Jump to content

Wikipedia:Teahouse

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Rocknrollmancer (talk | contribs) at 17:06, 15 November 2022 (→‎Warning about Undisclosed Payments for Creating Wiki Page: add Commemorative Stamp). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Skip to top
Skip to bottom


Introducing my parents/family to being a wikipedian

Hello! i have been a wikipedian for a while now and it's fun but my parents don't know yet, they use WP but don't like the editing aspect, my brother uses it the most and once said he would never have the guts to edit WP articles in case he makes a mistake, and my other brother doesn't think much of what he calls "wikifolk", he would be the hardest.


What would be a good way introduce WP maintainence to my parents? maybe sending them the WP:CANTBREAKIT? how do i explain to them that's its not all new articles and major edits? that you are free to fix any little mistake you see and revert vandalism? i'm a photog and my parents do know that so maybe i should introduce them to the commons first.


Or should i just straight up tell them i patrol and edit WP?


OGWFP (talk) 21:20, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@OGWFP Well, if you wanted to tell them I’m sure they wouldn’t mind, as Wikipedia can be edited by anyone. You may wish to tell them you edit, although not necessarily tell them the pages or your username? I personally have told people in real life I edit Wikipedia articles although I don’t tell people my username as I like to keep it separate. Blanchey (talk) 23:11, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@OGWFP And make sure that each person editing uses their own, individual account name. If any of you share a computer or other device, like a tablet or cell phone, everyone should log out of WP when they leave the computer (don't stay signed in and let anyone else edit using your usernane). Good luck! David10244 (talk) 06:56, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@OGWFP Hi. Your family should be aware of Wikipedia content disclaimer. One of the downsides of Wikipedia is that Wikipedia is not censored. Sorry. You can also learn how to hide an image (see Help:Options to hide an image). If you see something offensive or disturbing, you can even avoid visiting the article. When you visit an article, there is no warning template nor a rating system. There is a warning template on the talk page of the article. Cwater1 (talk) 05:25, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Cwater1: are you sure you posted this message in the correct section? The original question has nothing to do with concerns about how they feel about seeing certain material, a desire to avoid certain images, or the general idea of content-quality. DMacks (talk) 06:12, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I know what the conversation was. I was pointing out a fact. Now I think about it, it was pointless what I said.Cwater1 (talk) 09:33, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @OGWFP. Here is a better reply. You can ignore what I said above. Anyways, there is nothing wrong with introducing your family to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is made possible by contributors like you.Cwater1 (talk) 09:52, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]


lol bro they'll be fine trust me Jondvdsn1 (talk) 13:32, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I would go ahead and bring up the subject. You can then address any specific concerns they may have about you editing. Draw up a list of all the positive things that you can gain from it and present them to your parents. I can think of far worse activities on the Web than this one. Good luck!!Rogermx (talk) 15:33, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia has ups and downs. we should focus more on the ups and not the downs.Cwater1 (talk) 00:11, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Renaming John Henry Peyton to John Howe Peyton

 Courtesy link: John Henry Peyton

Before my wrist surgery (and although the very competent local genealogist was out sick that day), I started a new article about a long-dead Prince William County, Virginia delegate whom I thought was named John Henry Peyton, per a post-2000 published Peyton family genealogy at that library (which unfortunately did not give his birth and death dates). I expected to write a second article about his cousin (both sharing the same paternal grandfather) John Howe Peyton, who served in the Virginia Senate representing Augusta and Rockbridge counties significantly to the west a couple of decades later. However, when the genealogist got back, he pointed me to a family biography available on Project Gutenberg which demonstrated that John Howe Peyton actually held both legislative positions. So I revised the article briefly one-handed to include the correct refs and mention the confusion. For what it's worth, while that long-ago published family biography does not meet modern research standards (i.e. gets both dates of legislative service slightly wrong), the wikipedia article's title needs to be changed to meet the revised infobox and contents generally. I'm still trying to track down John Henry Peyton's vital statistics (his index entry in the recent Washington family genealogy incorrectly cites 2 pages or missing genealogical entries and the Virginia Historical Society library/archive has no index entry for him), but it's clear to me he doesn't otherwise meet wikipedia's notability standards. On the other hand, John Howe Peyton does meet those criteria, and I plan to work on the article when the genealogy library opens Saturday, even if still typing one-handed. Thanks for your help. And sorry for the confusion.Jweaver28 (talk) 22:38, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Jweaver28, I've moved "John Henry Peyton" to John Howe Peyton -- a minor chore that I think could have been accomplished with just one hand. I do note that the article is prefaced with an announcement that it's being reworked; I hope that it will be augmented, because as it is I can't see how Peyton is significant. (Yes, he held a series of posts, but what did he propose, how did he vote, what did he do, etc, while he held them?) -- Hoary (talk) 23:42, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
My two cents is too much genealogy about family members. David notMD (talk) 04:37, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. -- Hoary (talk) 12:34, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Hoary. I thought I had changed the article's name when I made the postsurgical article changes, but clearly did not. Then yesterday evening's changes got stuck/lost in a display driver update, and today proved a bit crazier than I had expected. As for notability, all members of state legislatures meet wikipedia's guideline. I understand they're not as sexy as rock band members or professional athletes, but figuring out who they were is important for historians. For Virginia legislators of previous centuries the genealogy is important, for this was an oligarchy. Then there are the quirks, like "forgetting" those who freed slaves, opposed slavery or for decades after the Civil War (a/k/a War between the States) were Republicans.Jweaver28 (talk) 01:18, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Jweaver28 If the family members meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines, then create articles about them. Until then, it is too much. David notMD (talk) 14:18, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Finding sources on an article

