the journals' text is reproduced in Melvin (2021) and Atkinson (2003)

where Melvin (2021) and Atkinson (2003) are references to books which are cited elsewhere in the article and which are listed in the "Further reading" section. What I am trying to do is to make those two references (within the note) into links, such that when you click on the link it would take you to the relevant book in "Further reading". In other words, I want it to look something like this:

Most of the journals' text is reproduced in Melvin (2021) and Atkinson (2003)

I've tried putting things like {{sfn|Melvin|2021}} directly in the text, and also experimented with the {{efn}} template, but none of that produces the desired effect.

I hope all this makes sense. And thanks in advance for your help. Mike Marchmont (talk) 17:14, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

Mike Marchmont, I exactly mostly cite stuff with Sfn. Have a look at Mahmud Hasan Deobandi. In Sfn, you just put the full bibliographic details of the citation in a section titled say References, and then using the sfn template, with required details, at the end of a statement. Regards, ─ The Aafī ^(talk) 17:17, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

You shouldn't be moving the citations you use in the article into Further reading section. It will give you Harv error. I fixed it and it works fine for me. Wherever I click on Melvin 2021 or other source, the full citation is highlighted. ─ The Aafī ^(talk) 17:21, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello, TheAafi. First of all, thank you for reorganising the References section in the Duncan Napier article. It looks much better now. And I take your point about the "Further reading"section.

Regarding your reply to my question, apologies if I didn't explain the problem clearly. I know how to use the Sfn template within the body of the article. I often do that. But it doesn't appear to work when you put the Sfn in a group footnote (that is, a footnote that is intended to provide explanatory text, as opposed to one the points directly to a citation).

To give another example of what I am trying to achieve, if you would glance at the article Anglo-Zulu War, you will see that in the Infobox, under the heading "Strength", there is a footnote designated with a lower-case a. The text of the footnote is as follows:

Colenso 1880, pp. 263–264 gives 6,669 Imperial and Colonial troops and 9,035 Native Contingent. Morris 1998, p. 292 gives 16,800

The text shown here in blue are links to entries listed under "Sources". That's what I would like to achieve. I considered copying the code from that article, but I see that it uses the Harvnb template, which I understand has been deprecated.

Thanks for any further help you can give.

Mike Marchmont (talk) 17:27, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Mike Marchmont, I tried this and this too works fine for me. Have a look at User:TheAafi/Cite try and if you have further doubts ping me. ─ The Aafī ^(talk) 17:41, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

I went on and fixed the notes in Duncan Napier article. If I'm right, you were mostly asking about this note and I've fixed that. I hope this helps. ─ The Aafī ^(talk) 17:59, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Many thanks, TheAafi, for fixing the footnote. That is exactly what I was trying to achieve. I see you used Harvnb. Clearly, I was wrong to avoid using that template. I'll make a note of it for future reference.

Thank you also for adding an Infobox to the article. I am dubious about the sub-headings, "Academic background" and "Academic work" because Napier's background was anything but academic. He had hardly any education and couldn't read or write until he was in his teens. But I won't worry about it just now.

Thanks again, Mike Marchmont (talk) 18:18, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Google

Hello. My article created has been accepted and I am super happy. I was wondering if that means the page is now live or do I need to take another step? every time I search the article it doesn't show up on google. can anyone let me know if it is live? Fmik36 (talk) 22:59, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

Google (and all other search engines) do not update instantly. Be patient. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 23:01, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

@Fmik36 Welcome to the Teahouse. A more relevant answer than that which @Jéské Couriano gave you is the fact that your article (Khaldoun Al Tabari) still has one further stage to go through before we allow it to be indexed by Google. But, yes, it is indeed live and findable via an internal search within Wikipedia. After 'Articles for Creation' approval, a more detailed final check is made by New Page Reviewers to ensure it appears to meet our key policies on notability and other things. As with all things on this volunteer-run project, there is a huge backlog. If, after 90 days, it is not 'NPP_reviewed' it will automatically be released for indexing by search engines. So it's simply a case of waiting patiently. Well done on creating your first article! Nick Moyes (talk) 00:03, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

@Fmik36 and Nick Moyes: Khaldoun Al Tabari was moved to mainspace (the actual encyclopedia) by an autopatrolled user so it actually allowed indexing right away. The HTML doesn't have noindex and it's already indexed by Yahoo but not Google yet. PrimeHunter (talk) 07:53, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Whoops. My mistake - sorry. Nick Moyes (talk) 08:33, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

HELP

This outputs nothing {{subst:User:NeverTry4Me/badgeometernew}} NeverTry4Me - TT Page 01:05, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

@NeverTry4Me: That page does not seem to exist. Check the spelling, including capitalization. RudolfRed (talk) 01:19, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

@RudolfRed: I have followed the "How to add Teahouse badges to WikiLove" from Wikipedia:Teahouse/Badge page. Is it depreaceated? For me it's not working. --NeverTry4Me - TT Page 01:23, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

@NeverTry4Me: Most likely because if you looked at the template at the top of the page it says "This page is currently inactive and is retained for historical reference." ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 01:25, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

@Blaze Wolf: yeah you are correct. I stepped on wrong page. :) My mistake. apology for being a noob here. --NeverTry4Me - TT Page 01:28, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

@NeverTry4Me: It's alright. I think Vukky might have something that adds the Teahouse badges to it, since I have them in my WikiLove. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 01:29, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

@NeverTry4Me: The code at Wikipedia:Teahouse/Badge actually works but don't replace the username. Just write what it says: {{subst:User:Ocaasi/badgeometernew}}. Code with {{...}} usually relies on an existing page, in this case User:Ocaasi/badgeometernew. PrimeHunter (talk) 06:12, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

User:Ocaasi/badgeometernew is from 2013. I haven't compared to current badges. PrimeHunter (talk) 06:13, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

@Blaze Wolf: MoreLove adds the Teahouse Barnstar as a WikiLove message you can send, yes. However, it does not have the ability to add badges since it's an extension for WikiLove, and I do not have a script to automate adding them. Vukky ^Talk_Guestbook 11:06, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Ah I confused "badges" with "barnstars" lol. My bad. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 19:18, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Draft Problem

Hi Teahouse/Wikipedia.

I've been trying to get a Draft AfC approved for a long while now. A few months ago, there was a lot of back-and-forth editing and commenting - now, in recent weeks, it's mostly been empty. Is someone able to help me get this little project alive or point me in the right direction? Draft:Make a Difference Foundation D.C. at MAD Foundation Inc. (talk) 06:09, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

@D.C. at MAD Foundation Inc.: Declined again - needs more independent reliable sources, especially in the Funding section. GoingBatty (talk) 06:47, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

More than half the refs are mentions of Wilipedia-notable people who are "ambassadors" for the foundation. These do not contribute to the article's notability. Other refs are to the foundations's website. A lot of content is not referenced. I agree that the most recent Declined was warranted. David notMD (talk) 10:15, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Try?

try ok? Laieng (talk) 07:09, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

@Laieng: Welcome to the Teahouse, and thanks for trying Wikipedia. Is there a specific question you have? GoingBatty (talk) 07:31, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Centre Party (Sweden)

Is it true that Centre Party (Sweden) is not only center but also center-right? Because as an example Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe Party is center. Example, in Spanish it is written as center-left and I don't find the evidence on the Centre Party (Sweden) page particularly good either. Wname1 (talk) 07:26, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello Wname1. For fact-related questions, you will get better answers at the Wikipedia:Reference desk. Kpddg ^{(talk • contribs)} 07:34, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict)@Wname1: Welcome to the Teahouse! I see you removed some information from the Centre Party (Sweden) article, and then your edit was reverted. Per the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle, the best place to have the discussion is the article's talk page: Talk:Centre Party (Sweden). Be sure to explain why you removed the information and any issues you have with the references you removed. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 07:35, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

What to do when subjects of articles try to remove negative material from pages about them

A few weeks ago, in the Cluebot report interface, there was this edit from a long time ago where a company was trying to change information on their own page.

Nobody owns articles, so this shouldn't be allowed. Is there a warning template for this in addition to the conflict of interest template? I.hate.spam.mail.here (talk | contributions) 07:42, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

There was which edit from a long time ago, I.hate.spam.mail.here? Whichever it was, it's relatively uncommon for an editor to announce that they represent a company. It often happens that one has very good reasons to suspect that an editor may be, but suspicions don't merit accusations. Was/is the "negative material" well sourced? Was/is the resulting article balanced? Is/was raising/pursuing the matter on the article's talk page inadequate? -- Hoary (talk) 08:36, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

When I come across this, I just put a conflict of interest warning on the user's talk page and if they continue I treat it like normal vandalism (i.e. I use vandalism warnings). Maybe I should use Uw-coi-warn more often? wizzito | say hello! 15:02, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Universal Language of Absolutes

Thank you for writing to me. Since being invited by Professor Dave ( Burgenhaug ??) have posted and published a great deal of material. The last publishing I think was the 9th one and was advised to keep posting. Advice that was given earlier that the material can be polished up where necessary over time. Have explained that at 94 years of age the plethora of detail required in Wikiuni is now outside my capacity to digest. The Wikiuni open University seemed to me the best opportunity to disseminate the material that has already been written by me. The archive material is copied and pasted and seems to be arriving safely. If any unintentional violation of any copyright could it just be deleted? Time is not on my side and the question that remains is 'Do I keep posting?'

