Wikipedia:Teahouse

AlanM1, 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

Only Talk page showing up on Google search

I recently created an article ("Carey R. Dunne") and now, when I search for it on Google using its title, the link that surfaces is the TALK page only. Same thing when I search using Wikipedia's search function. Can someone help me so that the Article, not the Talk page, is prioritized and shows up first? Thank you! Llmeyers (talk) 21:45, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

@Llmeyers: Welcome to the Teahouse. New pages aren't indexed by search engines like Google until a new pages patroller reviews it or 90 days have passed, whichever comes first. I didn't have any issues with getting to the article via Wikipedia's search bar. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:53, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

Got it, thank you! For some reason I thought it had been reviewed by a patroller... Llmeyers (talk) 22:02, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

@Llmeyers: Not sure why that is happening to you, but when I search I get this Carey_R._Dunne RudolfRed (talk) 21:55, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

Interesting, thanks RudolfRed. It seems like others aren't seeing what I'm seeing. Will circle back... Llmeyers (talk) 22:03, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

In case anyone else has intel on this problem, please lmk! Llmeyers (talk) 22:10, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

I thought that Talk pages were not indexed by search engines.?.? 73.127.147.187 (talk) 07:40, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

I thought so too, but if you Google "Carey R Dunne", ONLY the Talk page shows up. Any help from an admin or patroller? Llmeyers (talk) 14:53, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

Doesn't happen for me. Would you mind linking your search results Llmeyers? ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 14:55, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

Yes, here are the results -- https://www.google.com/search?q=carey+r+dunne+wiki&oq=carey+r+&aqs=chrome.0.69i59l3j69i57j0i512j69i60l3.1165j0j9&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8 Llmeyers (talk) 14:57, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

Am I missing something? Llmeyers (talk) 14:58, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

@Llmeyers: As others have stated above it will take some time for the article to appear in a google search. As to why the talk page appears when you add "wiki" or "wikipedia" to the search result I'm not sure since talk pages shouldn't appear in search engines (unless it's on a wikipedia mirror). ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 14:59, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

Okay, thanks Blaze Wolf. Kind of a mystery about the talk page. I guess I will wait a while and check back to see if the article, rather than the talk page, shows up. Llmeyers (talk) 15:01, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

In the article's "Options" section, I set it as "Default indexing" Llmeyers (talk) 14:59, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

Huh? Articles don't have any options section... I'm confused as to what you mean. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 15:01, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

@Llmeyers, is "Options" from a gadget or add-in? 73.127.147.187 (talk) 03:40, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Not that I know of!! I click the three lines at top right --> categories, page settings, etc. Is that an add in? I didn't think so. Llmeyers (talk) 19:39, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

All the other pages I've edited have the same settings. I don't think it's a gadget or add-in issue. Why would it be showing up instead of the Article? Llmeyers (talk) 19:48, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Possibly the wrong venue for this. See WP:VPT for hopefully better explanation. Mathglot (talk) 22:33, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Moved to WP:VPT § Talk page appears in Google search results

I want to nominate Led Zeppelin as a daily article

I've waited for 17 years for maybe it to pop up on the daily but to no avail. Then I see Lorde and I feel some kind of injustice for one of the greatest rock bands of all time. I thought for something in their 50 year anniversary or the 40th year of Bonzo's death. If it's good enough for Lorde it should be good enough for Led Zeppelin.

Thanks C Cdope666 (talk) 03:11, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Cdope666. Wikipedia has two top levels of assessed articles, which are Good articles which are very good, and Featured articles, which are the best. Only Featured articles are eligible for "Today's featured article" on the main page. Lorde is a Featured article and therefore eligible. Led Zeppelin is a Good article and therefore ineligible at this time. You could work to upgrade the rating of the article if you want, but that involves a rigorous peer review process that could take weeks or months. You would need to be thoroughly conversant with the reliable source literature about Led Zeppelin, which currently has 235 references. If you are willing to do the work, go for it, but be aware that it will be a lot of work, and you will have to convince every active editor who watches that page that your edits are beneficial. But if you succeed, it will likely be "Today's featured article" at some time in the future. Cullen328 (talk) 03:29, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

Led Zeppelin made GA in 2011, and then was a FA candidate in 2012 and 2013, but was not promoted. David notMD (talk) 06:13, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

That's fascinating. . I wonder why it wasn't promoted:(. . :) THX Cdope666 (talk) 07:20, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

THX for chatting. . It all seems subjective considering it's up to Wiki's editors (first line in FA). . :) Cdope666 (talk) 07:18, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

You can read the most recent FA review at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Led Zeppelin/archive4, Cdope666. Of course there's always some element of editor judgment involved, but articles are assessed against a list of criteria. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:34, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

The article has undergone more than 2,500 edits since the last FA review! That does not necessarily mean better, but it is much longer and with more references. David notMD (talk) 07:37, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks Larry!!:) Cdope666 (talk) 22:19, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Cdope666, and welcome to the Teahouse. It sounds as if you think that being the subject of a Featured Article is somehow an honour or a tribute to the subject. It is not. Wikipedia articles are not in any way for the benefit (or the detriment) of their subjects. "Having an article" (a phrase I usually avoid, for just this reason) means only two things: enough has been published about the subject to meet the criteria for notability, and one or more Wikipedia editors have been interested enough to create the article. It says nothing about whether the subject is worthy or laudable - indeed, we have articles on many subjects that are neither. The same applies a fortiori to a Featured Article. ColinFine (talk) 10:54, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi Colin and thanks for your reply and greetings. I've loved Wiki for almost 17 years and I always see articles that are obviously picked by the young generation that runs Wiki. To me having that Bronze star and being on the front page is special. Stupid I know. Many of things have been published. . most from 4 to 5 decades ago. Led Zeppelin is one of the highest selling bands and held attendance records for years. I really like one of the editors to do this. :):):) Cdope666 (talk) 22:31, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Cdope. I don't know where your evidence is that "the young generation ... runs Wiki": that may be the case, but I doubt it. This is a cooperative project. If you want to see something happen, you can make it happen either by doing it yourself, or by inspiring others to want to do it. One way to do the latter is to post at (say) WT:WikiProject Rock music, saying something like "I would love to improve Led Zeppelin to FA status: does anybody want to work with me on that?" Talking about "injustice", or what should be is not likely to inspire many people. But share your enthusiasm, and it just might. ColinFine (talk) 22:30, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

How can i get a pages quality changed

Hi there i have put some work into the page Breviceps fuscus and believe it is now a C class article on the quality scale as it has a similar layout Adelophryne maranguapensis and some other articles which are C-class do you believe that Breviceps fuscus is of c class quality and if it is how can i get it changed to c class Massimo510 (talk) 07:39, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

@Massimo510 Until you get into GA/FA territory, these quality marks are informal and anyone is allowed to change them, but changes should of course follow the linked quality scales. So you can do it yourself, or try asking at the talkpage of one of the wikiprojects mentioned on the article talkpage. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:24, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Appears you decided to upgrade from Start to C-class. David notMD (talk) 11:29, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Possible copyright infringement: You uploaded an image of the frog https://greensavers.sapo.pt/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/sapo.jpg from Green Savers on 26 February. How is that not a copyright infringement? At Wikimedia Commons there are four images of Breviceps fuscus, including the one you used, and the other three have been nominated for deletion on 4 May 2022. David notMD (talk) 11:39, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

And now, this one has been nominated, too. David notMD (talk) 13:49, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

@Massimo510 Did you steal screenshot of all the images you uploaded to Wikimedia and claimed were under a CC-BY-SA licence? I have nominated others for deletion. Please don't do that again unless you are clear the image has been properly licenced, or if you took it yourself, of course. Nick Moyes (talk) 15:50, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Oh Gosh im so sorry about this i uploaded those images a while ago before i knew much about copyright and probably should have checked or deleted them — Preceding unsigned comment added by Massimo510 (talk • contribs) 05:53, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Posting first new page

I could use a little help creating my first Wikipedia page.

I have been writing and editing a page called, Leona's Sister Gerri in Sandbox. I would like to move the page from Sandbox to a regular Wiki page. I understand that this will take a while for the page to be reviewed and hopefully approved.

After I made revisions to the page, I tapped the "publish" button.

Is that all I need to do, or is there another step?

In order to get the page up and running as quickly as possible, I would like to submit the page now although I would still like to make revisions and additions of new material.

Does my making revisions put the process of approval back, or can they happen simultaneously? FilmFiend (talk) 15:44, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, FilmFiend. You have not yet submitted Draft:Leona's Sister Gerri for review, and I strongly suggest that you wait a while and do more work on it first. You do not have any properly formatted references, but just a list of bare URLs at the end. Read Referencing for beginners and convert those URLs into properly formatted inline citations. Then, go to WP:AFC to learn how to submit the draft for review. Continuing work on a draft after submission should not have an effect on how long the review will take. Cullen328 (talk) 15:55, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

I have moved the content to Draft:Leona's Sister Gerri where you can continue to work on it. In due course , when it is properly sourced, you may submit it for review which, if successful, will publish the article to mainspace.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   15:48, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

I have to say, your article reads rather like a (favorable) magazine review--or perhaps even a promotional press release. I have nothing to do with deciding what Drafts pass muster, but from what I've seen, I think you'll need to edit out such phrases and expressions as:

• ... approaches one of the most divisive topics ...
• ... tells the dramatic story of ...
• Reprinted thousands of times ...
• ... this grisly photo ...
• ... pro-choice icon.
• Powerfully addressing issues of ...
• ... video is a moving portrait of ...

There are a bunch more wrapped in quotes; they might be all right if you properly attribute the quote, but right now, there is not a clue where the quote came from.

There are no sources, but lots of "External" links (a link to a Wikipedia article is not external) largely to things that would be meant to promote the film. One could suspect that your goal in this endeavor is not so much to improve Wikipedia as an information reference, but to "get the message out" in a timely way, given recent goings-on in the news. That's something for blogs or magazine articles, not for Wikipedia or for pretty much any other encyclopedia. Uporządnicki (talk) 16:16, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice. I'll work on the draft. FilmFiend (talk) 16:38, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

@FilmFiend, just a friendly nudge to check out WP:COI, as you will likely need to be very familiar with it if you are going edit articles which you have a Conflict of Interest in (although the best advice, generally, is don't edit with a COI!). HenryTemplo (talk) 17:31, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

FilmFiend, there's a copyright violation at the end of the opening (lead) section. If you want to quote material written by someone else, you must attribute it. I think the quoted material is from here, but it's behind a paywall so I can't check. Maproom (talk) 18:38, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. I have generally rewritten the article to make it more suitable for Wiki. I have removed the quotation. FilmFiend (talk) 19:40, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

I just saw your User page. You say you are married to the film maker who made the film you're writing about, and you frankly acknowledge that you're trying to write about her career in general. Uporządnicki (talk) 09:54, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

That is correct. Trying to be transparent about it. There is suddenly, because of current events, a great deal of interest in the film Leona's Sister, Gerri. Many publications are discussing the circumstances of the picture that is at the core of this film (of an anonymous woman, dead from an illegal abortion, on a hotel room floor). There was no mention of the film or the director on Wikipedia. I honestly believe that there is sufficient evidence to show that this film deserves a place on Wikipedia (exensive critical discussion, awards, repeated screenings on PBS to huge national audiences, as well as the repeated republication of the photograph and display of the image). It seems like it's important to provide some basic information about the cast and crew of the film, links to some of the articles that have reviewed it, and generally provide the basis for anyone with an interest in the subject to do their own research. My first attempts at creating the page were poor and clearly didn't follow Wikipedia guidelines. I have completely rewritten the proposed page to try to bring it into compliance with Wiki standards. I have tried to be as neutral as possible, provide citations for important points, and generally give the reader the tools to further explore the subject. I look forward to any constructive comments, and certainly encourage others to add information and edit what's there. I think it's in good shape now, and I am almost ready to publish to mainspace. Ultimately, I am relying on the Wikipedia community to decide if this article has value and is acceptably written to be included. I am very appreciative to all who have offered constructive advice. FilmFiend (talk) 17:08, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

@FilmFiend, thank you very much for your transparency and willingness to work within our guidelines. I think folks are mainly concerned with you reading and heeding the restrictions around editing with a WP:COI. So far, I don't think you've violated those - I do notice you've been editing Alloy Orchestra, but as a former employee your contributions will be under less scrutiny, though be prepared for a possible challenge if your editing comes across promotionally; there are definitely a few issues with that article's structure at present, which I'll probably head over to correct now.