I'm having trouble finding sources on Rawson Stovall, the first syndicated game journalist in the U.S. For example, I found an article on him in The Wall Street Journal on the Wikipedia Library, but said article is so old that I cannot find any copies of it online. — VORTEX3427 (Talk!) 10:10, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sources don't need to be online. Just include the relevant parameters in the citation; usually easiest to fill in the appropriate parameters in the {{cite news}} template. - David Biddulph (talk) 10:16, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I meant that I saw a record of the Wall Street Journal article on the Library, however, I couldn't access it from there - it was only a record of its existence. When I tried searching for it, I couldn't find any trace of it. — VORTEX3427 (Talk!) 10:36, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Vortex3427 Have you tried asking at WP:RX? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:14, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I found this article on him in the New York Times: https://www.nytimes.com/1983/06/08/us/youth-s-column-makes-him-popular-with-top-minds-in-video-games.html?searchResultPosition=2 Rogermx (talk) 15:40, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Problems editing a discography and adding a new title.

Column formatting problems. I am trying to add the 1975 single "Calypso" to the John Denver discography, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Denver_discography#Singles Packzap (talk) 04:13, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Calypso" is the "B" side to John Denver's single "I'm Sorry" and peaked at position #2 in the US Billboard Hot 100 chart in 1975. The problem is in getting the columns to line up properly as I don't have chart info for the other columns. The song is from the same album "Windsong". Packzap (talk) 04:25, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Is there a good resource on how to format these funky Wiki table columns correctly? Packzap (talk) 04:27, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'll sort of answer my own question (talking to myself in the tea house {grin}. I just noticed on the John Denver discography page, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Denver_discography#Singles that an entry was added to the bottom for "Charted B-sides" and contains "Calypso". Hence there is no need apparently to add it to the listing of singles farther up the page from 1975? Packzap (talk) 05:27, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I tried adding an Endnote to the 1975 single "I'm Sorry" to alert readers about the B-side single listing of "Calypso" farther down the page, but all that came thru was a "carrot" symbol. :( How does one insert a proper Endnote? Packzap (talk) 18:48, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

writing a biography

I want to write a bio of a well known commercial artist who is deceased. Is it correct that every fact, such as his employers, places of residence, and so on, must be publicly documented? Some of the information I have is from personal knowledge, such as that he was a Scoutmaster for the Boy Scouts. Can I not write that because it isn't documented? Entwalker (talk) 04:14, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That is correct, yes. If you know something personally, that is original research and is not allowed on Wikipedia. Look for reliable sources that contain the information, and make sure there are sources establishing notability as well or else the article can't be written at all. WPscatter t/c 04:18, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much. Entwalker (talk) 06:16, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Where can I find the criteria for acceptable source material? Someone said there are 4 criteria. Entwalker (talk) 17:21, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Entwalker So that you don't have to read this entire Teahouse page, I'll just copy some of what Fiddle Faddle said above: A source must be reliable, independent, and have significant coverage of the subject or topic. I think the fourth criterion is that the sources must not be primary sources; they should be secondary. Those pages have a LOT of information. David10244 (talk) 06:37, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Entwalker Many people have personal websites which can be archived at the Wayback machine. Citations to these are allowed for simple facts in biographies, as detailed at WP:ABOUTSELF. However, none of that contributes to notability. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:53, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Notability is not an issue, as I have several sources listing achievements etc. But for my subject's personal life, can I reference a book that I helped write, once it's published? It includes details from his heretofore unpublished autobiography. Entwalker (talk) 17:16, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Entwalker, If your unpublished book you want to cite is based on parts of his "unpublished autobiography", the answer is no, as your book would not be considered a reliable source. If parts of your book are based on material found in reliable sources, then use those reliable sources themselves. Quisqualis (talk) 00:14, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Help with a submission

Could someone assist with my submission that needs to be more encyclopedic?