Sincerely,

Jim Brines. Hamish84 (talk) 09:02, 13 February 2022 (UTC) Hamish84 (talk) 09:02, 13 February 2022 (UTC) Hamish84 (talk) 09:12, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Your query was initially an absolute mystery. There is no article "Universal Language of Absolutes" at Wikipedia. HOWEVER, content by that title exists at Wikiversity as https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Universal_Language_of_Absolutes, which you created in January. At Wikiversity, you appear to have a useful correspondance with Dave Braunschweig. The function of Teahouse, where you posted this query today, is for helping Wikipedia editors. David notMD (talk) 10:26, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Hamish84, you may wish to repost what's above at Wikiversity's "Colloquium", which is where people who may be concerned are much more likely to see and read it. -- Hoary (talk) 10:59, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Articles question

Hello, Teahouse, I'm the Recent User that Published III Zw 2 Article on the Wikipedia I was wondering what Articles Haven't Been Published Yet, I'd Like to Hear a Reply Soon --DemonymsPlayer (talk) 12:18, 13 February 2022 (UTC) DemonymsPlayer (talk) 12:18, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

If you're looking for which recently published articles are awaiting new page patrol, you'll find them listed at Special:NewPagesFeed; nearly 14 thousand of them. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:31, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict)@DemonymsPlayer: new articles on Wikipedia are noindexed until they have been reviewed by the new page patrol or are older than 90 days. I don't see evidence of either being the case for III Zw 2, so please be patient. Victor Schmidt (talk) 12:32, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

• DemonymsPlayer, hello and welcome to the Teahouse, I take it that you created an article, did a search of the article on your preferred browser and saw nothing right? you see if you create and publish an article yourself it is not indexed by google except a group of editors here referred to as new page reviewers mark your article as “reviewed”, also there are editors who have Autopatrol rights, this editors create articles and they are immediately indexed by google. Furthermore if after 90 days a new page reviewer hasn’t attended to you then the article goes live by itself. Celestina007 (talk) 12:43, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

I was Wondering about any Articles That have been Canceled And add some Citations to Pages "Articles" to be Accepted. --DemonymsPlayer (talk) 12:53, 13 February 2022 (UTC) DemonymsPlayer (talk) 12:53, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

If this is about Draft:Segala Island, Eritrea, you removed the decline notice, which, amongst other things, removed the resubmit button. I have restored it (there is no reason to hide it, we'll find out anyway). I am personally not convinced that this would go through, however. Bing searches aren't reliable sources, though individual results might be, due to their inherent tendency to change as well as the fact that different people might see totally different results. Victor Schmidt (talk) 13:16, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

East Harlem - Wikipediahttps://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › East_Harlem

Please tell me how to add a name to the 'notables' from East Harlem. I do not understand at all. Thank you Gayle 2603:8001:7107:FD52:4941:EBF5:936E:78F8 (talk) 14:24, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. To add someone to such a list, they must merit and preferably have an article about them. To merit an article, the person must meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person, as shown with significant coverage in independent reliable sources. 331dot (talk) 14:30, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi there! To learn how to edit, you could view Help:Introduction and The Wikipedia Adventure. You can also post a request on the article's talk page: Talk:East Harlem, with the person's name and any reliable sources that detail their relationship with East Harlem. GoingBatty (talk) 04:01, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

How change something to team instead of a person

 184.14.124.68 (talk) 14:57, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello! Could you share more detail on what you are trying to do? >>> Wgullyn.talk(); 15:09, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Should parody religons be treated like real ones on wikipedia? Is there really a difference, when you think about it?

I was thinking about this, y'know. 68.186.232.255 (talk) 16:34, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

This page is not for expressing your views on organized religion or how they should be treated on Wikipedia; the Village Pump is for discussing things like how to treat particular topics; your views on organized religion may be expressed on social media. 331dot (talk) 16:36, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia has articles on subjects which are notable - roughly, that there has been enough published about them in suitable sources. It makes no difference whether they are real or imaginary, serious or jokes, good or bad. A hoax or a joke that (or a fake religion) that has received independent coverage can be the subject of a Wikipedia article. A solid company, a worthy non-profit, a prolific YouTuber, or a popular band, that hasn't received such coverage cannot. --ColinFine (talk) 16:51, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, IP editor. As ColinFine has mentioned, what matters is if religions, real or otherwise, has been significantly mentioned in reliable sources, like the Flying Spaghetti Monster. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:40, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

References in foreign-language Wikipedias

I have now created 3 or 4 English Wikipedia articles which I started by translating from existing foreign-language Wikipedia articles. Frequently the foreign-language articles (French, Italian, Dutch, Danish) have had few, or poor, supporting citations, and so I have then had to do further research to find full supporting references. Question: are other-language Wikipedias supposed to use the same standards and the same quality and quantity of sources as English Wikipedia? If so, why have I found so many articles which would not be accepted in English Wikipedia? Masato.harada (talk) 17:09, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Masato.harada, hi there. All articles are expected to have at least a few reliable citations. I've seen many uncited articles in Indonesian Wikipedia because there are fewer editors there. The English Wikipedia undoubtedly has more editors, so it's easier for an uncited article to be nominated for deletion here than it is in others. That is why when you translate an article, you shouldn't just blindly translate, you have to do your own research too. GeraldWL 17:15, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Masato.harada Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Each language version of Wikipedia is its own project, with their own editors and policies- they aren't the same. The English version tends to be stricter as it is the oldest and has a large number of participants. 331dot (talk) 17:17, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

As 331dot says, each Wikipedia has its own policies, and some are less strict than en-wiki. It is also worth considering the question of time: in the early years, while en-wiki had broadly the same policies as it does now, editors were much less strict in applying them. English Wikipedia therefore has thousands and thousands of articles which, if they were offered for review now, would not be accepted: some would be declined pending further work, and some would be rejected outright. Ideally, editors would work through those thousands and thousands of substandard articles, improving or deleting them. (For some reason, this doesn't happen very much). It is likely that other language Wikipedias also have many articles which do not in fact meet their own standards. --ColinFine (talk) 17:54, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

How do I delete an account?

 M.E. Langley (talk) 19:39, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello, M.E. Langley. Please read Wikipedia:Courtesy vanishing. Cullen328 (talk) 19:45, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

With such a new account as yours, you can also just delete all content on your Talk page and User page and abandon the account. David notMD (talk) 11:10, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Photos

How do you delete a photo? There is an entry that has a duplicate photo and the subject asked if I knew how to delete one of them and...I don't! The entry is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_McNamara_(horticulturist)

Thank you. Sbmalone (talk) 20:08, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

It appears to have already been done. — Czello 20:13, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

@Sbmalone: Hello SB! I've removed the image for you since I see no reason to use the exact same image twice on the page. For future reference, all you have to do is remove everything contained within 4 brackets ([[ and ]]) that starts with "File:". Also, is the subject of the article paying you to make edits? Regardless of whether or not that is true you must read WP:COI and follow the instructions on the page, as well as WP:PAID. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 20:14, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Sandbox

What is sandbox? 2001:44B8:41C6:F700:5D3B:1764:1F2C:8691 (talk) 20:47, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. A sandbox is a place you can try things out. On Wikipedia it means two different things: WP:Sandbox is a communal page that you can use to practise editing. Other people may use it as well, and it gets automatically cleared several times a day. In addition every logged-in user can have their own sandbox, which they can use for example to develop articles. See User sandbox for information on that. --ColinFine (talk) 21:42, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Follow-up to How to contribute my article

The draft page I'm asking about is a biography of George Ockner. My question is, how do I cite sources that are behind a paywall, such as newspaper articles from the Proquest Historical Newspaper database? There are obituaries and reviews of this person's concerts there. Thank you. Ajo47 (talk) 21:08, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Ajo47. You cite sources behind a paywall the same way you cite any other source, though if you're using one of the citation templates, there are parameters you can add to notify readers that the source is restricted (see for example Template:cite web). Note that for most sources, the important part of the citation is the title, date, publisher, and author (if known): a URL is a convenience not an essential part of the citation. See futher WP:PAYWALL. --ColinFine (talk) 21:47, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Links in the LEAD

Is it better to put low-quality links to stubs and start class articles in the body of the article instead of the lead of the article? It seems like it would be better for an article to have no red links in the lead and a few red links in the body than a few red plinks in the introduction and no leaks in the body. ScientistBuilder (talk) 21:23, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

@ScientistBuilder: I personally don't think it matters. Red links should not be included at all unless the red-linked subject is extremely likely to be notable, and really ought to have an article of its own. They're then "preemptive" links, already linking to the (future) article, so no one has to go back after writing the article, to find all the places that ought to refer to it. If the subject is that important, then showing up as a red-link in the lead of other articles might encourage someone to go off and write about it! Elemimele (talk) 21:34, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

I'm working on improving atomic clock and a lot of the links in the lead section lead to low quality articles and I was wondering if should be dealt with. ScientistBuilder (talk) 21:37, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

I see no red Wikilinks anywhere in Atomic clock. If you mean that there are valid Wikilinks in the lead that go to Stubs and Starts, that's OK. The quality of Wikilinks linked to has no relevance to the rating of the article the Wikilinks are in. Standard practice is first use of a term gets linked, and all subsequent uses of that term, not. As for improving an article's quality, the quality of references is paramount. David notMD (talk) 22:19, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

ScientistBuilder I think it is better to leave the links in the lead rather than remove them, especially when none are red links (and haven't been for some time for atomic clock). Many readers, myself included, just hover over these links if they want a brief reminder of the definition of something. Only rarely do I click to follow through to the linked article, so I don't care about its quality. WP:Overlink does have something to say about this but for technical articles more rather than less is correct, in my opinion. Note also that many readers never go beyond the lead, so knowing which other articles they could find on related subjects is useful. Mike Turnbull (talk) 22:26, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

How to assess an unassessed Article

I have come across an unassessed article on Frequency standard and would like to help organize Wikipedia by assessing the article. How do I assess an article? ScientistBuilder (talk) 21:28, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi, ScientistBuilder. Please see WP:Content assessment. --ColinFine (talk) 21:51, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

I was having trouble figuring out where to put the label for the class but figured out where the banner was and added it.