Incidentally, I'm a big silent film fan, I've probably heard and enjoyed more than one of your soundtracks over the years! 199.208.172.35 (talk) 17:28, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks again. I have resisted editing the Alloy Orchestra page for years, even though it was filled with broken links (the Alloy website no longer exists and it now directs viewers to an Indonesian video game page), inaccuracies, and very little actual information about the groups work. Again, I've tried to be as neutral as possible, to include lots of verifiable information, and to provide copious citations. I would have preferred that someone else did this editing, but it wasn't happening. Please check it out and make any additions, subtractions or to ask me any questions. FilmFiend (talk) 17:37, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

If you want to be extra-transparent, @FilmFiend, perhaps you would like to try placing some COI templates and userboxes on the relevant pages. If your unsure how, I'll be happy to place them for you :). HenryTemplo (talk) 17:34, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi again, I don't know how to do that, but would like to. Your help would be greatly appreciated! FilmFiend (talk) 17:38, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

I actually started editing the Alloy page to follow Wikipedia's suggestion to make edits to existing pages as a way to learn how to work with Wiki in order to write a new page (Leona's Sister, Gerri). I started simply, but got lured into making substantial edits. FilmFiend (talk) 17:40, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Rightio, I'll get the templates placed. Do you want to place an userbox on your talk page? This one is the one you'll need, let me know if you have any problems. HenryTemplo (talk) 17:55, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Apologies, I meant place the userbox on your user page! HenryTemplo (talk) 17:56, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks again for all your (and others) help. It shouldn't be a surprise, but so far I've found Wikipedia community to be extremely helpful. I'm having a very positive experience and hope to learn more and get better at editing Wiki. FilmFiend (talk) 19:52, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Hirtle chart

Hi, we seems to have an article which is not really an article. Should I ask its author first, move it to the project namespace and tag the redirect for deletion, take it to AfD or... ? NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 17:02, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

I'm no expert, but the page appears to be a redirect to Commons, I would leave it as is. More experienced editors, let me know if I'm wrong! HenryTemplo (talk) 17:24, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

One of only 12 (that are in the hidden category and excluding the 2 shorthand redirects which I'm fairly sure would go to commons anyways) ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 17:28, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Never seen that before. Could be considered helpful, but I wonder "should we do that?" Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:09, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

The page in question is a soft redirect, in this case to Wikimedia Commons. Although not often used, they are usually helpful. In this case, we don't (yet) have an article on "Hirtle chart" but do have the chart as a .pdf on Commons: it helps readers determine when US media enters the public domain. Soft redirects don't take readers directly to the target page but allow them to click through there if they want to after reading the brief description. So, bottom line, NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh is that you should do nothing. Such redirects are cheap to create and useful. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:40, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Frequent Grammar Issues

I have noticed many errors in grammar, and approximately 98% of all articles have a majority of typographical errors.

The preponderance of most articles has denied the foundational rules of English grammar. 98s (talk) 22:44, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

You're requesting that 'someone' proofread nearly six and a half million articles? How long would you expect that to take?

All of Wikipedia's articles are in principle ongoing projects, but all of Wikipedia's editors are unpaid volunteers who are free to choose what they do (or don't). Only a small proportion are interested in actively pursuing copyediting, though many will copyedit something needing it if they happen to stumble across it.

If you're interested in helping out, there is the Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors. (I myself have resisted joining it as, being an ex-professional copyeditor, I know that if I did it would consume my every available waking hour to the exclusion of all else.) However, you probably first need to learn how to spell "Grammar" ;-). {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.208.88.97 (talk) 23:25, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

@98s, welcome to the Teahouse. Be sure that you are really seeing grammar issues. When you edited Matadero Madrid you changed perfectly correct spellings from British English to American English. Don't do that. Please read WP:ENGVAR before doing any more copy editing and make sure you understand that various varieties of English are used here. StarryGrandma (talk) 23:25, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

@98s The majority of your edits have been reverted, which suggests you do not have a firm a grasp on grammar that you think you have. David notMD (talk) 03:25, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

98s, an editor who misspells "grammer" and "descried" is not in a strong position to make sweeping assertions about grammar problems in the world's most popular encyclopedia. Cullen328 (talk) 03:32, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

@98s, you are incorrect. Most articles do not have over 47 grammar issues. 73.127.147.187 (talk) 08:29, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Unlikely that this user has had enough time to descry(2) the majority of our six million articles, no matter how strongly they descry(1) it now. Perhaps someone who knows more statistical theory could advise a sufficient sample size to draw a meaningful conclusion? I suspect a significant proportion of articles would have fewer than 47 sentences. Fun aside, though — 98s: code of the form [[namespace:Page name]] should not have a space after the colon. I wish this was the first time that I had seen someone enact that misconception. ⁓ Pelagic ( messages ) 09:27, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

I have discovered literally many thousands of articles (mostly on species) for which the categorization could be improved--or was out of date, or just plain wrong. I generally don't "descry" them--whatever that means. What I have done is to go through and fix them--literally many thousands of them. But for the reasons given above, maybe that's not the best suggestion in this case. Uporządnicki (talk) 09:36, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

@98s, Re: your user page, what does "Contrubutes" mean? Uporządnicki (talk) 09:40, 5 May 2022 (UTC)I

It's worth noting that English Wikipedia serves the entire English-speaking world, and within that range, there are a lot of different approaches to grammar. What is correct in American English may be wrong in English English, and vice versa. Even within one "brand", English is not a prescriptive language: there are often multiple acceptable ways to express oneself, and last year's edgy, informal street-speak is next year's appropriate grammar for the boardroom. Wikipedia permits a wide range of grammar and spelling; there is no single true correct path to grammarish correctness. There are limitations: if an article is about a US-American subject, is already written in US-American vocabulary, or is marked that it should use US-American spellings, we Brits must keep our 'rubbish' to ourselves, and instead write garbage. But one should be cautious about 'correcting' grammar. The grammar may have been correct in the original author's variety of language, and changing it a waste of time - and possibly borderline-rude. Copy-editing is sometimes regarded as a bit of a trivial task, but it actually requires knowledge, skill and judgement. Elemimele (talk) 11:37, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

@98s, although you're allowed to change your own comments, doing it after they've already been replied to is very much frowned upon - see Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines#Editing own comments. As to your new question, unfortunately they haven't yet invented a bot smart enough to handle all the various complexities of all the complex varieties of English. It's quite a mess. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:42, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

@98s: repeatedly changing your initial comment, after you have been advised that this is misleading, really hurts your credibility. You still have not provided any evidence to support any of your accusations about grammar issues here. ClaudineChionh (talk – contribs) 23:13, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

I am NOT suspecting you to do anything about this subject, only to take it under consideration. 98s (talk) 02:41, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

hi 98s! by confiscate it under consideration, what do you mean? please take note that wikipedia is a volunteer service and we have no obligation to fix grammar issues immediately. as you may already know, we have a system that allows people to tag articles for copyediting, where others can help out in their free time. 💜  melecie  talk - 02:48, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

also, are you by chance using a grammar-checking tool like Grammarly to detect grammatical errors? 💜  melecie  talk - 03:07, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Grammarly? 98s (talk) 14:47, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

@98s The phrase "approximately 98% of all articles have a majority of typographical errors" doesn't make sense either. I have tried to parse that in several different ways, and I just can't. 73.127.147.187 (talk) 07:24, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

sources are fake?

so social media and google and a physical storefront are not credible sources now, not even 9 news and local newspapers.for a website known for being false information these rules seem to just be hate to people trying to present real news. can someone tell me what a real source is? i made an article and cited everything from world news, local papers, google and social media sites. WTF? Saintmythi (talk) 01:51, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Saintmythi, and welcome to the Teahouse! I assume you're talking about Draft:Pawnman. Have you read Wikipedia's guideline on reliable sources? It explains what a source is and what makes it reliable; this part explains Wikipedia's stance on social media sites. I hope this helps! Perfect4th (talk) 02:11, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

After the first declined you did very little before resubmitting, so no surprise that it was declined again. David notMD (talk) 03:28, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Hyperlinks are not allowed in the text of an article and you have no references. For biography of a living person, all factual statements must be verified by reliable source references. David notMD (talk) 03:35, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

@Saintmythi You haven't cited anything (correctly). If you want to make edits to WP that "sticks", you have learn how to use references here, see WP:TUTORIAL about referencing and more. See also WP:BASIC, if you don't have the sources demanded there, the article will not be accepted. And since you're writing a WP:BLP, read that carefully too.

Trying to create an acceptable WP-article without any WP-editing experience is hard but maybe possible if good sources exist. If you are writing about yourself, see Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. WP is not your social media, and "real news" is not exactly what this place is about. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:32, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Aw man

Why there is so much the word her on possesive pronoun as male his? The word hers is severely underutilized. The word her is one of the most annoying word in my lifetime. Why the english word her has a dual accusative and possesive term as him and his? 114.122.104.72 (talk) 10:59, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, IP editor. You are going to want to ask this at the language reference desk, as this space is to ask about using or editing Wikipedia. Also, hers is a possessive pronoun. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 11:09, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

IP user. You asked a similar question yesterday, at WP:Teahouse#Her to hers and received answers. Please do not waste everyone's time by repeating this line of questioning. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:15, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

I'll bite, though, and answer the "why" nonetheless: her/hers for possession isn't equivalent to him/his (accusative/genitive), but to his/his (dependent genitive / independent genitive). Example sentences: This is her dog. The dog is hers. This is his dog. The dog is his. When you line them up like this, the answer is pretty obvious: "his" already has an s on the end. We can't add another to turn this into an independent genitive. You might be interested in reading History of the English language, English possessive, and English pronouns. -- asilvering (talk) 20:58, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

@Asilvering I think I know Engligh grammar pretty well, but I didn't realize, until reading this yesterday, that his and his are the same, while her and hers are different words. I know when to use them, but I never thought about the parts of speech for those. (What, there is more than just nouns, verbs, adjectives, adverbs, and pronouns? Who woulda thought?) 73.127.147.187 (talk) 07:33, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

His is more like a hissing cat indeed Wtf is the her and hers for no reason other than being accusative and or genitive?! I really despise the word her becayse h is for hummer or hajj anything else letter e is for ford econoline van. While the letter r is more like rrrrrrrrr! French movie in 2004 114.122.105.208 (talk) 00:29, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

If you want to make jokes, please do it somewhere else. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:51, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Overly aggressive deleting?

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

---

Over a period of 2012-18 an editor initially editing as IP 50.29.183.144 and later as Raindrop73, added literally millions of bytes of information to hundreds of school and school district articles - mostly in Pennsylvania - with references. Raindrop73 stopped editing in 2018. Over a period of March-April 2022, Graham87 (an Administator) went to every one of these articles and deleted roughly 90% of the content and references, leaving as an Edit summary "make proper school district article after extreme and sustained disruptin by IP user who became Raindrop73". An example is North Pocono School District. To me, this feels arbitrary. Should one person - Administrator or not - be empowered to radically shorten articles that were in existance for years, based on their own concept of what a school article should be? David notMD (talk) 11:22, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Ask WP:WikiProject Schools for input? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:43, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Will do, mentioning that also asked at Teahouse. David notMD (talk) 11:50, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

This strikes me as an odd place for this thread (perhaps a village pump would be better). In any case, I'm certainly not the only person who's had issues with articles created by Raindrop73. Most prominently, and I know This is hard to prove after the fact, about 40–50% of articles in the category for Wikipedia articles that are excessively detailed from October 2021 were there due to additions by ChillyBlanket and others (example). I began dealing with Raindrop73's edits in January and took a break in February to do some link-fixing on Australian government websites. No established users have brought up any issues with my editing of these pages until recently. Also see this thread. Graham87 12:29, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

It looks like several years went by between when Raindrop73 stopped editing and when Graham87 started reverting, so there wasn't an opportunity for discussion of the reverts with the original editor. Personally I think that 80-90% of that information is unencyclopedic and extraneous, which makes it hard to find the relevant bits, but that's not a huge deal compared to some of Wikipedia's other problems. Also I don't blame anyone for not wanting to spend a bunch of time combing through all that info and paring it down. 97.126.106.3 (talk) 12:35, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

 Note: This is a matter being discussed at the ANI. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 12:51, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Indeed; it's linked from the above thread, which is why I didn't add a link here. Yes, a lot of the text I removed was copy-and-paste boilerplate (especially the sections about 2013 academic scores). Before I started taking this on as an ongoing project, I did check a few of the largest school districts in the United States by enrollment to find out what was de rigueur in these articles (knowing that there'd naturally be a lot more encyclopedic to say about big cities than rural areas). The Los Angeles Unified School District article is probably a touch too detailed and I removed some text from it that was added by an IP as recentism. I won't lose sleep if an established editor can come up with a good reason for restoring this text, but no-one has done so in the past three months or so. Graham87 12:59, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

(This is the same person as the IP above) I guess it comes down to two questions: Did the additions improve Wikipedia? Did they harm Wikipedia? IMHO, the answers are "no" and "eh". I did find a somewhat worrying BLP issue in the Sayre article, but it's the sort of thing you could probably expect to creep into any low traffic, lightly monitored article about populated areas. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 13:22, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

To answer David directly, I believe, based on the spirit of the libre mission of Wikipedia, that an administrator has no more and no less power to edit an article than a regular editor except if an article is protected where only an admin can make edits to it. These are exceptionally rare cases. I won't rehash anything said at AN/I or at any talk page discussion, only answer David's question directly. I maintain that the highest position on the encyclopedia is editor. If an editor is in good standing and their edits are in good faith then they are part of the community and the community IS the highest governing body on this version of the encyclopedia. All other positions, from administrator to bureaucrat to arbitrator, are under the community even as they are entrusted with tools not given to the average editor. Those tools should never be used to cause injury to an editor acting in good faith as a member of the community. I don't find anything striking about Graham87 editing these articles in a bold manner. We all edit based on our perception. Once something is disputed, however, then the offending (not meant in a negative way, only that they are the ones adding or removing) editor, no other position matters in this case, should seek consensus to either add disputed information back or keep disputed information deleted depending on which applies. An admin is still an editor and still part of the community and receives no extra benefits which precludes them from having to follow the same policies, in those regards, as any other member of the community. In fact, if anything, they have more responsibility to be extra cautious as they have the added trust of the community and that trust is not to be taken lightly. In short, admins do not govern, they serve. The community, by consensus, governs. --ARoseWolf 13:53, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Extensive discussion at at the ANI, so I see no need for additional separate discussion here, other to say that my initial concern was that Raindrop73 was an editor who appeared to be contributing in good faith, and Graham87 - acting as an editor, not an Administrator - made deletions apparently based on a personal decision on what belongs or does not belong in a school-related article. The ANI discussion evolved into issues about blocking, which I consider as separate from my initial concern, and (hopefully) resolved there. David notMD (talk) 13:59, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

At Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Schools the response was that over-detailing and over-referencing at school articles not unique to Raindrop73. David notMD (talk) 14:03, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Fancruft gets everywhere. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:23, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

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

New Article

Am Snash a YouTuber from Tanzania i need to write my article ,but i don't how to get an article a published one. Snashtz (talk) 12:33, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Snashtz, you created User:Snashtz/sandbox, in which you advertised your own skills, achievements, popularity, etc. Please find some other website for your PR efforts. Wikipedia is not for this purpose. -- Hoary (talk) 13:19, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

You're not supposed to create your own article based on WP:NPOV, WP:What Wikipedia is not, and a few others. You can ask users to create your article at requested biographies. However, an article needs to be supported by reliable sources, and there may not be any on you. Also, users aren't required to slave away creating an article for you.