Here are the reviewers comments: This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject. WikiEditor242 (talk) 16:38, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Anar_Simpson — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiEditor242 (talkcontribs) 16:39, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Separate from that comment, there should be no hyperlinks in the article. You have included dozens, which all must be removed. Also, use her full name at first mention (first sentence), and thereafter only her surname. David notMD (talk) 16:54, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! WikiEditor242 (talk) 17:41, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@WikiEditor242 I don't understand what the "digital inclusion of women" is supposed to mean, in normal English words. David10244 (talk) 06:43, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ah ok!
So digital inclusion means ensuring the benefits of the internet and digital technologies are available to everyone. Digitally-excluded people can lack skills, confidence and motivation, along with having limited or no access to equipment and connectivity. And for women that means very little economic opportunity.
I can re-word it in the article submission WikiEditor242 (talk) 17:46, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I have now linked to the Wikipedia article on Digital Inclusion. Thank you for highlighting the need for clarification. WikiEditor242 (talk) 19:12, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How much should I wait till someone renames a category?

Hello everyone!

I requested a rename for the category which I just created. The rename is not because of a spelling error but it's a linguistic error anyway. How long it would take till someone does the rename? Because I want to add some articles to this category after rename.

Regards, Farooq (talk) 17:14, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Farooqkz, you can do it yourself by moving the page. See Wikipedia:Moving a page. StarryGrandma (talk) 17:34, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It's a category so I cannot move it myself. Farooq (talk) 17:36, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Farooqkz: A user has moved Category:Uninvented electrical components to Category:Non-invented electrical components on your request. The name still sounds odd to me. It appears to be intended for examples of Category:Hypothetical technology. A better name may be Category:Hypothetical electrical components. How many articles do you have in mind and can you give examples? If it's just a couple then maybe you can use the existing category. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:51, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah I was unsure about the name, too. "Hypothetical" seems better than "Non-invented" as it is also parallel with this other category you just mentioned. I currently know two pages which fit in this category(whichever its name is): Trancitor and Memristor. Both have been theoretically deduced but not invented, yet. Farooq (talk) 06:35, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PrimeHunter I think I will keep the current name for the category and add pages. We can decide on the category name later. I will add a section in category's talk page regarding this. Farooq (talk) 13:22, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Farooq, don't forget to add appropriate parent categories to this category before you are done. Categories on Wikipedia are nested within larger, less specific categories to form a hierarchy and it also demonstrates relationships so that this category doesn't remain isolated. Within fitting within the category structure, it's unlikely that anyone will come across it or knows how it relates to similar categories (whatever those might be!). Liz Read! Talk! 22:29, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah thanks for reminding. --Farooq (talk) 04:59, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Meeting Notability/Significance Requirements & Reliable Sources

I was interested in adding a page for the song "Sex Dwarf" by Soft Cell, from the Non-Stop Erotic Cabaret album. I felt the track alone has generated enough controversy to be note-worthy, such as its music video being banned in the UK, being covered by Nine Inch Nails, etc. I've read the Wikipedia:Notability (music) article but wanted to seek more opinions.

My main reason for hesitating was the lack of proper sources--the song's controversy is mentioned in BBC documentaries about Soft Cell (like in the Young Guns: Go for It series) but those same documentaries also feature interviews with Marc Almond and Dave Ball where they discuss the song/music video. There are articles about the song online, but they seem to be mostly editorials by publications such as Vice News. (https://www.vice.com/en/article/9ajkk5/soft-cell-sex-dwarf)

Apologies if similar questions are asked often, basically just looking for input on if this is a viable topic for a separate page and if so, are there any recommendations for sources? Or could I add more information to the album's wiki instead, or do nothing? Cheers Yalocalgaynoah (talk) 20:00, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Yalocalgaynoah, The Vice piece seems objective enough in parts that you should be able to use it as a source for some of your article. It's kind of a review and partly a memoir, if I read it correctly. Wikipedia says, "There is no consensus on the reliability of Vice Media publications", therefore, be selective in what you use from it. Quisqualis (talk) 23:47, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
My problem with the Vice item is that it's written in such an arch style that in places I don't know what it means. But perhaps that's just me. Yalocalgaynoah, could you perhaps specify two other good sources? -- Hoary (talk) 00:59, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
[1] might be usable, at least as a starting-point to info and other better refs. DMacks (talk) 06:33, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Reference questions