I figured out how to insert the classification into the banner of the talk page. ScientistBuilder (talk) 21:53, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Abuse of template on my talkpage by new IP/User, is this harasment ?

In less than an half hour i'm getting two Notices on my talkpage of Edit warring,[1], [2] first by a IP with a single contribution, then a new user Woodybrook showed up, put another one on my talkpage. I opened a case yesterday at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring which led to a temporary block of a user Rogeman123, now i'm getting notices from new IP/User. I have sent them both warning of improper use of template.  Dawit S Gondaria (talk) 21:39, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

@Dawit S Gondaria: You can request for your talk page to be semi-protected since, if you aren't edit warring whatsoever, protection would be appropriate. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 22:07, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

@Dawit S Gondaria: I just checked Special:Contributions/Rogeman123 and Rogeman123 was recently blocked for 72 hours, so I would wait until that user is unblocked to see if they resume their edits. In the mean time, if you suspect sock puppetry, you can report that as well. Anton.bersh (talk) 22:21, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

@Anton.bersh: Yes i know, then these two (one) IP/User show up, putting notices on my talkpage. There's no new discussion and i opened the previous one yesterday. I requested for semi-protection per Blaze Wolf recommendation. Thanks i will report sock-puppetry as well. Dawit S Gondaria (talk) 22:30, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Why are talk pages not usable with visual editor?

 2603:8000:F400:FCEA:A439:4538:6B7:92FA (talk) 21:43, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Just a limitation of the tool. According to Wikipedia:VisualEditor the Reply Tool will has many elements of Visual Editor. It should be enabled soon here. RudolfRed (talk) 21:59, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. You can force the visual editor to work on pretty much any page by adding the string ?veeaction=edit to the end of the page's URL in the address bar, but there will be some functions that won't work properly. For the most part, the Reply tool works well enough, though if you want more functions, you may want to make an account and try out Convenient Discussions. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:45, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Referring to a person who shares their surname with a settlement

Forgive me if this is a silly question; I checked the MoS and didn't see anything. I'm currently revising Strool, South Dakota, and the settlement was named for Ben Strool, who was fairly involved in the settlement's operations until his death. Conventionally, we refer to subjects by their surname only, but in this case that could cause confusion between the settlement and the person (e.g. "Residents paid a monthly rent to Strool"). At the same time, only referring to the settlement as "Strool" and the person as "Ben Strool" feels unwieldy. He didn't hold any kind of title (e.g. doctor or senator) that would make it easy to distinguish the person from the town, either. Is there a consensus on how to refer to people whose surname is the same as the settlement? –Galactic-Radiance (talk) 21:45, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

@Galactic-Radiance if you add a section about Ben Strool, and it is clear you are referring to the person, you can call him Strool. If you add such sentences as the above-mentioned "Residents paid a monthly rent to Strool" I would suggest you refer to him as Mr. Strool, or the merchant. Thank you for your work on improving the stub article. Karenthewriter (talk) 22:02, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Yep, I concur. "Mr. Strool." Or "the founder" versus "the settlement," depending on context. Bill Woodcock (talk) 14:53, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

No Original Research Clarification

I am looking a source that might relate to a claim on the Atomic clock article that lower line widths increase the precision. I googled atomic clock line width and I found a site that talks about ultrasmall linewidths and it does not directly state the claim the article is making and I am wondering if I added this as a source if it would be original research or if I can add the source and if so what is the reasoning for me being able to add it even though it does not directly say it. ScientistBuilder (talk) 22:09, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Disclaimer up front: I'm about to give you bad advice. That is, advice on how to be bad. Like when I tell my kids that the most important thing about doing the wrong thing is to not get caught.

I know it can be very frustrating, if you are a subject-matter expert to see vague, incomplete, or misleading information in articles, when you know the correct information, and are perfectly capable of presenting it clearly, but can't find a citable source to attribute it to. There are lots of people who, in that situation, just go ahead and say what they think needs to be said, and leave it for someone else, whose strengths lie more in the "finding citations" realm, to clean it up. There are early Wikipedia articles which are the sole "original research" of individual experts, predating the policies on original research and citations and so on, which have never really been touched since. And there are other people who run around diligently cleaning them up. So, the best approach (and I get that you know this) is to find a citation for what you think needs to be said. The bad approach is to say what needs to be said, and leave it for someone else to find a citation. The polite thing to do, if you're going to be bad, is to acknowledge that fact up-front in the talk page, apologize in advance for it, and thank in advance whoever can clean up behind you.

On the other hand, if you can fix the problem, or get 90% of the way there, by simply deleting incorrect stuff, that doesn't require a citation to do, and it will also make the world a better place. Good luck. Bill Woodcock (talk) 14:51, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Is there a way to get an image from a Goverment site without breaching copyright laws?

I would like to add a site from NIST.gov to atomic clock. Is there a way for me to do this without having taken the pictures or would a NIST representative (employee, manager, etc.) have to add the image? ScientistBuilder (talk) 22:37, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

@ScientistBuilder: If the image is from a NIST or other U.S. Federal employee, it is not covered by copyright in the United States. See [3] and {{pd-us-gov}}. RudolfRed (talk) 22:48, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

How do I replace an image in the Visual Editor?

The image I would like to upload is [4]. ScientistBuilder (talk) 23:01, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello, ScientistBuilder. You need to upload the image (to Commons, since it's PD) first: I suggest using the Upload wizard. Then once the image is available in Commons, you can edit the article to use it. I'm afraid I don't know how to do that in VE, as I don't use it, but I believe it's straightforward. --ColinFine (talk) 23:17, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Are pictures from the National Physical Laboratory in the United Kingdom public domain?

I tried looking through the public domain and I couldn't figure out the answer.

I would like to upload some pictures from the www.npl.co.uk to Wikimedia Commons but not if its illegal. ScientistBuilder (talk) 00:04, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

No. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 02:28, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Is there a way to get access to copyrighted images?

Why are UK images copyrighted and US images public domain?

I looked at the History of Copyright article and it had a section about the UK but most of it was about the 1700s and not modern day times.

In my opinion, there are too many copyright lawyers out there. ScientistBuilder (talk) 13:57, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Because the US Federal government chose to make images public domain, whereas most other governments have not so chosen. I don't know why that is; but remember that until the last twenty or thirty years, this was of interest to almost nobody outside publishing houses. --ColinFine (talk) 14:26, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Citing the same page but differing content

I have a webpage where content is deleted periodically. I would like to cite different versions of this page in the same Wikipedia article, which have been archived in the Wayback Machine. What is the best way to go about this? NemesisAT (talk) 23:02, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

If the version you want has been archived, then you can use parameters archive-url and archive-date as well as the main url. If in addition you use url-status=deviated, I believe it won't generate a link to the main URL. See Template:cite web. --ColinFine (talk) 23:22, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, I wasn't aware of this functionality! However, it isn't quite what I'm looking for. I am wanting to cite a webpage twice in the same article, but citing different archives of it in different places. I could create multiple citations where the only difference is the archive date and version, but I wondered if there was a cleaner way. NemesisAT (talk) 23:28, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

I'd be surprised if there was a simpler way, but I don't know for sure. --ColinFine (talk) 09:23, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll try making multiple citations and see if anyone says anything. NemesisAT (talk) 10:45, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

An experienced user reverted my change. After a discussion, most editors agreed with my changes. Now the user is still reverting me. Help.

At Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Baseball#Park_vs._Stadium, user Nemov is clearly in the minority as to his opinion on what a baseball stadium should be called. After the vote did not go his way, he is just ignoring the discussion and just reverting my edits anyway. What do I do to stop this? Please help. Thank you. Back Bay Barry (talk) 23:34, 13 February 2022 (UTC) Back Bay Barry (talk) 23:34, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

First off, you are violating the 3RR rule and could potentially be temporarily blocked. Please do not make any more reversions on that article. However, it does appear that you have a consensus for using the term "baseball stadium", so I'll raise the matter on their talk page. >>> Wgullyn.talk(); 23:49, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Pinging @Back Bay Barry: >>> Wgullyn.talk(); 23:50, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

@Back Bay Barry: Actually, after looking at that discussion again, it seems like the matter of the definition of baseball park was never raised. I think that User:Nemov is actually in the right on this issue. Please don't make any changes to the definition of the article before creating a discussion on that topic. >>> Wgullyn.talk(); 00:01, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Okay sorry about violating the 3RR rule. I literally just read that page now. I'm sorry about that, but didn't Nemov do the exact same thing? Back Bay Barry (talk) 00:03, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

@Wgullyn: Well, the discussion on Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Baseball#Park_vs._Stadium is essentially the discussion that led to me making that change. So I feel that many editors already endorsed that change. Back Bay Barry (talk) 00:05, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

@Back Bay Barry no, what they endorsed is that MLB venues should be called "stadiums", not "parks" -- the definition of the article wasn't at question. >>> Wgullyn.talk(); 00:06, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

@Wgullyn But that article is almost 100% about professional baseball stadiums. Back Bay Barry (talk) 00:09, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

@Back Bay Barry This is what you changed:

A baseball park, colloquially known as a ballpark is a park or stadium in which ball games (such as baseball) are played.

to

A baseball park, colloquially known as a ballpark, is a place where baseball is played.