Asparagusus (talk) 14:03, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Help with requesting a splitting

Hi, I am trying to request a split for Aunt Jemima and I would just like to know if I used the right template in the talk page. Please let me know if I need to fix it and if I need to use another template thank you. BigRed606 (talk) 15:46, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi, BigRed606! Looking over the splitting procedure, it looks like the talk page template was done correctly, although you might specify which sections you're referring to when you say "Pearl Milling Company", since none of the sections in the article have that exact title. You can also complete step two of WP:PROSPLIT by adding the {{split}} template to the article. Happy editing! Perfect4th (talk) 17:31, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

does 20-30 days old page can be deleted ?

Just for my knowledge wanted to know if I got a page published on wikipedia and its 20-30 days old , can any one delete that page ? Kbv2024 (talk) 16:33, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

@Kbv2024: Welcome to the Teahouse. Could you provide more information as to what page it is? Answer depends on factors like whether it is in the main articlespace or Draft:. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:35, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

main articlespace Kbv2024 (talk) 16:36, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Kbv2024. Only administrators can actually delete an article but any editor can propose that an article be deleted. It is the notability of the topic that matters most, not how long the article has been around. Please read Wikipedia:Deletion policy. Cullen328 (talk) 16:46, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

thank u for the information, Kbv2024 (talk) 16:51, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

The only type of page where the amount of time it has existed matters is Draft pages, and even then it will only be deleted if they have not been edited in 6 months. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 17:01, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

In addition, pages with more than 5000 revisions can only be deleted by a steward. Cranloa12n / talk / contribs / 22:50, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Userbox alignment again

Hello, i decided to put my userboxes in a table but they are not behaving and formatting correctly, they are all over the place and floating all the way to the bottom, is there anyway i can force them to stay together at the top?

Sincerely OGWFP (talk) 16:49, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

@OGWFP: Welcome to the Teahouse. Have you tried putting the userbox templates between {{userboxtop}} and {{userboxbottom}}? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:04, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Inside of the table or outside of the table?

OGWFP (talk) 17:20, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

OGWFP, you'll put the user boxes in place of the "and" above, if that makes sense. --ARoseWolf 17:36, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, i have tried that but it just puts the boxes in one long row from top to bottom, not in the table arrangement i would like.

OGWFP (talk) 17:21, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

{{Userboxgroup}} could be what you're looking for. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:49, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Inside; {{userboxtop}} and {{userboxbottom}} should sandwich the userboxes. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:54, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Wiktionary Teahouse

Is there a Wiktionary Teahouse? I know this is not wiktionary, and I apologize in advance if this is the wrong place to ask (which I know it is), but hoping someone might know and be able to help. I predominantly edit wikipedia, but I wanted to start on some basic stuff on wiktionary as well. Thanks you.

P.S.

If someone can help directly (https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/User_talk:Th78blue) I am trying to build a redirect (like I have for my wikipedia user page to my talk page) of my wiktionary user page to the "Discussion" page next to it (they seem to be called "Discussion" pages on wiktionary). Thanks again. ♥Th78blue (talk)♥ 18:08, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Th78blue, they have a tea room, but your question seems more suited to their information desk. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:19, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. ♥Th78blue (talk)♥ 18:21, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a dictionary... but glossaries are fine?

Hello! So while I was handling some requests at WP:EFFPR, I came across a report for a user who tried to edit the article Glossary of cue sports terms. The article just seems to be a list of definitions of terms used in cue sports. The thing that confuses me is this seems to violate WP:NOTDICT as Wikipedia isn't a dictionary, but that article seems to basically be a dictionary for terms in cue sports. So what's so different about glossary articles that make it so they don't violate WP:NOTDICT? ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 18:37, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

@Blaze Wolf: See this note in WP:NOTDICT: "Some articles are encyclopedic glossaries on the jargon of an industry or field; such articles must be informative, not guiding in nature, because Wikipedia is not a manual, guidebook, or textbook." There is link to Wikipedia:Stand-alone_lists#Specialized_list_articles. RudolfRed (talk) 19:41, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

@RudolfRed: Ah thanks! I had looked at WP:NOTDICT earlier to see if it mentioned anything about glossaries but I must've just missed it. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 19:56, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

After cleanup, what next???????

I want to know whats left before Rashida Bello will be reviewed, some editors have contributed, any help whats left for me to do??? would appreciate. Dorathy Nnaji (talk) 18:37, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Dorathy Nnaji, it is already in article space. Sungodtemple (talk) 19:35, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

@Dorathy Nnaji You could add a |website=, |work=, or |publisher= parameter to each reference that doesn't already have one. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 20:31, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Book Image Question

I recently asked a question here a few days ago about this but the post was archived and I had a follow up question.

The current main image on the Sapiens article is the Hebrew first edition cover. Would it be appropriate to either update the main image to the Harper Collins english first edition cover if it could be obtained and uploaded in the proper way, or if the Hebrew version is the best image for the article since it was the very first edition published, could the English first edition cover be added to the page? The English first edition is the image used by the author on his website and also the image most readers of the English Wikipedia page will be familiar with and be able to read the text on. There doesnt seem to be much guidance on this topic for books with multiple language first editions about which image is prefered for use with respect to the various language wikipedia pages. An image I mentioned in my post the other day has been nominated for deletion. File:Sapiens-uma-breve-historia-da-humanidade-livro-yuval-harari-320001-MLB20265211115 032015-O.jpg This image is not the official English first edition cover but it is being used on several other global wiki sites for the book image in other languages. Thanks! LightBulb22 (talk) 21:24, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

I don't know of any specific guidance for this situation, but if you think it would be a better image, I would go for it. A quick search turns up WP:WikiProject Books/Images, if you're looking for information about how to put images of book covers on Wikipedia while complying with fair use guidelines. – Anon423 (talk) 00:09, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Help undoing vandalism

Hi, I found what appears to be a user systematically vandalizing old movie pages. The two contributor IP's I found are 71.38.23.47 and 71.222.2.166 both making the same small edits to cast listings. I started undoing them one at a time but I discovered that there are at least 30+ pages and possibly more.

Any suggestions on how to undo the vandalism in a batch process? Or, is one-at-a-time the only way to go? Thanks Glasshammered (talk) 21:35, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Vandalism typically implies malice. Are you absolutely sure these are not good-faith, but unsourced additions to the cast? Pyrrho the Skipper (talk) 21:44, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

From "The Bet (2016 film)"

• Tricia Pettitt as Woman Drinking Coffee
• Eric Schenk as Angry Coffee Drinker

were added to the cast listing. These two names appear to have been added to the cast list of over 30 films. The additions are fairly innocuous i.e., not profane or obscene, however, they seem to be defacement of the article. Glasshammered (talk) 00:12, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Also: a quick scan of the films in question reveals a range in release date from 1948 to 2016 Glasshammered (talk) 00:20, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

@Glasshammered, that does seem to be misuse of the encyclopedia. I know of one tool that can do multiple reverts, but I've never used it myself - see Wikipedia:Rollback. 97.126.106.3 (talk) 12:33, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

I see both of those names mentioned in about 20 articles. 73.127.147.187 (talk) 06:25, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Help with draft

I have been working on a draft for the past couple of months. The times it has been rejected, I've fixed the noted issues and republished it. However, I am not entirely sure if it is pending review. Would I be able to get some help with this problem? Bellamreeves (talk) 21:53, 5 May 2022 (UTC) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:David_Schendel — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bellamreeves (talk • contribs) 21:54, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

@Bellamreeves: Why did you delete the declined messages? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:58, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

If I did then it was most likely an accident on my behalf. Is that why it's not pending review? Bellamreeves (talk) 22:00, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

There's no {{subst:submit}} at the top of the page. Please restore the declined messages so reviewers can determine if the issues have been resolved. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:28, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Restored the two Declines, which provide a Submit button. David notMD (talk) 22:59, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

References

I'm unable to adequately enter three references I have tried to provide. I've gone to the help page but everything I try does not work....I get this error code: Cite error: A <ref> tag is missing the closing </ref> (see the help page).

Don't know what I'm doing wrong....jeff Mrjeffmcc (talk) 23:04, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

I have reformatted your question, Mrjeffmcc. When you start a reference with "<ref>", you must also end it with "</ref>". -- Hoary (talk) 23:07, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

And please don't do what I did once and leave off the closing </small> tag and shrink the whole Teahouse to miniature size. Pyrrho the Skipper (talk) 23:10, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

I'm sorry I did that, Pyrrho the Skipper. (But where?) -- Hoary (talk) 23:16, 5 May 2022 (UTC) Oh, you did that. OK. -- Hoary (talk) 23:17, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Mrjeffmcc, I notice that in Jeff McCracken (which I infer is your autobiography), you previously had <ref> [https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0566841/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1]. There are several things wrong with this:

• It should have had a matching </ref>
• It shouldn't have been a "bare URL".
• IMDb is not a reliable source.
• You shouldn't have been editing an article about yourself.

-- Hoary (talk) 23:16, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

As your talk page shows that you had previously been amply warned about your conduct in that article, and that you had been specifically warned against removing templates from it, and seeing that you had very recently again removed the COI flag from the article, I have blocked you from editing it. -- Hoary (talk) 23:34, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

@Mrjeffmcc, you're not blocked from using the talk page (Talk:Jeff McCracken). Please use it to suggest improvements to the article. I've tweaked some of your additions; the sourcing still needs a bit of work. 97.126.106.3 (talk) 00:54, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

How to add reliable sources in Wikipedia article

Hey Team, I am a new user @Super30867 at here and I created an article at first time. I added all reliable sources in article by using citation but my draft: Sunil Sihag have declined by @Praxidicae. I want to know how to fix it. Super30867 (talk) 23:47, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Hey Super30867, you can start with Help:Referencing for beginners, and then looking at WP:Reliable sources and WP:Verifiability. For example, this webpage you referenced in Draft:Sunil Sihag isn't considered a reliable source since it appears to be a promotional press release rather than an independent news article, and we try to avoid sources associated with the subject for reasons of neutrality. – Anon423 (talk) 00:04, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Is Times Of India is promotional press release?

Is Hindustan Times is a promotional press relesae?

is dainik bhaskar is a promotional press release?

I have given many PR sources which are not Promotional Press Relesae. I request to you please review on it. Super30867 (talk) 10:23, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Is there a way to have my drafted article reviewed? I'm new but put in a solid amount of work on it.

 Courtesy link: Draft:Longstocking (producer)
I'm uncertain how I would give access for someone to review. Any insight for a true noob would be much appreciated. DenniKindred (talk) 00:50, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

@DenniKindred: Welcome to the Teahouse. You can add {{subst:submit}} to the top of your draft when you are ready. That being said, you are strongly discouraged to write about yourself, especially when the draft looks promotional, which will definitely cause reviewers to decline (or even reject) your draft. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:55, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

I appreciate the script and the links! You rock Tenryuu DenniKindred (talk) 01:03, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Hey Denni,

I'm also new to editing / article writing! So take what I say with a grain of salt. But I would say that more specifically, some lines such as "... and so many more.", "It was here in Seattle that her DJing and producing really took off.", and even "...her sound became part of the global underground music community." are probably going to come off as red flags to a lot of people reviewing them. Just because they're rather subjective and not in the traditional "tone" of the website. For instance, instead of saying "her DJing really took off", it would be more standard to list & cite specific examples of how this is the case.