Hi all. Apologies -- I'm totally new to Wikipedia. Been trying to put together an article in my Sandbox and it was not accepted when submitted -- the reason was that the references "do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject". I'm thinking (hoping) that the basis for this is that the most appropriate references I created are not "reliable" because I can't seem to create links to the articles in the original publication Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly -- a professional publication that is only available online via subscription. I suppose I could create images of the articles that I could share somehow, but they are copyrighted material, so I'm not sure how to proceed. I suspect that others have had this problem and apologize if it's been asked a lot of times before. Any help appreciated! Henry01301 (talk) 21:28, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Henry01301: Thanks for your question, and thanks for taking the matter of sourcing your article seriously. Obviously it is good to have a link to an online version of a source where possible, but it is not required. Where the source is behind a paywall, there are a couple of options open to you. If you can actually get a URL, but it requires subscription, then you can mark it as such: see the description at Template:Cite_journal#Subscription_or_registration_required. The other alternative is just to not have a link. This is often the case when citing a book, for example. The source still needs to be reliable, independent of the subject, and give significant coverage of the source.--Gronk Oz (talk) 21:40, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Henry01301: Looking over the article, which is at Draft:Wendy Sibbison, it is coming along nicely, especially for your first article. It still needs to be edited for tone. At the moment, it is written in quite a promotional way: for example, the opening sentence says that she "carved out a specialty in appellate litigation" instead of simply saying that she specializes in appellate litigation. Similarly, beware of statements like she is "likely the first to [do something]" unless a reliable source says that she is likely the first; it is not up to Wikipedia to make a judgement on matters like that. This is mostly a problem in the lede section; the body of the article is better at being neutral statements of fact.--Gronk Oz (talk) 21:53, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Henry01301 What Gronk Oz said, but when you cite a book, you don't need a URL, but you need to fill out the citation template with the publisher's name, the book title, page number, etc. WP:REFB has a link to the Cite Book template. David10244 (talk) 06:53, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks David10244 and Grok Oz -- I appreciate the help. I need to rework a number of things with this piece. I may well be back for more help. Do you know how to contact a "mentor" for Wikipedia? I seem to remember seeing something about that but have lost the reference. Do you recommend having a mentor? Again, thanks for the support! Henry01301 (talk) 21:23, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A protection filter: scirp.org prevents me from creating the page

Hi ! How to override this protection filter: scirp.org when I try to create the page War on COVID-19 ?

Here's the text of my article :

[article text removed]

-Etienne M (talk) 00:54, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Etienne M, welcome to the Teahouse. Remove the link to scirp.org. It's https://www.scirp.org/journal/paperinformation.aspx?paperid=113299. See MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/September 2022#scirp.org for a discussion. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:08, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That's a remarkable wall of text, Etienne M, but in no way is it a contender for an article titled War on COVID-19. Instead, it's more like Bibliography of the metaphor of a "war" on Covid-19, although this is only my first stab and I'm sure others here can improve on it. Incidentally, I wonder what "scientific" means here, and I'm surprised by the seeming lack of mention of the "war on drugs" and "war on terror". -- Hoary (talk) 01:10, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Etienne M: I would seriously consider finding a different topic to write about - one that isn't under discretionary sanctions - as this area, as with every other one listed here, is not someplace an inexperienced user should be editing in right away. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 02:42, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks very much, PrimeHunter, the error indication had lost me, I didn't understand it but now it's ok.
Thanks Hoary for your contribution. Sorry if my level in english is bad (I'm French man). The title is in effect not the more appropriate (I thought this title: "War on COVID-19" to look like: War on cancer, War on coal, War on drugs, War on gangs, War on poverty, War on terror, War on women). Metaphor of War in the Covid-19 Pandemic would be more accurate, but other appropriate titles could also be found if you have ideas (Political militaristic communication in the Covid-19 Pandemic, or as the french article: Political rhetoric of War in the Covid-19 pandemic [fr]...)
About discretionary sanctions, Jéské Couriano, this new subject don't be a target because it doesn't deal with COVID-19 as medecine, but with Social engineering (political science) produced by political discourses introducing a lot of sanitaries mesures. It is an article I want be a humanities sciences contribution on rhetoric by scientifics papers.
--Etienne M (talk) 10:20, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Etienne M, two points. First, you say About discretionary sanctions, Jéské Couriano, this new subject don't be a target because it doesn't deal with COVID-19 as medecine. It very much would be a target. That's because sanctions apply: For all edits about, and all articles related to, COVID-19, broadly construed. Secondly, I don't think that anyone here will doubt that there is much literature about the war metaphor. No need for you provide any bibliography in any teahouse thread. -- Hoary (talk) 12:46, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Bonjour, Etienne M, et bienvenue au salon de thé. This is not an answer to your question, but a linguistic note: "in effect" is a faux ami for French speakers: it means almost the opposite of en effet. "In effect, A is B" means that A is not B, but may be treated as B for present purposes. A better translation of en effet is "actually" (which of course does not correspond to actuellement'!) ColinFine (talk) 14:01, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hoary, I apologize to you for my lack of understanding. Thank you for giving me the precision that For all edits about, and all articles related to, COVID-19, broadly construed. Does this mean that one has no right to open a new article about Covid-19? Since no one doubts that there are many scientific studies focused on the subject, why should it be subject to sanction? I delete my examples of scientific literature to unclog the page, and since I don't have to prove to you the legitimacy of the subject.
Etienne M, no, you can start a new article related to Covid-19. However, the subject attracts so many crackpots, fanatics, and well-intentioned but gullible people who believe in the crackpottery, and the stakes can be so high, that drafts and articles have to be policed. If you're creating an article about, say, Cimabue, everyone hopes that you make no mistake; but if you do make a mistake then someone will fix it or amiably nudge you to fix it. Don't expect anything similar with a new article related to Covid-19. Jéské Couriano's advice was sound. You'd better get experience of successfully creating Covid-unrelated articles before essaying anything that's related to Covid-19. -- Hoary (talk) 03:03, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
ColinFine : I was mistaken, indeed ! I thank you for this point of language that I have not mastered. It reminds me of some old course already far behind me. I will strive to remember that translation of en effet! --Etienne M (talk) 14:28, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Volca Modular