Nowhere in that discussion was consensus for that change reached. >>> Wgullyn.talk(); 00:11, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Please look deeper into the all of the work I did on the article before Nemov started reverting me. Back Bay Barry (talk) 00:17, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

@Wgullyn Essentially, Nemov used a definition of "ballpark" to define "baseball park". I think the name of the article should be changed and I started a discussion on the talk page about that. But meanwhile, his change made no sense. It wasn't "status quo" as he kept quoting to me. He JUST made that change, in reaction to the vote that went against him. Back Bay Barry (talk) 00:22, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

@Back Bay Barry ohhh. Sorry about that. I thought that they were reverting to a previous version, not their own change. I've changed the definition back to the original one. Sorry again for the misunderstanding! >>> Wgullyn.talk(); 00:31, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Query about major revision required to page List_of_RISC_OS_bundled_applications

This page's content is more than ten years old. In that time new distributions of the OS have appeared with significant applications and games bundled. I have started constructing replacement tables in my sandbox, but want to be reassured that I can simply replace almost all the existing content with the newly formatted, but up to date, lists. Would an editor want to check my new material? If so, how? Bernardboase 23:55, 13 February 2022 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bernardboase (talk • contribs)

I think WP:FIXIT applies. You've found a problem, you're doing the work to fix it... go for it! If someone wants to argue with you, they're free to do so, once you've done the work. If you feel like being more cautious, you could propose what you're going to do on the article's talk page, suggesting a date a week or so out, on which you propose to make the change if nobody disagrees; that gives anyone who has the page in their watch-list plenty of time to chime in. Alternatively, you could preserve highlights of the old content in a "historical" section, or by creating a table which indicates when each piece of software was bundled, and when bundling was discontinued. That sounds interesting, but like a lot of work. Bill Woodcock (talk) 14:38, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Thanks Bill. All good advice. In fact the page content is so old and unmaintained that I'm pretty sure no one is watching it, and I am thinking that the "historical" aspects are not that important in this case due to their irrelevance today. The new data has already been collected for the RISC OS magazine Archive (a possible Reference) so reformatting it into Wikipedia tables is the only additional work. I will use its Talk page to point to my sandbox for comment. Bernardboase 17:46, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

On reflection, the likely chief objection to my proposed revamp of the page is that, by including two paid-for distros in my comparison tables, it may look like advertising even though the intention is only to show what functionality is covered by the distros. Is there guidance on this aspect?Bernardboase 16:39, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Adam Sandler filmography

I Need some assentance in fixing the table in Adam Sandler filmography, The IP (49.197.125.85) has messed up the table when he added Pearl Jam 20 to Adam Sandler filmography [[5]] Chip3004 (talk) 00:49, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

@Chip3004: Hello Chip! Mind telling me what exactly the IP messed up with the table? It looks just fine. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 00:56, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

@Blaze Wolf: When the ip added Pearl Jam 20 to Adam Sandler filmography Specially in 2011 section it bumped Jack and Jill to below the 2011 section, It would be easier to see what i meant by going to the article itself and scrow down till you get to year 2011 and you'll see that Jack and Jill is actually in the year section opposed to the title section. Chip3004 (talk) 01:55, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Looks just fine to me. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 01:59, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

It was fixed in this edit. --David Biddulph (talk) 02:03, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Fixing Draft

Hi, I would like to know which sections of my Wikipedia page specifically need fixing to get approved, Here is the link to the page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Australian_Leadership_Index Leadership scholar (talk) 00:53, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi! Welcome to the Teahouse.

Oh, that's a draft you have there. I, um.. well. This is hard to say, but in the interest of being honest, even if it's a bit blunt: every single section needs fixing. The best section there is "Latest results", and even then it's sourced entirely to primary sources. You should probably read Wikipedia:YFA if you haven't already. Writing an article is hard, but I know you can do it! What you currently have however, just won't do. casualdejekyll 01:00, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for getting back to me, could you please give me some more specific things to focus on? Is it the language used? Just not sure where to start with fixing it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leadership scholar (talk • contribs) 01:16, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

@Leadership scholar 12 of your sources are just for defining what leadership means. Out of the three remaining sources, not a single one is independent of the subject. >>> Wgullyn.talk(); 01:27, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Please read WP:YFA as suggested. Not to put too fine a point on it, but basically you should wipe out the draft and start over- only summarizing what independent reliable sources say about the topic, with significant coverage. Not brief mentions that merely document its existence, or any sources from the topic itself. Start with just your three best independent sources. Right now you don't have any; if none exist, the topic does not merit an article at this time. 331dot (talk) 01:31, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

I have permission from the copyright holder to use a photo, now what?

I wanted to improve a page with a photo, so I contacted the subject using one of the form letters here and got a response. "I, _____, the sole owner of the exclusive copyright of the self-photo as attached and have legal authority in my capacity to release the copyright of the work..." (apparently using an approved WP form letter as well), and sent that release in an email to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org and to myself.

Ok, great, but the photo doesn't show up in Wikimedia Commons and when I try to upload it myself I get error messages blocking me from doing so.

What's the next step in the process here? BBQboffin (talk) 02:03, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

They need to send that letter to the Volunteer Responce Team thru info-en[at]wikimedia.org, from their official email address. You sending it does nothing as you don't have the legal capacity to do this. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 02:24, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

At least as I understand it from what they said, the copyright owner sent it to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org and carbon-copied it to BBQboffin. Which sounds about right. casualdejekyll 02:32, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

They did send the email to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org and I was also included on the email, from their official email address. I didn't send anything except a WP-approved form letter to the image owner. BBQboffin (talk) 03:21, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

What error message in specific? Since the copyright is released, the photo can definitely be added to Commons now. casualdejekyll 02:26, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Error message I got was:

We could not determine whether this file is suitable for Wikimedia Commons. Please only upload photos that you took yourself with your camera, or see what else is acceptable. See the guide to make sure the file is acceptable and learn how to upload it on Wikimedia Commons.

The content must be freely licensed. Do not copy files illegally (in violation of copyright) from other websites.

If you believe that the file meets our licensing standards: Upload the file again or click "Retry failed uploads"/"Submit modified file description".

I did not try uploading again, should I? BBQboffin (talk) 03:27, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Yes, as it says right there, "If you believe that the file meets our licensing standards: Upload the file again or click "Retry failed uploads"/"Submit modified file description"." casualdejekyll 03:55, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Easy for you to say; the error message is all in red and is accompanied by a Big Red Exclamation Mark icon. Well, if this breaks Wikipedia for good and gets us sued into oblivion, it's all your fault! You gave me the courage to click on "Retry failed uploads"/"Submit modified file description" and...I get the same error message. I tried it a third time with the same result. Then I added some "optional" tags. Failed. A few more changes to "optional" things. Failed. And again. Then on about the sixth try it went through! Whoever said insanity is trying the same thing over and over again expecting different results was misquoted. I find it doing that works quite well, especially when looking for my car keys. Thanks for the help, the file is now uploaded somehow. BBQboffin (talk) 05:36, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

The software is broken, has always been broken, and will always be broken. We learn to live with it I guess. casualdejekyll 13:45, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Anudip Foundation Deletion

hello, I wrote an article and then Wikipedia send me a message like this So, now, I want to know that, will my article be deleted? I gave too much mainstream media's references...even then it be deleted that will not be fair.........thanks Muhammadyeakubhasan111 (talk) 05:51, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

The article is being considered for deletion, so I believe you can reason why it shouldn't be deleted. Vial of Power (talk) 07:48, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

You are welcome to make policy-based arguments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anudip Foundation. AFD is not a majority vote but a (structured) discussion. Using multiple accounts is not allowed. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 08:13, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Note: This user was banned as a result of Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Muhammadyeakubhasan111. casualdejekyll 13:44, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Article declined

Hi, hope everything is going well. My draft Draft: Pradeep Narwal was declined and said it has no significant coverage. While the subject have significant coverage which pass WP:GNG. While the reviewer said that WP:NPOL is not yet completed and reviewer wrote that "yet to win an election". ❯❯❯ Chunky aka Al Kashmiri (✍️) 07:47, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Well, since WP:NPOL hasn't been completed, the article has been declined. If the article passes NPOL, then it will be accepted.Vial of Power (talk) 07:51, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

I thought if article pass WP:GNG then it can be accepted.❯❯❯ Chunky aka Al Kashmiri (✍️)

I'm far from an expert on this, but I believe the policy is that simply being a candidate in an election does not establish notability, independent of other reasons. Being elected in a general election, on the other hand, does establish notability. Therefore, if you can establish WP:GNG independent of election coverage, you're good, or if the candidate is elected, you're good, but if the election comes and goes, the candidate does not prevail, and they're not doing anything else notable, then there's no reason for an article about them. Bill Woodcock (talk) 14:32, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

@TheChunky - Yes, if an article passes GNG then of course it can be accepted. NPOL is a sub-standard of GNG that basically says "If the subject passes NPOL, then it is assumed to pass GNG". The reviewer, in saying that NPOL is not passed, is saying that they assume GNG is not passed because it hasn't been demonstrated in the sourcing of the article. casualdejekyll 17:21, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

How long does "deletion discussion" take?