All that being said, I would be a little ahhh cautious about the odds of your page being approved. There's no hard and fast rule for when someone is eligible for a wikipedia article, but even googling Longstocking (producer) had limited results. That being said, best of luck with everything (on and off the site)! A MINOTAUR (talk) 01:50, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm in a situation where the most notable Longstocking Apple Music page, verified Spotify page, etc are all my music but some one album punk band from 25 years ago gets credited with all my music. I thought a wiki could solve it. I'll delete that part and I may delete the draft. It sucks that a small band I've never heard of that has a single album gets a page and I can't. I'm going delete the draft and give up on the wikipedia acknowledgment. I have a couple albums and a Buch of EPs all signed. Hell, I'm signed on a Warner Music sublabel but it doesn't seem to matter. Throwing in the towel. Thanks Fam! DenniKindred (talk) 01:55, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi DenniKindred! Don't feel bad about the situation: being assessed as Notable enough for a Wikipedia article (or not) isn't any kind of value judgement, it boils down to how much other, unconnected people have chosen to publish about you in what are considered Reliable sources, which is not really something under your control.

Because that punk band existed a quarter century ago, there has been plenty of time for people to write about them: since you are new(ish), there hasn't been as big a window for people to write about you, yet. Probably this is a case of "WP:Too soon", and in time (possibly quite soon) reliably published pieces by disinterested third parties will accumulate, demonstrating that you meet the criteria of Notability (music), and someone will decide to create a Wikipedia article about you, based on them.

Remember that, as an encyclopedia, Wikipedia aims to inform readers, not to promote anyone or anything, so an attempted article that appears to have promotion as a primary aim is never going to be accepted. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.208.88.97 (talk) 08:57, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Add language code for Prefix codes for linking to Wikimedia sister projects

By default, the interwiki prefix codes link to the Wikiprojects in English.

Is there a way to add vi language code for this shortcut wikisource:Đầu Pháp Chính phủ thư ? Leemyongpak (talk) 00:56, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

@Leemyongpak, put it in this way: wikisource:vi:Đầu Pháp Chính phủ thư. StarryGrandma (talk) 01:08, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Great. Thank you. Leemyongpak (talk) 01:17, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

@Leemyongpak—You can also put it in an even shorter format: s:vi:Đầu Pháp Chính phủ thư. The "s" should indicate Wikisource. You can also read Special:Interwiki for all of the interwiki links. — 3PPYB6 — TALK — CONTRIBS — 02:15, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Move requests: a question

What to do when during a RM discussion two users on different times go ahead and make changes, while others are still commenting on the discussion (and/or the discussion is not closed yet)? I did not find something useful on the RM page itself. Cheers. --Opencross (talk) 01:42, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

"Under review" tag languishing for more than a week

Hello, Teahouse hosts, it's your (not-so-old) Teahouse host asking questions again. So, I submitted this draft, and a reviewer quickly tagged it as "under review". The template stated that it should not remain for any longer than 12 hours, but the tag has been there for over a week. I'm assuming that it's fairly common, and the reviewer should obviously do this at his own convenience. However, I just wanted some help as to how long it should be up there. Thanks. — 3PPYB6 — TALK — CONTRIBS — 02:27, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi @3PPYB6, and welcome to the Teahouse! I've left a note on the reviewer's talk page. For what it's worth, I'm putting my metaphorical AfC reviewer stamp of approval on this one. Cheers! 🐶 EpicPupper ^{(he/him | talk)} 03:23, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Just read the draft - looks solid ! Jasonbrown1965 (talk) 11:57, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Rewriting File Information

Hello,

I am trying to rewrite the fair-use rationale section for an image (not uploaded by me) so that it has some better language justifying its free use. How do I do as such? The edit link on the summary section does not allow me to edit the rationale. And yes, I have read WP:COPY and WP:IUP. CollectiveSolidarity (talk) 03:08, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

@CollectiveSolidarity: Hello Collective! Would you mind linking the image here for us? Make sure you add a colon (this character-> :) before the word "File:" when linking it so that it displays as a link and not an image. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 14:08, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

It is this one. It is located on the page Hollow Knight. I wanted to rewrite it because its inclusion reasoning is not very well written. It is just a copy-paste of the reasoning for the infobox image. CollectiveSolidarity (talk) 14:49, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

@CollectiveSolidarity: It appears that somehow in both images, the words "Section" and "Main infobox" add a specific reasoning. I don't know how it works or why but that's what it's doing. Anyone here on the Teahouse more familiar with this know why it behaves like this? ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 14:58, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

It behaves like that because that's the wording specified in Template:Non-free use rationale video game screenshot. I don't really see the need to alter the rationale for an image that's been here since 2018, though whether it "makes a significant contribution to the user's understanding of the article, which could not practically be conveyed by words alone" is debatable. Deor (talk) 15:45, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

I was recommended here to change the reasoning (see section "Request for mentor"). I was hoping to change it to justify multiple non-free images and prepare the article gradually for a FA. If the reasoning is still okay, I will try changing it during the image review of FA. CollectiveSolidarity (talk) 15:54, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Article Flagged and Deleted in Minutes

Hello everyone,

I recently had an article I had authored a few days ago flagged and deleted in a matter of minutes. I am a bit confused because altho I have been a very sporadic contributor over the years, I have had two articles be approved that I drafted from scratch, and in both instances I had access to way less actual citations than this particular one. Furthermore the citations were in particularly well respected media outlets, references in actual printed books, the subject has won several awards from respected design institutions, their work has been part of a museum show, and they are faculty at a very well known university.

My question is this: I would like to receive a copy of the text that was deleted, so I can examine/work on the tone and seek guidance from more experienced editors. How do I go about doing this? And in what format can I receive it?

Also, would it perhaps be better to resubmit the page as a very brief factual stub first and wait for that to be reviewed and approved to establish the basic notability of the subject before working on adding more information? Or is it better to submit a longer article from the get go?

Finally, as I have access to a design archive library, I was able to pull even more well known printed magazine and journal articles (which date back to early 2000s), how would I go about refrencing them in a way that editors are able to actually review and verify them? I do have the ability to scan these pages, but if I do so, would I be able to host them anywhere and link the PDF? I ask because I don't think the editors would be able to pull up the actual text were I to merely cite the edition and page numbers.

Thanks in advance!

SleepyWhippet (talk) 08:09, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

hi SleepyWhippet and welcome to the teahouse! the best place to ask would be at Requests for undeletion. I don't exactly know why those articles were deleted, but if they were removed for not having been edited for six months (CSD G13) then you could probably retrieve them easily and continue editing. happy writing! 💜  melecie  talk - 08:22, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

...since it probably wasn't G13, then please see WP:Deletion review instead, where you can challenge the draft's deletion. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 08:28, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your quick response @Melecie, seems like the article was actually marked for Speedy Deletion under section "G11" SleepyWhippet (talk) 08:29, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello SleepyWhippet. As melecie indicated above, you can request undeletion of most articles into draft space as long as they were not deleted for copyright infringement or the like. Usually you would ask the deleting administrator first on their talk page before going to the WP:RFU page.

However, you do not seem to have created any deleted pages. If that is actually about Fade258’s decline of Draft:Araz Fazaeli, I see you have started to discuss it on their talk page. However, please note that sources like this do not really count towards notability (in that case, it is a short interview, so not independent of the subject and arguably not in-depth coverage either). Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 08:31, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Tigraan:, Yes I am the one who had review this draft. If I made any mistake regarding reviewing this draft then let it me know. Thank you! Fade258 (talk) 09:13, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

@Fade258 my question here was actually about a different article entirely, which we clarified below. SleepyWhippet (talk) 09:21, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi SleepyWhippet. Articles are not generally deleted so quickly after they’re created unless they seriously violate some major Wikipedia policy. Do you know the name of the article that was deleted? If you do, then you should be able to determine which administrator deleted the article and then ask that administrator to send you a copy of the article via email. The administrator in question may be willing to do so depending on the reason why the article was deleted. As for your other question, if the sources you which to cite are considered to be reliable per WP:RS, then they don’t need to be available online as long as they are published and readily accessible. Availability online often makes assessment easier, but it’s not required. Just provide as much information about the source as you can per WP:CITEHOW. I wouldn’t suggest you upload the sources anywhere and try to link to them because that could possibly be a copyright issue for Wikipedia’s purposes. The accuracy of the linked source may also be called into question. — Marchjuly (talk) 08:33, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

SleepyWhippet, the deletion came with the summary "G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion: more at User talk:Rasd coduresa diziet." Two more or less random quotes from what was deleted: (1) Over the years, Corr has continued to collaborate with a diverse set of designers, brands, and fabricators to create furniture, lighting, and fixtures for high-end hospitality applications. (2) Her academic career parallels her design practice in its focus on bringing cross disciplinary perspectives to explore topics such as Luxury design and Sustainability. Neither is encyclopedic language; rather they're possibly impressive but more certainly nebulous. ¶ As has already been pointed out, there is no need for cited material to be available online; and normally you should not scan material published this century and upload these scans, because for the vast majority of material published this century uploading scans would violate copyright. (Also, Wikipedia can't link to pages that appear to violate copyright.) -- Hoary (talk) 08:38, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

@Marchjuly@Tigraan@Hoary -- Thank you all -- I suspect the issue may be that when I decided to write the article in question last week, I first could not remember the login to my (this) account, so I made a brand new account and went through the AfC wizard on that account, so the articles origination may not be associated with this username (incidentally, is there a way to merge accounts?), as @Hoary mentioned, The article in question is was on "Jessica Corr" -- in retrospect, I can see how the highlighted language could have been more neutral. But I guess my question is: is the entire article worthy of deletion? Or is it perhaps something that could have been discussed and fixed? I have asked the Admin who deleted it for a copy of the text on their talk page, they haven't responded yet --- or should I be asking the user who originally flagged the article for deletion? SleepyWhippet (talk) 08:44, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

There is no way to merge accounts - just don’t reuse the old account even if you remember the login/password. If you want to, you can add a note on the old account’s userpage to avoid any accusation of sockpuppetry, but I do not think that is necessary.

Non-admins may not see deleted pages, and non-admins do most of the speedy deletion flagging, so it is unlikely that whoever flagged the article can help. You should first wait until Athaenara replies to your query (unless it takes more than a week or so, then ask at WP:RFU). (Athaenara might refuse if she judges that it contains nothing of value, but we will cross that bridge when we get there.) Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 08:58, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you so much for all of your time and advice -- I shall wait for Athaenara's response. Also noted re accounts, I clearly have a lot to learn about all the policies and best practices, so I appreciates everyone's help. SleepyWhippet (talk) 09:03, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

The admin restored the article as a Draft:Jessica_Corr. I took a pass at fixing the type of language that you had highlighted. I still haven't had a chance to add all the print references that I had compiled tho. But in the meantime, could you please take a look when you get a chance and tell me if the tone of voice is more acceptable now? Thanks. SleepyWhippet (talk) 13:23, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

@SleepyWhippet - on the subject of the Awards and Recognitions section - typically on Wikipedia we only cover independently notable awards someone has earned. casualdejekyll 16:05, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

@Casualdejekyll thank you for for pointing that out. My assumption had been that if Parsons, as a reputable design school, has deemed those awards worthy of listing on their website that must mean that they are notable and verifiable. But I will make sure to read the wiki article you've linked later today and go through it with a "fine comb" to make sure anything that doesn't fit the criteria is deleted. or perhaps that entire section should simply go? SleepyWhippet (talk) 16:40, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi, SleepyWhippet. What you are doing here is unwittingly confusing two different meanings of "notable."

In the general sense, those awards that Parsons lists may well be "notable", i.e. "worthy of notice" to Parsons. However, Wikipedia uses the term "Notable" as (slightly misleading) internal jargon to mean roughly "have been written about at some length in several published sources that are subject to good editorial standards, by people unconnected with the subjects (in this case the awards), and are therefore able to have acceptable Wikipedia articles written, based on those writings." Phew!

A line has to be drawn somewhere, or we would end up listing people's 4th-form prize for raffia work in their biographical articles, and the like: this is how we have chosen to draw the line.