Hi there! I received a notification that my article Volca Modular was reviewed, but it isn't indexed on any search engine. I'm pretty new so would like to clarify when an article is listed on search engines. Thanks! Schminnte (talk) 01:00, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Schminnte. It has been reviewed as you say so it allows indexing by external search engines but we don't control when it happens. It's up to each search engine to detect the page and see it can be indexed. Some search engines may watch our edit logs and detect it if any edit is made after the review (there are currently none) but I don't promise anything. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:13, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks PrimeHunter, it has appeared in the search engine I use now. Schminnte (talk) 14:58, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Could Imdb be a helpful

Well can it be?, it's trust by almost everyone and I believe that is it rightful. Or The madnesscombat officals website?:http://www.krinkels.net Thegibuspyro (talk) 03:37, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, there. According to WP:RS/IMDB, the Internet Movie Database is not really considered a reliable source. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 03:38, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sometimes IMDb has the same content as Wikipedia; as IMDb is user-generated and has no visible history, it is impossible to easily know which came first. What I'm suggesting is that contributors to IMDb can copy content from Wikipedia, so no, not helpful.--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 04:05, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Sjones23 IMDB is considered unreliable because anyone can write whatever they want there. Errors might, or might not, get corrected by someone else. All "user-generated" websites are considered not reliable for that reason, including blogs. David10244 (talk) 06:57, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Thegibuspyro I meant to reply to you, not necessarily @Sjones23, in my previous comment. Sorry about that... David10244 (talk) 06:59, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No hard feelings. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 07:08, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Thegibuspyro. I've used IMDB for clues to help improve articles about actors. If IMDB states an actor was in several well-known films I then start looking for published film reviews or movie reference books for a reliable source to show the person was indeed in the film. (I've only edited articles about actors working decades ago, so reference books are often helpful, if I know the names of films to look for.) Karenthewriter (talk) 13:37, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Karenthewriter makes an excellent point that also applies to other websites that are not themselves reliable sources for use on Wikipedia. This includes fan sites, hobbyist sites, blogs and sites like Quora and Reddit. These sites may say that something is factual and may mention an actual reliable source that can be cited, although you need to read that source first. Or the information there may provide clues that can be used to refine a search engine query to lead to actual reliable sources. Cullen328 (talk) 20:00, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

When I would be able to make my own articles on wikipedia

When I would be able to make my own articles on wikipedia Atalanta Enthusiast (talk) 04:53, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

hi @Atalanta Enthusiast and welcome to the teahouse! you're able to create articles right now, although it may take a lot of learning so it may be best if you learn the ropes first by helping edit existing articles before starting your own. if you still want to learn how, please read Reliable sources which discusses the sources you can use to cite your statements, Notability which determines if the subject is eligible for an article, and Your first article which gets in the process of sctually writing the article itself. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 05:22, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Help:Referencing for beginners provides guidance on how to format refs. Refs first!! Given that in the end, content needs to be verified by references, finding valid refs before diving into content is good advice. And there is no "owning" of articles. Once an article is created, anyone can edit it, as long as the new content is true, relevant and referenced. For any existing article, click on "View history" to see the editing history. For high profile articles there can be thousands of edits by hundreds of editors. David notMD (talk) 12:11, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What do you think makes a really good article?