FYI

 – The section header added by CiaPan (talk) 09:27, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

hi there! Kindly let me know, How long does it take "deletion discussion of an article"? Muhammadyeakubhasan111 (talk) 07:55, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

I think this belongs on your teahouse query, but I'll answer based on what I know. A deletion discussion can take any random time to finish. It finishes when a consensus has been reached. Who knows how long that could take. Also, since a lot of similar opinions have been stated on the discussion by an IP and new accounts, A WP:SPI Has been started on you. Just letting you know. Vial of Power (talk) 08:00, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Deletion discussions last a week at minimum unless a clear outcome very quickly becomes obvious. If there's limited participation it may be relisted, which adds another week. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 08:09, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for that, even If I'm not the one who asked the question. Vial of Power (talk) 08:10, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

NBSP versus space

Hello, is it correct to removed nbsp tags and replace it by a space, in an infobox? (see examples: STS-60 et STS-70) CRS-20 (talk) 07:57, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

@CRS-20: It depends on the case. If you're asking about, e.g., 22 seconds then no, replacing it with a space is not correct, because that can lead to a line split between a number and the unit, like this

8 days, 7 hours, 9 minutes, 22

seconds (achieved)

CiaPan (talk) 09:22, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

So removing the others.on this line before seconds is correct. I ask the question for all those who are in the infobox. Thanks. CRS-20 (talk) 09:31, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

@CRS-20: Nope. It would be correct if you're sure they're not necessary. And whether they actually are necessary depends on the screen size, font size and rendering habits of the web browser on devices used by people who read our articles. We do not know these conditions, so we use non-breaking spaces to avoid breaking the text where it is undesirable. If you can see any specific reason to remove this protection, go on, be WP:BOLD and fix what is broken. But removing 'just because' is likely to be reverted soon. --CiaPan (talk) 09:58, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

I ask this because MOS says no nbsp tags in an infobox. CRS-20 (talk) 09:38, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

I respect MOS, but I don't give up a common sense. IMHO, style is necessary to maintain a consistent, uniform and good look, not to deprive us of our mind. When sticking blindly to MOS makes the article look worse, I go for WP:BRAR and strive to keep article look good rather than following the manual. After all, that is our goal: to make a readable encyclopedia, not to build a monument of MOS. --CiaPan (talk) 09:58, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

IMHO, what is it? and thank you for your information. CRS-20 (talk) 10:04, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

IMHO = In My Humble Opinion. There is also more sound IMO and more humble IMVHO (very humble). CiaPan (talk) 10:13, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

The MOS does not say "no tags in an infobox". It says "it may be counterproductive in a table (where an unattractive break may be acceptable to conserve precious horizontal space) and unnecessary in a short parameter value in an infobox (where a break would never occur anyway)." If there was a parameter in an infobox that would be unlikely to have a line break, it is unnecessary. In long entries, like mission duration, that will result in a line break, an nbsp tag should still be added. Balon Greyjoy (talk) 10:41, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

No, MOS:NBSP doesn't say so, as you've been already told in a recent ANB discussion. — Mikhail Ryazanov (talk) 14:51, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Now I'm leaving the discussion and make place for other editors, with probably another point of view. :) CiaPan (talk) 09:58, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Unless somebody is going around making every space in a sentence a non-breaking space, I see no benefit to ever removing non-breaking spaces. So what if you don't see the need for it, someone else obviously finds it useful and it is hurting you in no way. Even the added "cost" to Wikipedia as a whole is so minuscule as to be functionally none.--User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 14:26, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Editing Question for New User

Hello, I just got a new account with wikipedia. I was trying make an edit to a school on wikipedia by adding a name to it's Notable Alumni. I was able to add it, but wasn't able to place it in the correct place alphabetically. When I tried, the section with the other alumni names turned blue. Can you help me? Thank you. Peter Fleming 2601:642:C300:4A0:5955:434C:EBE4:31EC (talk) 08:45, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

• Hello there, and welcome to the Teahouse, hey, are you sure you are logged in? Please do confirm this, if you are having trouble logging in then you can just try and tell us what article you are trying to edit and we would assist you in doing this, if you are unable to login and you are sure you aren’t operating more than one account then you may find going here and requesting an account be created on your behalf to be pertinent. I’d personally handle it for you. Thank you for stopping by, we hope to see you again. Celestina007 (talk) 12:27, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

It would help if you say which article you tried to modify. The question above is the only edit visible in this IP-address edits history. Probably you edited when logged-in with your user account? --CiaPan (talk) 09:13, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Proposing new pages

Reading2019. I have just finished my History Masters at the University of Reading in England so know all about referencing. I want to know how I would go about producing a page on Beasts Before Us, a recently published book widely available in book stores across England on the evolution of mammals, or indeed its author, Elsa Panciroli. I have read this book. Thank you, Leeds2014Reading2019 Leeds2014Reading2019 (talk) 09:58, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

First you should make sure the book meets notabilty criteria, which means it needs at least two in-depth independent sources reporting on it. So far, I was able to find one source which might be usable, "The Runty Prehistoric Mammals That Outlasted the Dinosaurs" in New York Times. Once you have two good sources, you can make a draft page and work on your article there. Anton.bersh (talk) 10:17, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

With all due respect, writing an encyclopaedia article is not the same as writing an acadeic essay or dissertation. One major difference is that a Wikipedia article should not contain any argumentation or conclusions at all: it should summarise what the sources say, but it may not do any synthesis from them. I'm not saying you can't write a good Wikipedia article, but please don't assume that because you have just got a Masters therefore you can immediately write a good article. If you haven't already done so, please read your first article. --ColinFine (talk) 14:39, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Single citation, multiple quotations?

Can anyone point me at an example of a citation which contains multiple quotations? For example, if an article relied upon citations to two different sections of a single source book, in different parts of the article, and one wished to associate a quotation with each of the two citations, is there a way of formatting that? Thanks. Bill Woodcock (talk) 12:49, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Bwoodcock, Korean War is one example of having multiple references to the same book. To have multiple citations simply list them separately like you would different books, but with the same author. Sungodtemple (talk) 13:39, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Thank you! It looks like Template:Sfn#Additional_comments_or_quotes is what I was looking for. I kept noticing pages that had multiple full-length citations to the same sources, just to incorporate different quotes, and wanted to clean them up. Off I go to master sfn! Thanks again for the pointer. Bill Woodcock (talk) 14:19, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Resubmission in mainspace

I have submitted a draft for review but now I have already made 10 contributions. Can I somehow fasten the process and move it to mainspace ? Sjanapgs (talk) 12:59, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Welcome to Wikipedia, @Sjanapgs, the only way that you are able to speed up the process in Articles for Creation is that you add WikiProject tags, what you do to add them is when you look at the draft, the yellow box will have a list of information on creating an article. You expand the section saying improving the odds of a speedy review and press the button of add WikiProject tags. When you go to the page for adding the tags, you type the general categories that the page falls under and then click add tags. This method will not always work, however it can speed up the review as reviewers may review the page over another one if it falls under something of interest to them. Hopefully that answered your question, Zippybonzo (talk) 13:09, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

And as you describe yourself as a " marketing professional" on your user page, please make the required disclosure of paid editing. Theroadislong (talk) 13:58, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Sjanapgs, Hello and welcome to the Teahouse, please could you tell us what article that is? Secondly it appears you are barely 4 days old, that is a little too soon to decide to create articles. Penultimately you seem to be in a hurry what seems to be the problem? Is it something we can help you out with? If not, then please note that we have no deadline here, except for un-submitted Draft articles which haven’t been edited in 6 months. To the crux of your question, what I want you to understand is drafts that are submitted are thrown into a pool as opposed to a queue so basically Patience is the most imperative factor at the moment, whilst there are ways to hasten the process, it is my opinion that those are more theoretical than practical. You have fulfilled your obligations by submitting, it is then behoove of editors with the AFC pseudo perm to fulfill theirs but please have patience. Celestina007 (talk) 14:10, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

@Sjanapgs: Okay. You technically can move the page (assuming 4 days/10 edits). But probably not a good idea, per other comments, and making articles is hard, especially for a newcomer. – AssumeGoodWraith (talk | contribs) 14:21, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Citing Sources

I have a question about the correct way to cite sources. I am working on adding page numbers for a source for Atomic Clocks and the page numbering for the pdf starts at 74 pages. Should I use 77 for the third page in the citation or 3? ScientistBuilder (talk) 13:49, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

I would have thought if it says 77 on the page then say 77. If there are less than 77 pages in the actual PDF then this will be unambiguous anyway.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 13:54, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

How to cite a webpage that automatically downloads a pdf

I am hoping to add a citation for https://www.bipm.org/en/publications/mises-en-pratique second brochure. I would like to add a link to the document on the second mises en pratique definition but when I open the link it automatically downloads and the address is local to my computers file system instead of to a webpage on the bipm server. Is there a way to cite this specific document on the webpage to help people find the source easier instead of looking through all the documents on the webpage as a citation and finding the second document on the bottom? ScientistBuilder (talk) 14:06, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

How about this? You may want to juggle the parameters of the citation around to get the format you want. The main thing is that you need to peel all the cruft off the end of the URL, and let it end with ".pdf". Bill Woodcock (talk) 14:28, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

References

Manual of Style Dashes

I have a sentence from atomic clock: "These secondary frequency standards are accurate at the level of parts in 10−18; however, the uncertainties provided in the list are in the range of parts in 10−14 – 10−15 since they are limited by the linking to the caesium primary standard that currently (2018) defines the second." I am wondering if this is needs any improvement or could be worded with WP:MOS dash guidelines and if it would be appropriate to replace the dash with the word to. ScientistBuilder (talk) 14:31, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello, ScientistBuilder! According to MOS:RANGE, numbers such as this one here should be conntected with an en dash. Description words "between" and "from" are the exceptions, and if these words were present you would then use a "to" instead. Panini!^🥪 15:18, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