If you can find Reliable sources that would support the creation of a Wikipedia article about a given award, even if there isn't one yet, then you can argue for including mention of that award in the current Draft, and hopefully stimulate (see WP:Red link) an editor into writing an article for that award. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.208.88.97 (talk) 12:41, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Ahh, thank you @90.208.88.97 for that VERY helpful explanation of the distinction. I finally get it! I have taken the awards off for now as per @Casualdejekyll's @Theroadislong's comment on the draft. I think my first priority is going to be first getting the tone of the remaining copy in the correct tone and format, then adding the printed magazine articles/features that I have (and any new facts) from as proper citations, and having the article reviewed. But perhaps once I get in the swing of things, contributing information/articles to wikipedia about design industry awards can be an interesting niche for me to work on. SleepyWhippet (talk) 15:07, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Small technicality: pages that aren't in the (Article) or Draft namespaces aren't articles, usually. If you don't know what that means don't worry about it casualdejekyll 16:44, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Jacques Baud

A few days ago I found in Wikipedia in English the page on Jacques Baud, who was a member of Swiss army and inteligence, and worked for the UN. However, the page disapeared completely. I recall that the page was showing some warnings that an "editing war", or something similar, was going on. I ask you please for an explanation. Valerio pillar (talk) 11:06, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

hi Valerio pillar and welcome to the teahouse! there exists no english-language article named Jacques Baud, however it exists in french, which is what you may be looking for. edit wars are when people keep reverting each other to keep a desired revision on the current article, for more information check that page, or the French equivalent (different language projects may have different community guidelines and policies). happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 11:16, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

BloombergQuint in Now BQ Prime - How to Change Wikipedia entry

Hi,

We have rebranded ourselves from Bloomberquint.com to bqprime.com. We wanted to understand how the rebranding on wikipedia works. We came across a similar example where Tata Sky rebranded to Tata PLay. Tata Play seems to have created a new wikipedia entry and added a redirect to its wikipedia Tata sky page which brings it back to Tata Play.

We wanted to do the same exercise but we dont have the expertise in Wiki entry hence wanted to check if any credible editor will help us create a new brand wiki page and then do the redirection from bloombergquint wiki to bqprime wiki, this is the announcement here - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oX4ruJmnSZE

Do let us know how we can proceed and what requirements are there to get this initiated.

Regards, BQ Prime BQ Prime (talk) 11:48, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Step 1. Don't ask the same question at two different locations. This is also on the Helpdesk.- X201 (talk) 11:53, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

hi BQ Prime and welcome to the teahouse! before we get to that, please also change your name through one of these processes as you may not have the company name as your username, as they have to identify individuals, not companies. once that is done, you may add a edit request or a move request to have the article be renamed. you would also need to disclose your conflict of interest and provide reliable, independent sources to have it moved (you cannot just cite your own announcement, for example). happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 11:57, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Further discussion should take place at the Help Desk, where BQ Prime asked two minutes before asking here. -- Hoary (talk) 12:02, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

done BQ Prime (talk) 12:13, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Categories on an article

Hi there! I was reading the article Oliver Sykes when I got to the end and I saw the categories. My question is: Why should there be a category for "English atheists"? I mean that isn't it like putting a label on a person. I don't know. It seems a bit bad for a person? I've also seen categories of like emo artists or about their sexuality. Guys, isn't it something completely personal? I really do not get it why categories like that should exist! I know that categories exist to find a person easier but these ones are like making it easier for someone who is against the beliefs of someone's to start discussing it. English Wikipedia is a worldwide encyclopedia lots of people see and trust around the globe. Those are "labels" that people with the same beliefs might feel awkward. Please someone explain me WHY!! Thank you - Fisforfenia (talk) 12:33, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Fisforfenia, my understanding of Wikipedia policy is that someone should not be labelled an "English atheist" unless their atheism is/was a signicant component of their notability. My personal view is that your claim that such a label is "a bit bad" is insulting to atheists – though few of us are likely to care. Maproom (talk) 13:04, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

And now that I've read Oliver Sykes, it's very clear that he would not consider that label "a bit bad". Maproom (talk) 13:30, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Also, @Fisforfenia, in many cases we don't put people into a category unless they've publicly identified themselves as belonging to that category. If they make such a decision, presumably they don't regard the information as completely personal. Sometimes they then want to put the cat back in the bag, but as the adage implies, that's very hard to do. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 13:36, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Where are all my alerts?

I wanted to read an alert but accidentally marked it as read. Is there a way to see all my alerts? ScientistBuilder (talk) 12:58, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

@ScientistBuilder – Yes, there is a way. You can tap the bell badge for alerts, and then click "View all notifications". There, you can see all of your notifications, whether read or unread. Alternatively, you can go directly to Special:Notifications. Thanks! — 3PPYB6 — TALK — CONTRIBS — 13:09, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

@3PPYB6 Is there a way to read an email? I see the preview of the email but I can't open it. ScientistBuilder (talk) 13:13, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

@ScientistBuilder – Emails don't go on Wikipedia; for that, you have to look at your email inbox and view it. Sorry for any inconveniences. — 3PPYB6 — TALK — CONTRIBS — 13:15, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

@ScientistBuilder: I think for that you actually have to go into your email and read it (otherwise you just mark it as read here). Probably for privacy reasons. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 13:16, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

@ScientistBuilder: Like the others have said, emails are not on Wikipedia. You can receive notifications here that an email has been sent if a user used Email this user, but you have to view the actual contents on their own application/webpage. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:15, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Plagiarism revision

I used an online program to identify the plagiarism. Now there is still 35% overlap, but they're all proper nouns. Just want to make sure there isn't anything else I should do prior to reposting. Please let me know if anyone has any other advise. Thank you Mededbios (talk) 19:00, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Mededbios: - can you please identify which article you're referring to? Thanks, PKT(alk) 19:17, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft_talk:Ara_Tekian

i Mededbios (talk) 04:45, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

@Mededbios: Close-paraphrasing by replacing pronouns with proper names isn't enough to make it stop being copyvio/plagiarism. Rewrite it wholesale, in your own words. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 19:28, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

I do not believe that 35% overlap indicated plagiarism, especially if the duplicated content is proper names. David notMD (talk) 01:19, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your feedback. I am weary of making the same violation again. Mededbios (talk) 04:50, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. I major copyrighted part was a detailed list of awards. I did rewrite this completely, but the list of awards together still triggers the copyright overlap. This is what I am referring to. Any advise on how to rewrite this? Mededbios (talk) 04:48, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Lists of non-notable awards generally aren't a good idea anyway (though many creators of articles provide them, maybe thinking that they contribute to notability). Maproom (talk) 06:51, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

@Mededbios: I did some editing, ran a copyright violation check and left a comment. I suggest you resubmit. David notMD (talk) 11:17, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protection of an article from IPs from certain territories

Is it possible to protect a page from unregistered IP addresses and new users from certain countries/territories? There are anonymous Georgian IP addresses removing visas and stamps of Abkhazia and South Ossetia in Gallery of passport stamps by country or territory constantly. I do not care what anyone's opinion on their independence is, I do not advocate for their independence either, but they are territories that issue their own visas and passport stamps, they definitely belong on the page. This constant removal is nothing but nationalistic pissing contest and it is really annoying at this point.--Shallov (talk) 19:42, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Shallov, there doesn't appear to be much recent activity (only once every few days), and it is only one user. Simply warn IP and ask for a block at WP:AIV if necessary. Sungodtemple (talk) 19:50, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

My bad, at first glance it seemed it's multiple users. When I checked their discussion page, there were a couple of warnings already, next time I'll ask for a block straight away, thank you. Shallov (talk) 09:28, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

@Shallov I gave a clear warning to the latest IP, explaining what you said in your edit summary on their talk page. If they persist after that, let me know and I can block the IP range from the article. Best practice in these cases is to warn the user a few times and then report the user. Galobtter (pingó mió) 20:20, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, thank you for your response. I'll let you know if the user keeps removing those two items from the article. I checked their discussion page and there were some warnings already so I decided to ask here. Shallov (talk) 09:41, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Deletion of a cited claim

I'm familiar with WP:PROVEIT, which places the burden of proof on someone restoring a claim. In order to restore a removed claim you have to then provide a citation supporting it. However I'm interested in the opposite scenario. What if a cited claim has been removed (in good faith) by an editor simply claiming it is wrong? Is there policy that addresses the best course of action in this scenario? AquitaneHungerForce (talk) 20:49, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi, AquitaneHungerForce! You should discuss on the talk page of the article to form consensus. While not policy, the bold, revert, discuss cycle is often a good rule of thumb describing this process. Does this answer your question? Perfect4th (talk) 20:58, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Ok, I figured it would have to go to the discussion somehow. But I wasn't sure if the page should be left with or without the claim until discussion is resolved. And furthermore I'm not really sure what the point of the discussion should be. It hardly seems like the job of wikipedia editors to figure out what is true or not and with only one source I'm not so sure what can be discussed. There's also issues with proving a negative. It's much harder to find sources making negative claims unless the positive claims are widely held. AquitaneHungerForce (talk) 21:07, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

If you think the article is better a different way, you can try reverting and explaining your reasons in the edit summary, but make sure you don't edit war. It's generally good to form consensus on the talk page, though. Perfect4th (talk) 21:13, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

My user talk page / New contribution dis-appears by itself after 1 second

Please, don't refer me to Phabricator; Phabricator is a little resistive to letting someone who does not have an e-mail address/account report a bug (to word it politely and say not more).

As regards answers in topics, a few years ago all was fine.
Then I took some holiday (because of frustration about a few users, in the German WP).
Since a couple of weeks, since I'm back, something strange happens when I open a message.

The sequence is as follows:

1. Once in a while, at the very top of any wikipedia-page, I see a little rectangle with a number in it.
2. I click into this rectangle.
3. A window opens.
4. I click on one of these alerts.
5. My user-talkpage opens.
6. I see the heading of the concerned topic (or only older contributions to this topic).
7. The new contribution (text) of this other user appears.

So far everything is, as I expect it to happen.

8. This new contribution stays for about a second.

9. Then this new contribution dis-appears, all by itself, with me having done nothing.

But there remains the empty space, where the contribution was;
the space does not close.

If the message has started a new topic, the new heading remains visible.

If there are older contributions above this new contribution, under the same topic/heading, these older contributions remain visible;
only the latest contribution(s) disappear(s).
(Sometimes I find two answers to one topic.)

The same happens in the German wikipedia.

I recently had two announcements from the Teahouse. They also left a little image. After the text had disappeared, where there was supposed to be this image, there was only a dim/very dark kind of placeholder for this image.

If I repeat the same sequence, the same happens.

As a workaround I scroll to the top of my talk page and, in the table of content, click on this topic. Then this topic appears and the new contribution(s) is/are visible and remain(s) visible.

It has also happened that the latest answer remained visible, and only the second to last answer disappeared, leaving empty space inbetween.

After a while (minutes), or maybe because I went via the table of content, the messages are visible permanently, as they are supposed to.

I have Windows 8.1 and Firefox, both updated.

Steue (talk) 00:26, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Steue! Is the rectangle you click on a notice badge (the second image in Help:Notifications#Viewing_notifications)? Perfect4th (talk) 00:50, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Perfect4th, I guess so, but with me it is a simple rectangle with rounded corners.

Steue (talk) 01:04, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Steue, clicking on the notice takes me to a conversation and highlights the new response for a few seconds before the highlighting fades. I've never had messages outright disappear, however, so I'm not sure what the problem is. If it takes a while for someone who knows the answer to reply here, you could try the Help Desk. Sorry I couldn't be of more help. Perfect4th (talk) 01:39, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Steue. For a highly secure and anonymous email service, see Tutanota. For discussing technical issues, please try Wikipedia:Village pump (technical). Cullen328 (talk) 02:04, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

I just found out, by intuition, : If I click into the first line, the text comes back - and remains.

Steue (talk) 02:07, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

I mean: the first line where the text was and should be.

My contribution above is not indented, although I used [Reply].

Thanks Cullen328.

Steue (talk) 02:16, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

x in y?

I remember there is an essay about this that I read shortly before notifying a college student about mangoes in Florida or something of the sort... does anyone have the link?

In short, the essay is about not including articles that have the form 'x in y', unless the particular combination of x and y happens to be something important or special enough to merit its own article. Sungodtemple (talk) 03:23, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

@Sungodtemple: Are you looking for WP:XY? {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 04:21, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

I think that I too may have seen such an essay. It might explain that, although for any nation/territory X, far more "man-hours" are expended sitting on chairs than on either playing or watching hockey, Chairs in X is much less likely than Hockey in X. (X would probably need an extraordinary tradition or manufacture of chairs, or something similar, for the former article to exist.) I'd expect to see the essay listed within Wikipedia:Essay directory#Notability, but I don't. Perhaps it's listed elsewhere in that page. -- Hoary (talk) 04:33, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Is there a tool that helps with editing episode list tables?

To where I don't have to do this and this manually or completely manually?

Wikipedia:VisualEditor is pretty much the same as just just doing it through "edit source" and doesn't really have much of any options either when it comes to editing episode lists/tables.