Putting aside featured article and good article criteria, what other criteria do you think would make a good article that is fun and easy to read? CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 04:54, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure that there are many excellent math(s) related articles, but they'd be a lot easier to read if only I studied math(s) at university. ¶ Articles would be slightly more enjoyable if their creators avoided certain ponderous de facto conventions of Wikipedia writing. One among many: It seems that most writers will avoid saying that a building is on a road, river, etc when they can instead say that it's located on that road, river, etc. (And they always can.) To me, "located" seems to add nothing whatever; but it's clear that other writers are devoted to it. -- Hoary (talk) 07:43, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Imho the use of "located", and worse "hails from", is not a convention of Wikipedia writing, rather the reverse. I remove such expressions when I notice them. Maproom (talk) 12:19, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Maproom, I'd guess that the article New York City is about as carefully written and vigilantly watched as any. A quick count gets me nine superfluous tokens of "located". I'm too sleepy now to risk removing them myself; if you removed them, I've a hunch that most or all would be swiftly reintroduced. -- Hoary (talk) 12:55, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I did it. Let's see how it goes. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 13:08, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This is a good question, CactiStaccingCrane. I think it comes down to stakes: Who (or what community) is invested in the subject, why does it matter to them, and if the subject were slightly different, what would that mean for them or for us? These don't need to be explicitly addressed, especially the last one, but it's a question of uniqueness and importance. Looking at some random articles: William Rehnquist's lead says he is remembered as an important Chief Justice who changed the landscape of American law; Stage pin connector says it is a standard cable type for theatrical lighting in North America; Ghulam Mustafa Jatoi says his four sons are simultaneously present in all three Legislative forums, which is a record. Those articles all demonstrate that their subjects have unique, ongoing (or recent) importance. One of 'my' articles, Astri Aasen, has not been important in several decades, but I mention a scholarship in her name to illustrate her enduring value to Norwegian art, whether or not that is of great value. Not all articles have ongoing or recent importance, and that's fine, but for those that do, I find that to be part of why I read them and why I enjoy them. Urve (talk) 18:49, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

what is the first 17 values of pie

Pi 106.201.141.118 (talk) 07:47, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

3.14159265358979323. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 07:48, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ask Google (not Wikipedia:RD, that would be a waste of time). Better yet, scroll down to the external links section. — VORTEX3427 (Talk!) 07:50, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
See Pi, in the infobox at the top right. Maproom (talk) 08:30, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If, instead, you meant "pie," then I propose Apple, Blueberry, Cherry, Peach, Pecan, Walnut, Pumpkin, Key Lime, Lemon, Lemon Meringue, Rhubarb, Strawberry, Sweet Potato, Raisin, Chess, Shoofly and Turtle Pie (does not contain turtles). See List of pies, tarts and flans for more. David notMD (talk) 12:30, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@David notMD No, peach and pecan come right before cherry. David10244 (talk) 06:29, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Current sources

How do I find more non-contemporary sources for Rawson Stovall, an article I am working on? As far as I know, the only source backing up his main assertion to notability, which is that he was the first syndicated video game reviewer in the US, ( I have added plenty of references, though, so he easily meets GNG) that isn't primarily based on an interview is the PC Gamer source. Surely, this would result in plenty of coverage on this fact. Most of the useful sources I've found are all from the 1980s. — VORTEX3427 (Talk!) 07:48, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Vortex3427 and welcome to the Teahouse! I would go and check with the Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities or Wikipedia:Reference desk/Computing. If you are eligible for use of the Wikipedia Library, I would look there. Happy editing! Helloheart (talk) 01:27, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Article assessment classes

Hello once again. I created another article, Nigel Boddice which has been reviewed as C class. I have two questions: 1. I have added significant amounts of detail more than when it was reviewed, so when or how does it get rereviewed? 2. How much difference would I have to include to get to B class, or even A class/GA? Thanks again everyone. Schminnte (talk) 14:24, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Schminnte Up to "B", these ratings are informal, and anyone who feels they understand the relevant guidance, in this case Wikipedia:WikiProject_United_Kingdom/Assessment#Quality_scale, can change the "This article has been rated as". You can change it yourself, if you think it's a good idea. WP:GA however, is different, you can read about that at the link. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:20, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for replying. I would really like your opinion on the rating, as I'm quite a new editor and don't want to interfere with any processes that I might not fully understand. I would like a second opinion on the article's quality as, as I said, I have added much more content including an infobox and picture. It would be great if you could check it out. Thanks! Schminnte (talk) 15:36, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That's a respectable position, walk before you can run etc. I've been editing for 10+ years, but this aspect of WP is not one I've ever looked into. Perhaps someone else seeing this will. If that doesn't happen, you can try asking at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United Kingdom. Or why not ask the editor who reviewed it:[2]. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:48, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
For B class, there are six criteria that need to be met. The process for reviewing these criteria is informal and can be done by any editor. To get the article to a WP:GA, you have to get your article reviewed formally by another editor. A-class is not used much these days, but it is supposed to be given via a formal review process by the Wikiproject the article falls under. Most Wikiprojects do not have A-class review processes nowadays though. For more details, see Wikipedia:Content_assessment. 2601:647:5800:4D2:8CC2:482F:97D0:56AB (talk) 20:09, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
And what would your own opinion of the article's class be, if you could check it out I would be much obliged. Schminnte (talk) 22:00, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Authors in external links, bibliographies, further reading