I think "in the range from parts in 10−14 to parts in 10−15" is better. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 15:28, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Someone is misunderstanding something but perhaps it is me. I would say "1 part in 10¹⁴ to 1 part in 10¹⁵" if the meaning is powers of 10. The code for this is:

"1 part in 10¹⁴ to 1 part in 10¹⁵" but I don't know how the visual editor does this. Thincat (talk) 16:02, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Oh! Pardon me, I thought you were referring to the first 10−18 instance, and I didn't even notice the second one. ScientistBuilder, through my interpretation of the MOS, I would leave it as is. The MOS doesn't say too much about this case, but what it does say is to at least put a space between the numbers, to differentiate it from the other en dashes. Panini!^🥪 16:10, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

sounds good. ScientistBuilder (talk) 16:11, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, I noticed that the exponents were actually being superscripted, but I just copied it over in my reply to avoid the original poster not noticing the changes I was suggesting. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 16:13, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

how do i check if i should write a article on a notable site?

im thinking about writing a article on a website called Social Media TestDrive. i have checked, and it meets all three criteria. but how do i check if i should write an article since it meets the criteria? -just a quick reminder,Im really bad at this(talk)- 16:00, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Im really bad at this, hi! Well if you conclude the subject is WP:NOTABLE, I suggest making it a draft so you can improve the article more before publishing. To do so, on desktop, search "Draft:Social Media Test Drive". See the redlink? Click it, then write the article. Then publish it. But if you want to publish it to the mainspace directly, do the same thing but without "Draft:", although I suggest not to do this in case it's actually not notable. GeraldWL 16:10, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

If you think something is notable enough, go ahead and start writing a draft in the draft space (Draft:TestDrive). Once your draft is submitted for review other people can decide if they think it's not notable enough. ― Levi_OP^Talk 16:13, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

thanks for the advice! just submitted the first draft -just a quick reminder,Im really bad at this(talk)- 18:12, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

@Im really bad at this: I can already tell you your draft is going to be denied right now. One paragraph and two sources aren't enough to merit an article. I suggest you add more information about the subject as well as add some more sources. I also would suggest you look at some already established good articles similar to your topic to see the layout of the article and what they might include. ― Levi_OP^Talk 18:35, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Closing merge discussion

Hello! So a merge discussion I started is now over 10 days old. I'm attempting to request closure (I know I can close it myself however I'd like to make sure it's done properly) however I'm not exactly sure how. THe instructions at the requests for closure page don't seem to make any mention of merge requests. For those wondering, the discussion is here (yes I know i can do a wikilink but the title is rather long so this is easier). ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 16:04, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

What you are looking for, Blaze Wolf, appears to be WP:MERGECLOSE. Follow steps 4 and 5, or, if you'd prefer to watch someone do it before you can confidently do so, I can also merge the articles for you if you'd like. Panini!^🥪 16:13, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Technically step 4 gives you incorrect instructions, telling you to use the discussion top and bottom templates instead of archive top and archive bottom @Panini!: Yes I'd like for you to do that for me. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 16:18, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

It looks like it's already been redirected and there wasn't much to salvage anyways (most of the Internet Channel article either was copied from the Wii Menu article or was poorly sourced with blogposts), so I've closed the discussion and moved an additional paragraph of content to the Wii Menu article. Panini!^🥪 17:05, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

@Panini!: Sounds good! Thanks! ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 17:40, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Closing a RM

(Asking this question in line with my previous one since they cover similar topics) Hello again! So there was a discussion at Talk:Ford F-150 Lightning (electric pickup)#Requested move 6 February 2022 about moving the article to a different title. It's been a week since the RM started and there seems to be consensus to support the move. Would I be able to go about closing this RM or do I have to have an admin close it? ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 20:36, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

@Blaze Wolf: since the pages with those titles already exist, I'm pretty sure that an admin will have to close it. >>> Wgullyn.talk(); 21:36, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

@Wguyllyn: Ah ok. So where would I Go to request closure? ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 00:37, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

@Wgullyn: (whoops mistyped your username). ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 14:51, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

@Blaze Wolf: it's already listed at Wikipedia:Requested_moves#Elapsed_listings, so it'll probably be closed within the next few days. >>> Wgullyn.talk(); 14:53, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

@Wgullyn: Ah ok. Sounds good, thanks! ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 15:29, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Blaze Wolf; No, wherever you a party, you shouldn't be performing any such actions; be it a RM or an AfD. Closures should always be left to those who are uninvolved, preferably those who can perform such actions, like page-movers and admins in this case. ─ The Aafī ^(talk) 16:04, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

@TheAafi: Alright I figured that was the case. I wasn't sure if I could close it if the consensus was obvious and then go to the place for requesting a move that I can't do myself for technical reasons was something I would be allowed to do. Thanks for telling me! ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 16:08, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Where do I express concerns about a draft Article for Creation?

Draft:Ecology_Crossroads_(Organization) has been submitted for review. I suspect that the newly-registered author has an undeclared COI and that the creation of the article is a response to the proposed deletion of a subsidiary organization (Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Globcal_International). Where exactly should I bring my concerns to the attention of a reviewer? Barry Wom (talk) 17:11, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

You can use Template:AfC comment at the top of the article (right underneath the big box at the top) - {{afc comment|1=your comment here}} renders " Comment: your comment here".
Additionally, you should check out WP:COI/N, the conflict of interest noticeboard. casualdejekyll 17:17, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

@Casualdejekyll:, I wouldn't worry. The AfC people are a canny bunch when it comes to COI and sourcing, and will probably pick up on what's going on. It looks a bit of a marginal case anyway. I see only one supporting source of any merit, and that one (Washington Post) doesn't paint a great picture of notability. If it gets accepted, you can always send it to AfD. Given the shenanigans at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Globcal_International I'd be half expecting strange things to happen over this creation anyway. Elemimele (talk) 17:33, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Oh, sorry, pinged the wrong person, Barry Wom! Elemimele (talk) 17:34, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Discussing a Wikipedia Guide Page

I would like to talk about the Wikipedia:No original research's primary research guidelines. If I would like to discuss something related to a Wikipedia guideline, what is the best way to do so? ScientistBuilder (talk) 17:20, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Welcome back, ScientistBuilder! If you want to discuss something about the NOR policy, you can reach out to the users who are active in this field by leaving a message on the policies talk page. Of course, you can also always reach out to us as well. Panini!^🥪 17:24, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

... and if you have a specific example around your atomic-clock work or wherever, then you can also use the talk-pages of the articles to discuss anything you're proposing to write, if you feel it might be taken as OR, or anything that you think is OR that you think should be removed. Elemimele (talk) 17:35, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Content questions on politically charged article

Hello, While I registered an account several years ago, I have not used it in a while. Upon my return, I've been looking through the pages at WP:CSB flagged as needing attention and noticed some possible problems on Neocolonialism. First, it's a philosophical and political idea but seems to be taken for granted as true/valid within the article's context (i.e., no alternative interpretations are offered), which could be a NPOV violation even though most of the views offered are sourced. (The section "Catholic Church" is not sourced, though it quotes two living people.) Concerns have also been raised on the article talk page about WP:COATRACKing of criticism of American foreign policy that have gone unanswered in almost 6 months. I'm just not sure what to do here, because any attempt to be bold and "fix" it could very well come across as POV pushing on my own part, especially without sufficient experience to make those sorts of judgment calls. ChromaNebula (talk) 17:48, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello, ChromaNebula. The place to discuss your concerns is l Talk:Neocolonialism. Be sure to bring high quality reliable sources to the discussion. If the previous discussion has been inactive for six months, I suggest that you begin a new section at the bottom. Cullen328 (talk) 18:53, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Translation

I am working on improving an article on Wolfram mathematica. I would like to import text from the German article. I am not sure if I need to have 500 edits as an extended confirmed editor to use Content Translation. How do I make use of this article in German to add to the English article? ScientistBuilder (talk) 17:51, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

@ScientistBuilder: As far as I am aware, only creating new articles with the content translation tool is restricted to EC users. Wether or not you use the content translation tool, please be aware that translations should be of a high quality and must comply with all english Wikipedia policies and guidelines, particularely on sourcing and on BLP content. Please do not use machine translation tools, most often the results are garbage. Please see WP:Translation for more information. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:58, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

My first serious efforts for WP were translation from German, and I'm sure that was before I had 500 edits. The important thing is that you acknowledge the translated material as described at Help:Translation, and follow the guidelines there. It is super-important that the translation is of a good quality. Machine translations are often really dubious. The problem is that they deal with all the obvious stuff very well, which lures the user into a false sense of security: they break down on technical stuff, subtleties and ambiguous situations. If you want to use a machine translation, you will need either a combination of technical knowledge and willingness to go back to the sources, or a good knowledge of German yourself (sufficient to translate without the machine) in order to make sure the machine translation is accurate. But good luck, and happy editing! Translation is a very useful activity. Elemimele (talk) 18:15, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

ScientistBuilder, I do a lot of translations, mostly from French but also from German occasionally. I never use the Content Translation tool. Feel free to contact me on my Talk page for more about this. Also: attributing the translation in the edit summary is a strict requirement: see WP:TFOLWP. Mathglot (talk) 09:28, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Wiki pages non-english

Hello, i want to create an english article from this Amharic Wikipedia article https://am.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E1%8A%A3%E1%89%A0%E1%88%AB_%E1%88%9E%E1%88%8B can i just go ahead? Can i also use the pic there, on English wikipedia? YonasJH (talk) 18:19, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

If you speak the language well enough, and you think you could translate the article, I would suggest reading Help:Translation for a guide on how to translate. ― Levi_OP^Talk 18:37, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Along with the above, avoid using machine translations like Google Translate or deepL. While deepL is more accurate than Translate (from my experience), it still isn't as accurate as having someone who speaks both the language it's being translated from and the language it's being translated into (in this case English) translate it. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 18:48, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Courtesy ping: YonasJH —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:10, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

To answer your question about the image, it looks as if the image on the Amharic Wikipedia article is hosted there, and not on Wikimedia Commons. To use an image in a BLP on the English Wikipedia the image would need to be on Wikimedia Commons (and therefore released under an appropriate licence). A non free use rationale is not acceptable for living people, and an image hosted locally on another language's Wikipedia can not be used here on enwiki. --David Biddulph (talk) 22:23, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

@David Biddulph: missing a not in that sentence? Mathglot (talk) 09:24, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Indeed. "Not" added now. Thanks for pointing it out. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:11, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

COI Request Related to Updating for Tag Removal; Best Route to Suggest an Update?