Is there a tool of some sorts that helps with this process? Similar to Twinkle for vandalism-fighting and XFDCloser for closing AFDs? —Mythdon (talk • contribs) 03:53, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

It’s Srinda not Srindaa regarding the article Srindaa

•  Courtesy link: Srindaa

I am actress srinda, my name is not Srindaa it’s just Srinda. Please change it, it’s affecting my google search also the career. Please help somebody!! Srinda446 (talk) 06:30, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

I've changed the spelling throughout the article, in accordance with the sources cited. But I can't move the article "over a redirect" – I think it needs an admin to do this. Maproom (talk) 07:02, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

hi Srinda446! I've also mentioned it over at requested moves, where hopefully someone would be able to swap the pages so Srinda would be the main article page. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 07:13, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Stop multi language vandalism

Dear Administrators, I'm a newcomers Wikipedian.I've investigated a multi language vandalism which has done by BitaKarate1. The user has been editing destructively in articles named Kafir and jizyah‎ etectera. It's ongoing in Hindi[1][2], Malayalam, Kannada and Bangla.The user has banned in Bangla Wikipedia after warning third times for vandalizing, destructive edit, cheating , bullying and personal attack about religion. Please kindly investigate the user's crime and take a proper action. -মজুমদার সাহেব (talk) 06:38, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

hi মজুমদার সাহেব and welcome to the teahouse! do you have specific diffs showing this vandalism in english wikipedia? 💜  melecie  talk - 06:59, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Dear @Melecie:) Thanks for the purple welcome.Here's the diff link [3]

-মজুমদার সাহেব (talk) 07:33, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Bita says on their edit summary "The source says that". You attempted to amend the sentence to Encyclopedia Britannica has a statement like that '...'<ref name="Britannica" /> Which means you acknowledge that Britannica does say that? Please be careful about accusing editors of "vandalism". ⁓ Pelagic ( messages ) 08:07, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Oops, forgot ping @মজুমদার (Majumdar). ⁓ Pelagic ( messages ) 08:09, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

@Pelagic: I don't know.When I saw it refers to Britannica I thought there might be a statement like that, so I neutral this sentence by mentioned the source. Don't make it complicated, matter is that Britannica has statement, "Jews and Christians were required to pay the jizyah." but the other line while pagans were required to convert to Islam or die. has added by BitaKarate1. It's a vandalism, look these difference in Hindi[4][5], Malayalam, Kannada and Bangla [6] [7]] [8] Wikipedia article. The user added much lines and saying he translated it from English, Hindi or Kannada Wikipedia article while it's not, rather a cheating or destructive edit.I've talked in Hindi Wikipedia about this user vandalism but a hindi wikipedian removed talks[9].In Bangla Wikipedia this user banned by administrators. -মজুমদার সাহেব (talk) 08:25, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

@মজুমদার:

1. The current online Britannica literally says "They were, however, required to pay a per capita tax called jizyah, as opposed to pagans, who were required to either accept Islam or die." Don't try to suggest that BK1 made it up out of thin air. Just because you dislike it, doesn't make it vandalism. We take accusations of vandalism seriously here and @BitaKarate1 would be well within their rights to demand a retraction.
2. Another user has since removed the paragraph, with a sensible rationale in the edit summary. In contrast, you have been reverted multiple times at Kafir. I hope our article evolves to present a more nuanced view than Britannica, but the convert-or-die perception is common in the west and it's not surprising to find sources which present that.
3. Whether hi, ml, and ka Wikipedias object to the characterisation of the "Muslim invasion and plunder" of the subcontinent is up to them.
4. Maybe the Bangla talk page [10] loses something in translation; it looks like Bita intimated suggested another user was a non-Muslim [add: in fear of their life], and that person chose to interpret it as a "death threat".

. ⁓ Pelagic ( messages ) 10:04, 7 May 2022 (UTC) edit: improved charactization of the translated Bangla discussion 10:41, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

(P.S. nor would I condone the deletion of your post on hi wiki.) ⁓ Pelagic ( messages ) 11:05, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

@Pelagic:

1.Need sources, strong sources. Not Britannica, it's a encyclopedia and we already bad experienced about Britannica.Please proof it by strong sources.Don't try to suggest that BK1 made it up out of thin air. Just because you dislike it, doesn't make it vandalism. You've personally attacked me here.I think Administrators will take care about this line. This is not about my personal choice , without me anybody can talk about this or debate on it.

2. When I've started controversy about the line then removed it by strong sources demanding. I don't surprised in Western 'convert or die' perception, I've surprised the user BitaKarate1 already have warned 2 times in Bangla Wikipedia for Vandalizing, he added it might be controversial.But then I saw it's in Britannica. So I've mentioned it in the line.

3. A user undid few times my talks in Hindi Wikipedia and administrators doesn't take any action. When I can't talk how could they take action or consider!

4.

• @মজুমদার সাহেব: আপনি কি হত্যার ভয় পান?- BitaKarate1 ( আলাপ) ০৯:১৩, ৫ মে ২০২২ (ইউটিসি) (English: Do you fear of killed?)
• @মজুমদার সাহেব: আপনি এইমাত্র ইংরেজি উইকিপিডিয়া থেকে অনুলিপি করা আমার উত্স সহ নিবন্ধগুলি সরিয়ে দিয়েছেন। কেন? আপনি কি বাংলাদেশে বসবাসকারী একজন কাফির/হিন্দু?- BitaKarate1 ( আলাপ) ০৮:৫৮, ৫ মে ২০২২ (ইউটিসি) (English: You now undid with sources my translation copy which from English Wikipedia.Why? Do you a Bangladeshi hindhu/kafir?

Now you tell me what's those lines. I've warned the user several times that I'm translated it totally from English Article,the user should mark me which lines the user translated from English Wikipedia (these translation was cleverly vandalized by the user) and why when it already exist. On the other hand, I saw the user doing it same in Kannada, Malayalam, Hindi too by the edit summary 'the user translated from Hindi, Kannada, Bengla and English.' I've given link of those edit on top.

Conclusion: You personally attacked my in 1. Then you cleverly denied all those crime done by BitaKarate1 by the word of translation mistake! But what about 3 or 4? 1 and 2 was a good work by me you can't refused it.-মজুমদার সাহেব (talk) 12:20, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

@মজুমদার সাহেব, that was not a personal attack, and what this user is doing (at least on English Wikipedia) does not seem to be vandalism. This appears to be a content dispute which should be worked out on the talk pages of the articles involved. Complaints about editor conduct should be discussed at an appropriate noticeboard, such as WP:ANI. 97.126.106.3 (talk) 12:28, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

As an addendum, try to stay away from ANI. Generally everyone comes out of a report mildly frustrated at the very best. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:05, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

I have provided sources for all my sentences. This person who is complaining about me is actually the vandaliser who is removing sentences with sources.-BitOfKarate (talk) 16:21, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Template show/hide

Hello
Why is the template: Netherlands squad – UEFA Women's Euro 2013, at the bottom of Maayke Heuver set to show, while by all the other players, who have this template, it is set to hide? Dutchy45 (talk) 08:56, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

hi Dutchy45 and welcome to the teahouse! if I'm correct, navboxes in general are automatically collapsed when there are two or more of them (or two or more collapsible templates in general) in a page. Maayke Heuver has only one, which is why it's left expanded there. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 11:58, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

@Melecie Ah, thanks Dutchy45 (talk) 13:11, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

how do i create a new page

Minimushtheduck0 (talk) 10:39, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

hi Minimushtheduck0 and welcome to the teahouse! please read Notability (guides you on what can and can't have an article), Reliable sources (guides you on how you can find sources appropriate for establishing notability and proving what you write in the article]], and Your first article (which guides you through every step of actually writing your article). I know that's a lot of reading material, but I promise the information all three pages contain would help you write an article properly. happy writing! 💜  melecie  talk - 10:48, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

cheers Minimushtheduck0 (talk) 10:57, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Not by inserting uncited and tendentious material into Wikipedia, that's for sure. ColinFine (talk) 14:12, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Why is [Visual Edit] a tag?

I noticed it comes up a lot while patrolling recent changes. Is there a reason why its tagged? ~ carpathianflorist 11:23, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

hi carpathianflorist! I'm assuming it's tagged mostly to let people know that edit was made using the VisualEditor and comes with all the quirks and possible bugs of such. in recent changes patrol it doesn't really mean much except distinguishing between visual and source edits (and also for me explains why sometimes infoboxes get randomly removed, because they for some reason seem to be fragile with visualeditor and easy to backspace out, although Iunno, haven't tested it) happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 11:32, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Biography

I have wrote a biography of my grandfather who is alive and one of the well known writers of the Pashto language but got rejected. I tried to first write in English and then in Pashto language but it got rejected in the first attempt is there anyone to help me in this regard.

As he is an academic personality of Pashto language and there are no proper research papers on web regarding this language if there is any possible way to help me publish his biography on Wikipedia.

Regards. Abdulmusawir88 (talk) 14:39, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Convenience link - Draft:ZAHEDI AHMADZAI

Abdulmusawir88 the only "reference" in your draft is "interviews with him" - which is totally unacceptable for Wikipedia - We are not interested in what he says about himself, only in what others have said about him.
As per WP:42 Articles require significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Unless you can find such coverage, I am afraid that the subject is unsuitable for a Wikipedia article - Arjayay (talk) 14:46, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

@Abdulmusawir88, our notability criteria for academics is here. The sources needed to prove his notability, and which would be used to build an article, do not need to be on the web and do not need to be in English. They only need to meet the criteria outlined by Arjayay above. 97.126.106.3 (talk) 15:15, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Declined, not rejected (which is more severe), because it lacks references and other reasons. Unless people have published about your grandfather (see comment, above), may not be possible. David notMD (talk) 17:52, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Italics

How to write an article's title in Italics? Yes, I have read WP:ITALICTITLE but I am not getting it. Looking forward for someone's help. Cheers! Leoneix _(talk) 14:55, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

@Leoneix: Welcome to the Teahouse. Please read the documentation at {{italic title}}. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:06, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks Leoneix _(talk) 15:46, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Leoneix I had this same question a while back, if you are using {{Infobox album}} or {{Taxobox}}, the title of the article should automatically italicize. Sorry for the late reply I don't frequent here often. X-750 _{I've made a mistake, haven't I?} 00:43, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

@X750,Yep! I figured it out. Thanks Leoneix _(talk) 04:41, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Blind scientist

I was wondering if blind people could have successful careers in science and if so, what field of science? I would really like to hear your opinions! Mtbuser name (talk) 15:54, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, @Mtbuser name, and welcome to the Teahouse. Unfortunately, this is a help forum supporting people having practical difficulties editing Wikipedia, not a general chat forum. In fact, there is no such place on Wikipedia at all to ask that sort of question, except perhaps the REFDESK. I think yours is a question for you to use a search engine on and then to land on some other discussion fora or news articles. But, in short, I think the actual answer to that question is 'Yes'. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 16:09, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Mtbuser name. Amy Bower is a blind oceanographer. Cullen328 (talk) 16:15, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

See also Joshua Miele.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 17:23, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

And Geerat J. Vermeij --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 19:05, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

@Mtbuser name, please don't removed answered posts from the Teahouse, even your own. They will be automatically archived after several days. 97.126.106.3 (talk) 19:25, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Article Review before re-submission

Hey all,

I posted a couple days ago, but am hoping I could lean on the Teahouse's assistance in making sure my draft Draft:Barbarians (2021 film) is in solid shape before I resubmit it. Friendly user Bilorv indicated I should add in some more specifically cited reviews which I've done now (thanks Bilorv!); but I figured I would toss the draft in the Teahouse first just to get general impressions on if there's anything else obviously missing.

The only thing I would mention is that it is an independent film - and while I firmly believe it's notable enough to deserve an article, there is some limited information out there regarding some things like where exactly it was filmed, what the budget was, etc (at least, from what I could dig up myself). A MINOTAUR (talk) 16:18, 7 May 2022 (UTC) A MINOTAUR (talk) 16:17, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, A MINOTAUR, and welcome to the Teahouse. The Teahouse is not really an appropriate place to ask for informal review (though people often do so). Whether particular information such as locaton and budget are available is not really the point: the question is whether there has been substantial independent coverage: uncontroversail factual information such as that (well, at least the location: the budgt is not always uncontroversial) can come from non-independent sources, as long as there are adequate independent sources to establish notability. I haven't looked in detail, but your first four references, and no 7, are not independent, so do not contribute to notability. References to iMDB should be removed, and your citation 12 seems to be garbled: it is to the LA Times (which is usually a reliable source), but says it's to Facebook and Twitter. ColinFine (talk) 16:42, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. My mistake on posting it here - I figured The Teahouse was kind of a "catchall" for new user questions & general advice. Regardless, thanks for the tips on citations and all. I'll try to reinforce or change some references as needed to make the page a bit more robust. Citation 12 is a goofy one lol. It seems the automatic citation feature must have picked up on their website a bit incorrectly. Regardless, it should be fixed now! A MINOTAUR (talk) 17:16, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

@A MINOTAUR: I've accepted the draft, as your changes address the issue I had with the draft not showing notability. I've made a number of minor changes to conform to Wikipedia's house style in this edit. — Bilorv (talk) 17:57, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks Bilorv! You've been a big help in getting my first article down. I appreciate seeing your edits as well - I'm still very much working on the habit of the house style down, especially in my tendency to capitalize more than I need.

Regardless, best of luck, and have a good one! A MINOTAUR (talk) 18:05, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Changing list defined references to inline references

I am working to improve this article Himetataraisuzu-hime and it has lots of list defined references that I cannot edit in visual editor mode. This is causing me issues, how can I turn these references into regular references capable of being edited by the visual editor? Is this a deprecated feature? Immanuelle 💗 (please tag me) 16:58, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Immanuelle, hello and welcome to the Teahouse, I note your question has gone unanswered for a while, I believe it is somewhat convoluting, but allow me attempt to answer, have you looked at WP:LDRHOW? Maybe it can be of help. Celestina007 (talk) 23:07, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Look at my sandbox?