Are books/articles and their authors given names and surnames in external links, bibliographies and further reading sections supposed to be mentioned in specific order? If yes should the order be the same for each section? If not is there a preferred order? Mcljlm (talk) 15:19, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Mcljlm Good question. Some attempt at logical order would seem reasonable. I see no guidance at WP:EL. MOS:FURTHER says "usually alphabetized". And I think a bibliography like Historiography_of_Christianization_of_the_Roman_Empire#Bibliography will usually be alphabetized. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:33, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
In External links it seems logical that an item from a person/organisation directly connected to an article's subject should precede items totally unconnected. I try to include an item's original publication date {probably from being a retired librarian and archivist} and sometimes wonder if that should affect a list's order.
Is the order [title] by [given name surname] OK in External links though not bibliographies? Mcljlm (talk) 17:35, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Vaccines and autism: My family's autism

When I got my vaccine (I was 18 months old at the time), I stopped talking until I was almost four. And tests reveal that I have a 79% chance of having autism. Plus, my mom's Godmother said that she was very similar. She didn't like people after hers. She has an 89% chance of autism, which makes sense because she has always been really shy as a kid. If vaccines don't cause autism, why would my family have autistic symptoms right after the vaccine? 67.215.28.226 (talk) 16:34, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, IP, and welcome to the Teahouse. This is a place for asking for help about editing Wikipedia, so it's not an appropriate venue for this kind of question. Writ Keeper  16:37, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Writ Keeper: I've referred them to WP:RDS on their talkpage. – dudhhr talk contribs (he/they) 16:41, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Per Wikipedia:Medical disclaimer, ask doctors. That said, the article Causes of autism may have something you find interesting. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:43, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
IP user, I wore a red shirt one day, and then broke a toe. If wearing a red shirt doesn't cause broken bones, why did I break my toe right after putting on the red shirt? David10244 (talk) 06:33, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@David10244, you were lucky to get away with a broken toe! Red shirts are dangerous! Chuntuk (talk) 12:53, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Talk page

Hello there. I want to leave a statement on another users' talk page, but I have been endlessly figuring out on how to do so. How do I leave one? Wikipedian10282 (talk) 17:59, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and welcome. There should be an "edit" link at the top of the talk page, just as with articles, at least in desktop mode. 331dot (talk) 18:04, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If the user's talk page already exists, you will usually find a "New section" tab. If the page does not exist, you should find an option to "Post a message to ..." when you try to read the non-existent talk page. - David Biddulph (talk) 18:06, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks both of you - much appreciated. Wikipedian10282 (talk) 18:11, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Using newspaper/book scans

Hi there! I have newspapers/book articles critical to show the notability of a person about whom I want to write an article. I can scan it and upload, surely, but I'm afraid it would be copyright violation. To what extent can I use it? Thanks in advance. - KhinMoTi (talk) 18:38, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@KhinMoTi, see guidance at WP:OFFLINE. A weblink to the WP:RS is nice to have if possible, but not mandatory. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:52, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, KhinMoTi. Unless you are certain that the book or newspaper is in the public domain, then it would be a copyright violation to upload scans. This usually requires that the newspaper or book was published over 95 years ago. But it is not necessary that a reliable source be online in order to use it as a reference. Just cite the complete bibliographic information. For a book, that would be the author, the book title, the year of publication, the publisher, the page numbers, and the ISBN number. If you use Template: Cite book, you can also include a relevant quotation of a sentence or two, as well as a link to the appropriate Google Books page. Cullen328 (talk) 18:58, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
While these above answers are quite correct, there may be another option for online links. Newspapers.com. Generally speaking, wikipedians who qualify may obtain newspapers.com access at no cost through the fully searchable The Wikipedia Library and be able to create, modify, and link clippings from the thousands of newspapers available. Based on a cursory look at User:KhinMoTi's profile, they may well qualify for access to the library. In addition, there's a helpful resource exchange board here, where users with more and/or alternative access may assist folks who need sourcing help. BusterD (talk) 19:26, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for all your answers! KhinMoTi (talk) 21:10, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Education level

I know that Wikipedia has some policy page that states a topic should be written for an audience that is one education level lower than the topic is commonly thought at. What is the name of that page? Thanks. PhotographyEdits (talk) 19:01, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, PhotographyEdits. I suggest that you read Wikipedia:Writing better articles, especially the section that can be found with the shortcut WP:AUDIENCE. Cullen328 (talk) 19:12, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Where to request edits on Wikidata and Wikimedia Commons? Also what are the Wikidata and Wikimedia Commons versions of Teahouse?