Hello WikipediaTeaHouse. This is a COI request to address issues with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anomali, which I am an employee of. There are tags present at the top of the page I'd like to have removed. As a COI, what is the best way to suggest changes to bring it inline with Wikipedia standards to have the tags removed? In reading through responses made by https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mhawk10 and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Quetstar, I believe I can suggest changes needed but am unsure of how to propose them. Is the best route to reach out to one of them directly via their talk page with the suggestions or to simply go in and make them and then remove the tags, if I believe they are no longer relevant?

The tags in question: {{Cleanup rewrite}} {{Advert}} {{More citations needed}} {{Unreliable sources}}

JWF+Anomali (talk) 18:48, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

@JWF+Anomali: To make a COI edit request, place {{Edit request}} on Talk:Anomali. As a paid editor, you should not make changes directly to the article. Instead, copy the article to your sandbox and make the changes there, and then link to the sandbox in your request. See WP:COI for more general information. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 19:15, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

@Sdkb: - Thanks for your help. To clarify. I will not make any changes directly to the article. After making the changes in my sandbox as advised, do I just need to add a link to the sandbox or add all the changes to the talk page as well?

JWF+Anomali (talk) 20:00, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

@JWF+Anomali: Just adding a link to the sandbox should normally be enough. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 20:16, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

@Sdkb: - Thanks. I was also advised by another editor to add a disclosure notice in my talk page prior to suggesting any edits, which I did. Can you advise if I did this correctly? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JWF%2BAnomali

JWF+Anomali (talk) 20:24, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

@JWF+Anomali: Yep, you did that correctly. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 20:38, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Dot Product

I am wondering if it acceptable to replace the definition of the dot product's equal sign with a triple bar. I looked for a mention of it in the MOS for Math and want to make sure its okay. I have made a few changes to the Dot product page. ScientistBuilder (talk) 18:52, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

@ScientistBuilder, a good place to ask questions like this is at the Mathematics Project page, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics. StarryGrandma (talk) 19:01, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Done. ScientistBuilder (talk) 19:03, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Fair use images

Hello fellow host, I have a question about fair use images. For the article List of The Book of Boba Fett characters, you can see the top image is a collage of 4 images. I was told at the Commons Village Pump that I would need to provide the fair use information for each image. I thought I did so, but I got a message from B bot on my talk page saying that because the images are orphan files they will be deleted. So how do I go about providing the fair use information for each picture in the collage? ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 19:24, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

@Kaleeb18: It looks like the reason the files are up for deletion is because the individual files themselves aren't being used on the article anymore but instead a single file containing each individual one. Not sure if the individual files can be kept with the reasoning that they are used in the single file or not, but my guess would be no. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 19:33, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, I thought I had to do something similar to File:Cincinnati Photomontage V1.jpg, so I listed the photos and my edit got reverted so. ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 19:41, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Does anyone else know what to do? ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 01:44, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Draft review

Can someone go through this draft and tell me if it's ready to be submitted? [6] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Toofllab (talk • contribs) 21:18, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Without looking at the sources, I can tell you it is not. We are not interested in a rerun of the Seigenthaler incident. Every biographical claim that could potentially be challenged for any justifiable reason MUST be cited to an independent, in-depth, non-routine source with editorial control that corroborates the claim or (if no such sources can be found) removed. This is a hard requirement when writing content about living or recently-departed people on Wikipedia and is NOT NEGOTIABLE. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 21:26, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

@Toofllab: It looks to me like there aren't enough sources on the subject, and it's likely to be declined. Almost all of the references are about their company's investments, not the person. The only source that actually mentions the subject in the title is an interview, and therefore a primary source, and should not be used often. >>> Wgullyn.talk(); 21:27, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Changing MAX to StanRTA

hello, i’m a project associate helping with the rebrand for Stanislaus Regional Transit Authority (StanRTA). Modesto Area Express was absorbed into StanRTA. The folks at StanRTA want to edit the MAX wikipedia page. They want the name changed from MAX to StanRTA. Is there a way to do this without having to create a brand new page for folks to be redirected to? 2600:1012:B069:CC02:352C:3159:CD92:3829 (talk) 22:12, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello. After making the required declarations for a paid editor, you should raise an edit request (see that link for the details) on the talk page Talk:Modesto Area Express, specifying the changes you want making as precisely as possible, and providing reliable published sources, preferably ones independent of the Authority. ColinFine (talk) 22:37, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Luke the Evangelist was an ethnic Syrian, this is an unignorable fact

Here are all the sources: https://www.nytimes.com/2001/10/16/world/body-of-st-luke-gains-credibility.html https://www.irishtimes.com/news/it-s-gospel-dna-analysis-proves-st-luke-is-who-they-say-he-is-1.332299 http://hypotyposeis.org/weblog/2008/02/dna-testing-the-relics-of-st-luke-the-evangelist.html https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC60893/ https://www.igenea.com/en/famous-people/luke https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/dna-analysis-supports-syr/ Send me my wording of the edit and I'll recover it right away. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:8108:9340:1B30:F824:610D:BA3D:2C53 (talk) 22:32, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

The place for discussion of potential changes to the article is Talk:Luke the Evangelist. --David Biddulph (talk) 22:36, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

reevert

'Hi, is there a faster way to revert people's edits , rather thn undo?? 6millionarticles (talk) 23:19, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

@6millionarticles: there are two ways that edits can be reverted faster -- using Twinkle and rollback (though both need more experience than you have). However, as someone with only two edits, I don't see why that is necessary. >>> Wgullyn.talk(); 23:29, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. There is a faster option, which is installing Twinkle, when you have reached autoconfirmed status. If you are experienced enough, you may be promoted to a faster reverting option, Rollback, where you can be signed up here. Severestorm28 23:30, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Note that both rollback and Twinkle should only ever be used on edits that are obviously unconstructive. Using them to try and control content is grounds to have them revoked. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 02:08, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

6millionarticles, accuracy in reverting is much more important than speed. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not an MMPORG. I have has access to rollback for quite a few years, but I use it rarely. Unless vandalism is glaringly obvious, I take at least a few moments to evaluate the edit and sometimes a few minutes. And if I decide to revert it, I leave an edit summary explaining why. Cullen328 (talk) 03:04, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Standall Quote Sentence

The Atomic clock article has a section I am wondering about: "The NIST-F2 caesium fountain clock operated by NIST was officially launched in April 2014, to serve as a new U.S. civilian frequency and time standard, along with the NIST-F1 standard. The planned uB performance level of NIST-F2 is . "At this planned performance level the NIST-F2 clock will not lose a second in at least 300 million years." NIST-F2 was designed using lessons learned from NIST-F1. The NIST-F2 key advance compared to the NIST-F1 is that the vertical flight" I am wondering if the standallone quote starting with "At this planned..." should be in another sentence. I looked for information on Wikipedia:Manual of Style on quotes, but there is a lot of guidelines around quotes so I wasn't able to find it. Is this okay or could it be improved and changed for the better? ScientistBuilder (talk) 01:16, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

@ScientistBuilder, since that's just a statistic, I wouldn't put it in a quote at all. Just paraphrase it in our own words. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 02:15, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

I didn't put this in quotes. I am asking if the fact that the quote is freestanding.

The quote is its own sentence. ScientistBuilder (talk) 02:55, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

@ScientistBuilder: I'm not quite understanding your question, because "I am asking if the fact that the quote is freestanding" is not a complete sentence. But Sdkb is saying that the quote should be paraphrased. I have done this. CodeTalker (talk) 04:53, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Plain Text

Is there a way to extract only plain text from a Wikipedia article and no math or science formatting, images, HTML, or another specially formats? I am working on pasting text into a translator. I would also like to find only text when reading articles out loud for Spoken Wikipedia Project. ScientistBuilder (talk) 01:51, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Maybe try using the source editor? It'd allow you to selectively get the textual content while stripping any formatting, images, and templates from it. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 02:07, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

@ScientistBuilder, hmm, good question. There's not a simple way I know of beyond just copying and pasting. You can avoid copying reference numbers with this CSS. If that's not enough, you can ask at the technical village pump and someone there might be able to help. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 02:12, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

@ScientistBuilder: It won't solve much of your problem, but you might want to try getting a more visual-friendly layout for pages. Years ago I installed a script that reduced a lot of the elements for narrating.