Article Four-player chess exists. So in my sandbox I've completly overhauled the article, and I plan to cut/copy/paste. It is a definite improvement. If this is the correct place, I was wondering if someone could look at my sandbox to see if my planned changes are A. clear B. I know my references are not particularly nice, but tell me if things like that need to be fixed/where I could do that. C. Everything's encyclopedic. If this is not the correct place, where should I go?

Thanks! Bedfordres (talk) 21:33, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi Bedfordres. I like chess and I've played chess, but don't know much about this particular variant of the game. Even if I did, however, it seems pretty hard to just say to expect someone to look at your sandbox, compare it to the existing article and see how clearly better your version is. That's essentially what is being asked of others by a bold copy-and-paste rewrite like you're saying you're going to do. In some cases, such rewrites often seem to end up being reverted because it's too big to break things down and see whether it really was an improvement. So, maybe it would be a good idea to be a little WP:CAUTIOUS here and discuss what you'd like to do over at Talk:Four-player chess first to see what others familiar with the subject matter might think. You could add a Template:Please see to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chess as well to let that WikiProject's members know as well. Full rewrites of existing articles done via copy-and-pasting sometimes lead to confusion and misunderstanding because it seems as if one editor is trying to ignore what others might think or even a previously established consensus related to such articles. There's also the possiblilty of new issues related to formatting or style consistency being introduced that might not be apparent from focusing only on the one article in question. I'm just going to point out that your recent attempt to move the article to a new title was reverted shortly thereafter by a different editor because they didn't agree with it for a style-based reason. The page move also wasn't really the type of thing that the Wikipedia community considers to be a WP:MINOR edit, and it could be potentionally contentious for some reason (e.g. Three-player chess would likely also be affected). So, it might be better to get others who work on chess-related or chess-variant articles involved and ask them for feedback. Ultimately, the WP:ONUS falls upon you to convince others that the changes you want to make are things that improve the article. If you're WP:BOLD, just go ahead an make them and everyone else is just WP:SILENCE, then perhaps everything will be fine. If, however, at some point another editor either partially or completely undos the changes you make, then it falls upon you to try and seek consensus for them. With a big change like this, it sometimes can help avoid edit warring and other unpleasantness by simply proposing them on the article talk page first and give others a chance to look them over. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:25, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Haven't read all your points. The current article is a mess. I have something that at the very least would be more accurate, though I shouldn't of mentioned that, it comes off as boasting, though that was not my intention. I don't care if someone edits my work or no, I was hoping someone could read it and tell me if it is at least wikipedia acceptable. I'll read all your points now, sorry I don't think I was clear. Bedfordres (talk) 22:31, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

@Marchjuly So I was not trying to boast, or take away people's time. I was/am concerned about some things...The sourcing is bad, I may rely to much on a primary source, and I don't know if the articles clear to people who don't have expertise in this subject. Thank you for your help, I will post on that talk page and perhaps thewiki project Bedfordres (talk) 23:04, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

I wasn't trying to imply that you were boasting or that the current article isn't in need of improvement. I was only stating that trying to improve everything in one fell swoop sometimes creates other problems. Perhaps a more piecemeal approach in which you incorporate the changes you feel need to be made into the article in stages might be better. This often makes it easier to discuss changes and then incorporate them when a consensus has been established, and reduces the chance of changes being reverted by someone else simply because there're too many being made at once to properly assess them. Of course, every minute change need not be discussed, but it might work better if at least the major changes are, particularly if they're not being made for some clear-cut and very well-established policy or guideline reason. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:10, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

@Marchjuly Ok, thank you. Sorry I misread you. I will do that. Bedfordres (talk) 23:15, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Two important points:

1. You need to discuss your proposal at Talk:Four-player chess. If you make your extensive changes to the article without discussing them first, you can be sure that someone will revert them.
2. You shouldn't use cut-and-paste. It destroys the edit history of the material copied. Indeed, the current contents of your sandbox is technically a copyright violation, as you've copied other people's work without giving them due credit. Maproom (talk) 22:31, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Who did I copy; I'm genuinly confused Bedfordres (talk) 22:32, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

On November 26th, you copied the entire contents of Four-player chess. If you look at its edit history, you'll see contributions by Neils51, JacobOfChess, an IP address, Sdrqaz, and over 100 others. You haven't given any of them credit for their work. Incidentally, I agree with you that your sandbox is an improvement on the article. But if you approach this like a bull in a china shop, your work will end up wasted. Maproom (talk) 22:44, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

@Maproom@RudolfRed I didn't know that, thank you. for what its worth, almost all of the copied material I deleted(minus template with photo thing), but anyways. Bedfordres (talk) 23:01, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

didn't know that refering to the copyright law thing. Bedfordres (talk) 23:06, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

@Bedfordres: Copying entire articles into your user sandbox can sometimes lead to problems as pointed out above, but attribution would be most likely be restored and the page history would most likely be preserved when you copied and pasted your version back into the article. For minor tweaks and changes, this probably doesn't matter much since such things are usually quite easy to figure out. For major changes (e.g. a complete rewrite), things can be much more confusing. The problem is that the link in the attribution chain connecting your sandbox and the old version of the article would be unclear. Someone might mistakenly assume that everything in your sandbox was your own original work and not something that incorporated and built on the work of others. Even if the edit summary you leave when adding the content back to the article states something like "Copied and pasted improved version from my sandbox", there would be no 100% easy way to determine where the content in your sandbox came from. So, if you're going to do something like this again, simply giving "Created new sandbox with content copied and pasted from article X" or something similar as your edit summary when you add the content to your sandbox usually is sufficient. You can fix the issue with your current sandbox as explained in WP:RIA. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:29, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

@Bedfordres: Read WP:CWW RudolfRed (talk) 22:54, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

zaferalpat

why my page didnt approved? Zaferalpat (talk) 00:27, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

@Zaferalpat: No sources, no article, no debate. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 00:33, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

@Zaferalpat: Also, no autobiographies. ClaudineChionh (talk – contribs) 01:06, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Attempts at autobiography are allowed, just strongly advised against. David notMD (talk) 02:01, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Zaferalpat, and welcome to the Teahouse. Please understand that Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources. ColinFine (talk) 17:18, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Ongoing News Event: Casey White & Vicky White

Hi, I was wondering if the recent ongoing event of prison escape by criminal and maximum security prisoner Casey White, in which he's been helped by a corrections officer named Vicky White (no relation) would be considered notable enough for a Wikipedia entry? The event has been widely covered by national and international news and thus far the pair have evaded being captured (in itself atypical), but at what point does that cross over to being considered notable by wiki standards?

Additionally, I assume if the answer is yes, the article would have to be about this event itself rather than either one of the people involved (tho Casey White was the perpetuator of a 2015 interstate crime spree and convicted of murder in 2022). What are the best practices and naming/titling conventions for something like that?

Coverage: NYTimes, CNN, Newsweek, CBS (national) — Preceding unsigned comment added by SleepyWhippet (talk • contribs) 02:09, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

SleepyWhippet (talk) 02:02, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

@SleepyWhippet: Not something I've been following, but yes, if this does meet the notability criteria at NCRIME, the article should be about the event, not the people (see CRIME)). ClaudineChionh (talk – contribs) 02:15, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, what would a possible title be for the potential wiki Article? SleepyWhippet (talk) 03:06, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Accidental AfD nom

I accidentally did a AfD when it should have been a speedy deletion, it was for the redirect only. I am unsure how to resolve this now? Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anderson Museum of Contemporary Art PigeonChickenFish (talk) 02:05, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

You can WP:WITHDRAW the nomination and make a not that you accidentally nominated it for deletion. —Mythdon (talk • contribs) 02:08, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, hopefully this works. PigeonChickenFish (talk) 02:12, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

No problem :) —Mythdon (talk • contribs) 02:15, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Just curious

Does anyone know why when you're editing an article, and you do an edit preview before publishing, to make sure that you haven't missed anything, the layout of the article in preview is different to the way it appears in the actual article when published e.g. the line breaks? I'm not sure if it's been asked before, but if it has, my apologies. Editrite! (talk) 05:12, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

No expert but this page suggests a few things to look at ?

Might narrow the gaps :)

Wikipedia:Browser notes - Wikipedia Jasonbrown1965 (talk) 11:52, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion. I have used both Internet Explorer and Microsoft Edge, and there doesn't seem to be any difference in the results, but I did notice that it's a different font with Edge. Editrite! (talk) 03:49, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Help edititing Article

Hi I need help reviewing editing a article. I recently submited and automatically got deleted or moved. I gave all the information needed. The source I gave is for referance that it existed. Ones that mainly got article deleted is blog, youtube channel. I added that to for it to be found. There where two other referances on their as well. I seen other youtube listed on here before. So not sure why that was included with the deletion. So am needing help with article and referance to pass afc guidlines. Thank You

link: Draft:Ss Stacks 2 ScooterSlim (talk) 05:28, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

@ScooterSlim: Is there a reason why content from the Blogger reference has been copied over into the draft? That's copyright violation, which is taken very seriously on here. Furthermore, that reference doesn't establish the notability of the subject, which is what is required for a subject to be on the encyclopedia. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:37, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Status: Created as article, nominated for Speedy deletion, instead moved to draft Draft:Ss Stacks 2, not yet submitted to AfC. The nom and move were actions by editors - not 'automatic'. As written - first person, no valid refs, copyright violation for copying content from your own blog - there is no potential for this to be approved. Either give up, or delete content and start over. David notMD (talk) 12:47, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Just for knowledge of the biography. All music has the same info as well. I can take that out. Will need add another referance for the biography? ScooterSlim (talk) 16:38, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, ScooterSlim, and welcome to the Teahouse. Please see the answer that I gave to #Zaferalpat a few paragraphs above this. Unless you find several sources that meet that specification (they are published by somebody with a reputation for fact-checking and editorial control, and they are written and published by people completely unconnected with you), you will not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, and no article about you will be accepted however and by whoever it is written.

If enough such sources do exist, then an article about you is possible. Writing a Wikipedia article is one of the most difficult tasks there is for inexperienced Wikipedia editors. Writing about yourself makes it even more difficult. Note that if we do at some point have an article about you (whoever writes it) , the article will not belong to you, will not be controlled by you, and will not necessarily say what you want it to say. ColinFine (talk) 17:28, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

What is freedom day

i want to do my homework So that I can pass and make them proud 41.116.209.86 (talk) 07:52, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. There are several articles about various countries with a "Freedom Day"; you can find them at Freedom Day. 331dot (talk) 07:57, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

hi ip user! if you have further questions you may stop over at the Reference desk (note that they don't do your homework directly, only point you to what you're looking for), or just search what you're looking for directly. happy reading! 💜  melecie  talk - 09:51, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

How to avoid speedy deletion

I'm facing this problem on pages i created. I gets notifications on speedy deletion from some bots. Can you explain me what is speedy deletion and how to avoid speedy deletion. Thank you GuardedEdits (talk) 09:41, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

hi GuardedEdits and welcome to the teahouse! the speedy deletion criteria can be found over at Criteria for speedy deletion. you can avoid it by not copying from other websites. additionally, articles (those with no draft: prefix) have much stricter rules of inclusion, so it's better to keep stuff you're working on as a draft until you believe it's ready to become an article. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 09:46, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Reasons were given for each of the three Speedy deletions. All of the nominations were by editors (not bots). The first was a draft with no content. The second was for copyright infringment (you copied stuff). The third was because the topic - an actress - has been 'salted' due to previous, failed efforts to create an article about her. David notMD (talk) 12:55, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Jairam Das Bheel

Computers Operator Jairam Daas Bhil (talk) 10:56, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

hi Jairam Daas Bhil and welcome to the teahouse! are you here to make an autobiography about yourself? if so, don't: autobiographies are discouraged in wikipedia due to it being hard to make one that would also fit in line with wikipedia's many policies. instead, there may be other places you can write one in. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 11:03, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Is it appropriate to add a person's twitter as an external link? Or inline?

hey all, just found the treehous - teahouse?

:) Looking at this page:

Raymond Winbush - Wikipedia

Wondering if it's appropriate to create an external links section, including one to his twitter?

Or should that be noted at the end of his bio?

Tried looking up policy but couldn't find anything, specifically.

thanks for any help :D

jas Jasonbrown1965 (talk) 11:43, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Before considering adding his own social media accounts, I would suggest that you try and put in some reliable sources. The article is at serious risk of being deleted because of its lack of reliable sources.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   11:55, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks Velella, will do :) Jasonbrown1965 (talk) 11:59, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

The subject's Twitter account (i.e. something the subject has tweeted) could possible cited as a source in support of article content as long as it's done so in accordance with WP:ABOUTSELF or WP:BLPSELFPUB, but it would be considered a WP:PRIMARY source and you would need to be very careful when doing so. Adding a link to the subject's Twitter account might be acceptable as an external link as long as it's not a problem per WP:ELMINOFFICIAL and item #10 of WP:ELNO. In other words, if the subject has an official website that also provides links to their Twitter account and other social media accounts, then it's better to provide a link to only their official website. If the subject is fairly well known for their tweeting and their primary online activity is Twitter, then perhaps it might be OK to link to their official Twitter account. It's probably better in that case to only link to a verified Twitter account so that there's no reasonable doubt that it's the subject who's doing the tweeting or the subject's people doing the tweeting. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:22, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

This appears to have been answered already but I thought I'd mention some more content you can read up on that explicitly addresses the usage of twitter on Wikipedia such as WP:TWITTER, WP:TWITTER-EL, and WP:RSPTWITTER. TipsyElephant (talk) 12:43, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Removed vote from blocked sock

Is Wikipedia:Dealing_with_sockpuppets#Removal Required or Optional ? Will it apply for both on going and recently closed voting ? And it is a common rule for all wikis or each wiki has its own rule for vote of sock ? Leemyongpak (talk) 12:28, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

hi Leemyongpak and welcome to the teahouse! a sockpuppet's not-votes can be removed (or other methods) to prevent confusion or the illusion of a larger support/oppose. however this shouldn't be done in already-closed AfDs since those are meant not to be edited. finally, each wiki is a separate project and thus have their own rules for sockpuppetry, with Dealing with sockpuppets only applying to the english wikipedia. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 12:41, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

My article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed, and it has not been accepted

Hi editors! I created a draft of an article (Draft:Tissue therapy), and today I've been notified that the article isn't created at this time. Reviewers inserted some templates on the draft and on my user talk page, telling that the subject does not deserve to have a separate page on Wikipedia because the references (that I provided) don't show the subject significance. Aside from that, they are trying to have me to study the rules of the platform, to fix mistakes that I made, and to resubmit the draft. ...Or to request the article deletion.

Hmm, I find that a bit unfriendly. I created the article from a link to a non-existing article on a page about Vladimir Filatov. The link is still there (on the day of writing this), and invites to create the article with the name "Tissue therapy". Reviewers titled their edit actually, this is a really bad idea. Maybe they suspect me in promotion the subject. I'm not going to promote it. I wrote a brief complete note, as neutral as possible (it rather tends to criticize the subject). I'm not going to rewrite it, and to request the deletion either. None of proposed options. I even do not desire to have a separate article for the subject. I violated the rules. I'm sorry for that! That was not on purpose.

As I understood the material will live at least 6 months...

My question: Why do reviewers not propose to transfer materials to a more appropriate place? Tosha Langue (talk) 14:58, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Tosha Langue First, what you got at Draft:Tissue therapy and on your Talk page is standardized wording for whenever a draft is declined by a reviewer (not "Reviewers"). Second, at English Wikipedia, medical/health topics require a high standard for references, described at WP:MEDRS. I cannot read Russian, but suspect the references you provided do not meet this standard. Third, as to next steps, you can ask that the draft be deleted. If you do not, at five months you will get a reminder that it is due for deletion, and that action will be taken at six months. The clock is reset if the draft is edited in the interim. David notMD (talk) 15:48, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

This is it, @David notMD! The references don't meet WP:MEDRS. I mostly agree with the reviewer's standardized wording. The article should not exist on Wikipedia. Maybe I should add this material to Vladimir Filatov page. Nevertheless I wanted to insert a claim that tissue therapy isn't in use in scientific community, but didn't find any citation for this. This case is similar to Linus Pauling and his vitamin C therapy, however it seems that reliable and independent critics of Pauling's ideas are abundant, unlike Filatov's. Tosha Langue (talk) 17:12, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Tosha Langue, Wikipedia must of course cover "therapies" that don't achieve anything (or worse), if these are notable. I shan't attempt to judge whether "tissue therapy" is notable; but if you believe that it is, you might post a message at Wikipedia:Fringe theories/Noticeboard, briefly summarizing what's written immediately above and asking for suggestions. If you're lucky, your message will excite the interest of one or more editors who aren't just accustomed to this kind of subject but can also read Russian more or less fluently. -- Hoary (talk) 23:21, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Draftify/CSD/AfD

Hi,

I came across this article (Bhushita Ahuja). The references don't support the article and an article on the same person was deleted through AfD in April.

As a ~new person I'm unsure if it should be moved to draft, go for CSD, or AfD again. Suggestions please? Any links to good reading material on what I should have done also appreciated! Carver1889 (talk) 17:33, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

@Carver1889 Welcome to Teahouse! None of the current sources are an improvement from the last AfD discussion, so I've nominated it for deletion a second time. I also noted the dubious usage of irrelevant academic sourcing that fail to verify any of the content in this biography itself. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 17:51, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

how do I move an addition to an article from my sandbox to the live page

I'm a student completing an assignment. RYNOT1206 (talk) 20:03, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Please, see Wikipedia:So_you_made_a_userspace_draft. Ruslik_Zero 20:42, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi RYNOT1206. Since you seem to have essentially asked your Wiki Ed advisor Ian (Wiki Ed) the same question at User talk:Ian (Wiki Ed)#Need help request from RYNOT1206 (talk), maybe it's best for us here at the Teahouse to let Ian respond to your question. Ian is probably more familiar with your class and what's expected of you as a student, and may be able to give advice more particular to your specific situation. Ian may also be better able to assess your sandbox and whether it's ready for the article namespace. Students who try to move content from their sandboxes into articles sometimes run into problems for one reason or another (as you can see from all the messages on Ian's user talk page); so, maybe waiting a bit will help you avoid some of them. My understanding when it comes to courses like this is that your course's instructor should be OK with assessing or grading your coursework while it's still in your user sandbox. Once you add something to an article, the next person who edits the article can modify or remove (partially or totally) what you added; so, your instructor might not even see what you actually did if someone else has already changed it. — Marchjuly (talk) 20:44, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

@RYNOT1206, I see that you have completed the training required by your course. However I also see that you spent 28 seconds on the "Moving group work live" section back in March. I suggest that you go over that again. One of the 14 sections in that training is "Adding content to an existing article?" StarryGrandma (talk) 00:18, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. RYNOT1206 (talk) 00:23, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

AOL

Is AOL a reliable source? I've read through the referencing for beginners guide but I'm still getting fairly mixed signals here. I've never cited a source before, and I don't want to do something wrong. I'm trying to cite a news article from 2012, and I've noticed the writer of the article is listed, and nowhere on the news article does it seem to say that it's been looked over and reviewed. Does this make it a self-published source? Did I not read it through enough? I looked at the list of commonly used sources and AOL was not in there, so I thought I should go here to ask for help. Anything is appreciated. - Cheers, KoolKidz112 (hit me up) 20:31, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi KoolKidz112. Are you asking about this AOL or some other AOL? I don't think the American Online "AOL" is generally considered to be news media organization that creates it's own original news content, but maybe it does. Was the article you want you want to cite written by someone working (or reporting) for AOL? Was it an article simply being hosted by AOL? Some news aggregate sites do have their own independent news departments generating original content, but they also host lots of content created by others, including some of which is unvetted user-generated content. For example, if you read an article using Yahoo!, Yahoo! isn't always the original source of the content; Yahoo! could've gotten the content from someone or somewhere else and is just republishing it. So, if you can provide more information about the source (i.e. who wrote the article, what organization they seem to work for, what type of article is it (e.g. blog, editorial, news report)) and which Wikipedia article you want to use it in, then perhaps someone can help you sort things out? — Marchjuly (talk) 21:07, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Improving my article to meet Wikipedia standards (Top 100 Films of All-Time, according to Rotten Tomatoes, IMDb, etc.)

I've drafted an article that lists the top 100 films of all-time based in now way on my own opinion, but purely based on an average ranking from 5 trusted sources: Rotten Tomatoes, IMDb, AFI, Sights & Sounds, and Empire (each referenced in my article). Unfortunately, it's been declined on the basis that it uses my own opinion but it doesn't; in fact, I don't even like the way Top 10 came out, but math is math :D

Can someone help me understand how I (if at all), I might present this data/information in a way that is suitable for Wikipedia? I'm a first-time publisher so could very well be missing a blatant issue but would love any guidance! Nuferdan (talk) 23:56, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

You have asked this at the AFC help desk; please only use one method of seeking assistance, to avoid duplication. 331dot (talk) 00:19, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

You can't, because Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia. We don't publish original synthesis (which is what this is, as you're synthesising information from sources) because encyclopaedias don't do that. We merely summarise what other, reliable sources that have already done the synthesis say. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 00:20, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

@Nuferdan: Extrapolating trends to come to a conclusion is not what Wikipedia is for. This would be considered improper synthesis. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:41, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Citing sources via the Wikipedia Library?

Hi, as the title may suggest I will maybe be citing some sources from the Wikipedia Library very soon, some of which will be behind a paywall. What I want to know is that do I need to include a url? EBSCO permalinks can be funny, and I was just wondering if it was possible to get away with just a doi/PMID identifier? Obviously I'll need to put in url-access=subscription in the cite journal template but I just wanted to know the deal with urls. Thanks X-750 _{I've made a mistake, haven't I?} 00:38, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

@X750: There is no requirement for a cited source to be available online. The source needs to be verifiable, that's all. If verification means going to a local library or paying a fee, so be it. A web link is just a convenience and it isn't a required. Citing sources behind a paywall is acceptable. Just include the doi or PMID parameter in the {{cite}} template, and that is sufficient for anyone with access to review the referenced work. ~Anachronist (talk) 04:33, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

How to mark the British Crown Dependency on the map?

I have uploaded File:Map of countries by BMI.svg for List of countries by body mass index. This map is based on the data provided by the United Nation. I wonder that British Crown Dependencies are not part of the United Kingdom, but the United Kingdom is responsible for them, the UN didn't provided data for them. Should they be marked in the same colours as the UK or marked as "no data"? (Sorry for my poor English) --BlackShadowG (talk) 01:14, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

As "no data", BlackShadowG. -- Hoary (talk) 03:32, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

VIISAN

Draft:VIISAN Bernice860114 (talk) 01:41, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Your creation Draft:VIISAN has been rejected, Bernice860114. This means "Please stop", because continuing your efforts would just waste more of your and other editors' time. -- Hoary (talk) 03:32, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

References vs. Inline Citations

Hi, I was wondering if it would be possible for me to add References to an article without having them necessarily be inline citations attached to specific segments of the article? I ask because I am working on a AfC draft where I would like to make sure the Notability of the subject is sufficiently verifiable for the reviewers once I submit it, and I do have a fair amount of printed magazine/journal articles that I could add to the references, but I don't necessarily have more to say about the subject than I already have in the article at the moment, these references would just further establish/reinforce the existing points. If this is possible, please let me know how because I can't figure out how to add references manually to the ref list anymore, I know it used to be possible years ago tho! SleepyWhippet (talk) 02:21, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Template:Reflist and Help:Footnotes should be helpful. Regards, Ariconte (talk) 03:03, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

@Ariconte thanks, I ended up creating two different heading names -- References and Footnotes -- which I think will be more clear? If so, will be adding more manual references. SleepyWhippet (talk) 04:43, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Yugoslav and Serbian

Can we call avant-garde musician Konstrakta Yugoslav and Serbian, since she was alive before the dissolution of Yugoslavia? 85.238.69.176 (talk) 04:19, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Every person I know who was born in Yugoslavia (including every member of my family on my father's side, my son's best friend's grandparents, and a former supervisor) identify themselves as Croatian or Serbian or whatever subdivision of the former Yugoslavia currently exists. And having visited the region a couple of times, nobody I met, even the older folks, identified themselves as Yugoslavian, but as the region is called now. That's just a personal observation. For Konstrakta, it is more relevant to call her Serbian, as that is a better indication of the region than Yugoslavian, which is significantly larger and no longer relevant because it includes Serbia. And it's highly probably that she herself identifies as Serbian also. ~Anachronist (talk) 04:24, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Muholi Art Institute

Please guide or assis in correcting:

Muholi Art Institute (MAI) uses the creative process to nurture and archive the voices, hearts, and minds of historically marginalized individuals.

We are offering a space for them to produce freely content that matter, to imagine, to believe, and to represent their creative vision for their lives and communities, through visual arts activism.

We use the medium of (documentary) photography.

Through consistent workshops with long-term partners,  including youth organizations, schools, universities, and internships; art becomes the starting point of a larger life process, and the start of larger conversations about the future of our black communities. This is the core premise of MAI Mbusongcongo (talk) 04:46, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

@Mbusongcongo: Welcome to the Teahouse. If you're thinking about using this content in a draft, I'll stop you right there and say that that will make reviewers decline it immediately. Ad copy has no place on Wikipedia, since the tone is wholly inappropriate for the medium. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 04:52, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Is this a copyright violation?

I was looking for citations for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermite#Hazards And I came across https://studyqueries.com/thermite-reaction/. It seems like very similar worded to that website... Anyone have thoughts on this? WikipediaNeko (talk) 04:53, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

I'd guess that the studyqueries site copied from Wikipedia, not the reverse EvergreenFir (talk) 05:02, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

How to write locked edits.

I want to write on locked edits because i have knowledge on that different fields Aditya2422341 (talk) 05:43, 9 May 2022 (UTC)