Code

/* Toggle VF  */

// timestamp  10 Jun 2018  1603


var currpgName = mw.config.get( 'wgPageName' );
var currURL = document.location.href;
var prntable = currURL.endsWith("&printable=yes");
var torf = prntable.toString();
var myFlag;   // must be defined here
var currFlag;

function chkmyFlag() {
 
 	try{
    	currFlag=window.localStorage.getItem("myFlag"); 
 	} catch (e) {
 	}

    if (currFlag=="VF" && torf=="true")
    { 
    nullFlag();

    dotogg();
    
    }
}


chkmyFlag();

function nullFlag() {
	try {
		window.localStorage.setItem("myFlag", "null");
	} catch(e) {
	}
}
function setFlag()  {
	try {
		window.localStorage.setItem("myFlag", "VF");
	} catch (e) {
	}
}
function clrFlag()  {
	try {
		window.localStorage.clear();
	} catch(e){
	}
}

//  Printable VF Button

mw.loader.using( 'mediawiki.util', function () {
$( document ).ready( function() {
 
  var prntVF = mw.util.addPortletLink ( 'p-coll-print_export', 'https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=' + currpgName + '&printable=yes', "Printable VF", "p-VF", "Voice-friendly version for printing [b]","b"); 	

    $( prntVF ).click( function() {
 			setFlag();
			});
	

    			});
});  	


// Toggle VF Button

var next="center";
mw.loader.using( 'mediawiki.util', function () {
$( document ).ready( function() {
	var ToggVF = mw.util.addPortletLink( "p-tb", "#", "Toggle VF", "t-Toggle VF","Convert to Voice-Friendly format[4]",'4');
// alert('next is: ' + next);
	$( ToggVF ).click( function() {
			dotogg();
     
		if (next=="center") {firstHeading.style.textAlign = "center";
    		$( ".Template-Fact" ).hide(); next="left"; }
	else
         {firstHeading.style.textAlign = "left";
			$( ".Template-Fact" ).show(); next="center";}
		    	 
	} );
} );

} );

—Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:26, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

@ScientistBuilder: Keep in mind that most web browsers have a "reader view" or something similar. Essentially, this displays a web page as just plain text, without any formatting, navigation or other paraphernalia. So you could use that to display a Wikipedia article, then simply copy and paste the text from the browser to your translation tool. Mike Marchmont (talk) 13:33, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Expanding a Stub into an Article

 SentToCoventry (talk) 03:51, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

@SentToCoventry: See WP:Article development. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 04:07, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

how to make new page and get approvel

how to create new page and get approvel for same?I have written some of authentic pages but not able to get the approvel for same Umarpatelw (talk) 06:46, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

@Umarpatelw: It’s very hard. See WP:YFA. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 06:55, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

You have had two drafts declined for not having adequate references to confirm a bank's and a person's notability, and then you skipped using the draft/review process to create a person article in mainspace which has now been nominated for deletion for inadequate references. Learn more about what is required for referencing, especially for biographies of living people (WP:BLP). David notMD (talk) 14:27, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Linking to another Wikipedia article

What is the wikitext for linking to another Wikipedia article? For example, if I am writing about South Africa and I reference Johannesburg, what wikitext do I use on the word Johannesburg to make it turn blue so that when it is clicked on, it transitions to the page on Johannesburg? 102.132.134.49 (talk) 09:00, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

It's simple, just enclose it in paired square brackets, like this: [[Johannesburg]], which results in this: Johannesburg. You might find this page useful: Help:Cheatsheet. Mathglot (talk) 09:16, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Additionally, [[Wiki|Example]] will display Example with a link to Wiki. – AssumeGoodWraith (talk | contribs) 09:36, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

One thing you can do to remember that is [[goes|shows]] meaning you put what it links (goes) to first and you put what it shows second. ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 13:41, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Reply

How to reply any talk page messages? 2001:44B8:41C6:F700:48:BBBA:CD3E:5971 (talk) 10:24, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. All article talk pages can be edited just like any other page; you may click "edit" at the top of the page, or in a section header, to reply to a message. As I have done here- replies should be placed underneath the message you are replying to, indented with a colon. 331dot (talk) 10:26, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Also after every time you leave a message you must sign your message with your signature (username and date) by putting 4 tildes ~~~~ at the end of your message. ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 13:50, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Size of the logo on the company's page

Hi dear Wiki editors! Pls can you help me to understand how I can adjust the dimensions of the logo in order to let it be displayed fully when it is displayed as a featured page on another wiki page?Fairy Bliss (talk) 10:45, 15 February 2022 (UTC) Fairy Bliss (talk) 10:45, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello @Fairy Bliss:. Could you provide example where logo is displayed incorrectly (or where you want to use it)? I might be able to help you if I can see the problem and verify that my fix actually fixes it. Also, just to check: are you in any way affiliated with Silk Way West Airlines? Anton.bersh (talk) 11:54, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Dear Anton, thanks for your prompt response. Yes, I'm a Digital Marketing Specialist at SWWA. I'm trying to create a wiki page for the CEO of the company and when I add the wiki page of the company on his page, its preview with the logo is cut and logo is not shown fully. That is the page with logo Silk Way West Airlines Regarding affiliation, I have received a message stating that this is not allowed. I did not know this, as I'm new on Wiki. I guess, I just have to add a signature showing that I'm a paid editor, right? Thank you for your support.

Fairy Bliss Please read WP:PAID for information on how to disclose. Wikipedia has articles, not "wiki pages". 331dot (talk) 12:12, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Proving musical notability

Hi all,

I am trying to set a separate page up for a member of a band that has its own wikipedia page. By all accounts I did not originally fulfil the musical notability criteria. As a novice, I suspect that part of the problem was that I copy and pasted much of the original wikipedia entry, not through malice, more through naivety. I have since rewritten (read:hacked) and submitted the article, with new hyperlinks to Irish national newspapers.

The url is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Enda_Mulloy

I now note that I get a warning saying that my submission redirects to the band. Can anyone help? Each day, I discover that I am less intelligent that I thought.

Many thanks in advance of a reply. 94.118.100.188 (talk) 10:50, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

You see that warning because Enda Mulloy is a redirect to The BibleCode Sundays (you can see it here). You do not need to do anything about that because your draft reviewer will override the redirect during article publication. However, I looked at your draft and I think it is not ready yet for publication/review. It might pass, but I think chances are still less than 50/50, I would recommend adding more in-depth reliable independent sources. Anton.bersh (talk) 12:04, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

It is essential that you address the concerns mentioned in the first review. As far as I can see, the current draft is actually smaller than the one already declined, so there is no chance of it being accepted and you are wasting the time of the reviewers. In addition, all the facts stated in the "Background" section must be capable of being verified by readers. It is a strict policy for biographies of living people that all facts be verifiable and that there be no original research (by which is meant information possibly known by the author of the article but not stated in reliable sources) . Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:13, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Redirects and Hatnotes

Hello there is this article I wrote Draft:Eric_Omondi who is a Comedian it has a redirect to another article Eric Johana Omondi who is a footballer. Help me remove the redirect. Thank you. PushaWasha (talk) 11:05, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello PushaWasha and welcome to the Teahouse. If and when your draft is approved, the reviewing editor will take care of that. You don't need to worry about it at this stage.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 11:36, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Some suggestions to improve Draft:QOVES Studio?

Hello all. Please suggest me how to further improve Draft:QOVES Studio?Ameen Akbar (talk) 13:47, 15 February 2022 (UTC) Ameen Akbar (talk) 13:47, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

You are a paid editor working on an article about a client company, and you initially skipped the Articles for Creation process to create the article in main space. It is on you to be competent. David notMD (talk) 14:41, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Examples: Ref #12 does not mention QOVES and #13 is barely a mention. David notMD (talk) 15:16, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Is looking for sources to add to un-/under-sourced articles confirmation bias?

If I come across an article that is lacking sources and I go and try to find sources that support the existing claims, would that be confirmation bias? The claims aren't necessarily my own, but it kinda feels a little wrong for me to intentionally search for evidence for specific claims, any claims, and just use those sources to support the claim. I suppose in looking for sources if I come across opposing sources, I could add (and source) the opposing evidence as well, or just not add a source to the original claim, but I'm not sure what would be the best thing to do. Rourensu (talk) 16:03, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

@Rourensu: Hello Rour! I don't think looking for a source for things that are lacking a source would be confirmation bias (In fact, that's the entire reason why tags like {{cn}} exist, to indicate what needs a source so editors can find one). However if you find reliable, secondary sources that go against the claim you are trying to source, then it would be wise to adjust the statement so that it matches what sources are saying. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 16:05, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Broodiness: abnormal/normal behavior in hens?

This question relates to the article "List of abnormal behaviors in animals" link: [[7]]

In this article, we are given a list of abnormal behaviors in animals, and on this list, we see the behavior "Broodiness". The article states that broodiness is "(...) considered abnormal in modern commercial egg-laying hens". The reference to this is the article "The Effect of Certain Groups of Environmental Factors upon the Expression of Broodiness" by William H. Burrows and Theodore C. Byerly (note that the article is from 1937!). I am not able to find any evidence in this scientific article that states that broodiness in modern commercial egg-laying hens (or in any other hens or chickens) is considered abnormal behavior. Is there any reliable reference that actually does investigate broodiness as an abnormal behavior? How can Wikipedia claim that broodiness is an abnormal behavior when there is no scientific evidence on this? 130.225.188.130 (talk) 16:20, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. This question is best asked at the article talk page, Talk:List of abnormal behaviours in animals. If the source does not state what is claimed, it should be removed. 331dot (talk) 16:32, 15 February 2022 (UTC)