What page/pages can you request edits on Wikidata and Wikimedia Commons?

What are the Wikidata and Wikimedia Commons versions of Teahouse? Danstarr69 (talk) 19:11, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Help desk is the closest I know on Commons. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:29, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
d:Wikidata:Project chat is the equivalent on Wikidata. As for edit requests, on Commons you post on the talk page using c:Template:Edit request. I can't find any analogue on Wikidata though. Wikidata also has d:Template:Edit request. ■ ∃ Madeline ⇔ ∃ Part of me ; 19:33, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

New page issues

Hi there! Hope you're all well.

I'm creating a wiki page for up-and-coming actor/screenwriter Alex Lane (www.imdb.me/alexlane), am his assistant Julie. He has more than a handful of verifiable TV, film and commercial credits, and more.

The following issues are coming up:

  • {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)
  • {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)
  • {{cite web}}: Text "Trailer" ignored (help)
  • {{cite web}}: External link in |title= (help); Text "cite web" ignored (help)

Can anyone help, please? I'm new here. Alex is a really nice boss, and he is setting up a major TV series. Am just trying to do my job here. Appreciate any help I can get!!

Take care, Julie Cleanmean (talk) 19:55, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Cleanmean: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Creating or editing an article about one's boss, while generally allowed, is one form of what Wikipedia calls a conflict of interest and has to be disclosed. As for the error messages, each of these has a blue link labeled "help" which should explain what the error is and how to fix it. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 20:16, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Victor!! Cleanmean (talk) 21:46, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Cleanmean Hello! WP:TUTORIAL has guidance on how to add add references correctly. Recommended reading: Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing and WP:conflict of interest. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:17, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
See also Help:CS1 errors, for the page where all the help links mentioned above will link to. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 20:19, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Where the word "help" in the error message is in blue, this is a wikilink to specific help on that type of error. - David Biddulph (talk) 20:20, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
As well as the guidance on conflict of interest, referred to in one of the earlier replies, there are also further requirements regarding paid editing when you are editing Wikipedia as part of your job. - David Biddulph (talk) 20:24, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks David! Cleanmean (talk) 21:46, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Cleanman, issues like "missing or empty title" are easy to deal with. But Draft:Alex Lane has a more serious problem. To establish that he's notable enough to warrant a Wikipedia article, you'll need to find and cite several reliable independent published sources with extensive discussion of him, and base the draft on what they say. The draft cites only two sources, and they tell us very little about him. That he is "up-and-coming" suggests that there may not yet be any acceptable sources. Maproom (talk) 20:47, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Julie, and welcome to the Teahouse. Unfortunately, you're more or less starting your Wikipedia journey by taking on the most difficult task there is - creating an article - and making it even more difficult by writing about a subject you are connoected with. Please remember that what you are doing is not "creating a wiki page for" Lane but writing a neutral encyclopaedia article about him. Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only 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. Neither of your current references says more than a few words about Lane. (The Filmthreats one says more about one of his films, but you are trying to write an article about him, not about Within). ColinFine (talk) 20:49, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Cleanmean, "up-and-coming" is an expression which Wikipedia editors see as a red flag, because notability is conferred by being already covered in depth in reliable, published sources. See WP:TOOSOON to see why promoting "up-and-comers" is contrary to the purposes of Wikipedia. Quisqualis (talk) 21:21, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks all! This guy has film, TV and commercial credits, and just produced an A-list film. Am resubmitting with more info in place. Appreciate all your help!! Cleanmean (talk) 21:45, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Cleanman, as you have told us that you are Lane's assistant, you are contravening Wikipedia's terms of service by continuing to edit without first making the mandatory formal declaration of your status as a paid editor (See that link for how to do so). If you continue editing without making the declaration, you are likely to find your account blocked.
Once you have made the declaration, your first and only priority in working on your draft should be finding at least three sources, each one of which is simultaneously reliably published, independent of Lane, and contains significant coverage of him (see those links for exaplanations of what they mean). If you cannot find at least three or more such sources, then every bit of work you do on the draft will be wasted effort, because it will never be accepted into Wikipedia. ColinFine (talk) 22:11, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

hello

ive heard that the coffe lounge from esperanza failed but is there anything similar you could recommend? Allaoii talk 22:05, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Allaoii. Is this a question about editing WIkipedia? If not, then this is not the right place for it, because this page is for new Wikipedia editors to ask for help and guidance in doing that. ColinFine (talk) 22:14, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
the isnt anywhere else to ask this where i might get an answer Allaoii talk 22:23, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Allaoii This is the Coffee Lounge from WP:Esperanza. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 22:18, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
stop lieing Allaoii talk 22:22, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Allaoii I'm not; read the link above. The Teahouse is the Coffee Lounge's direct descendant and fills the same role it did. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 22:25, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
what link and i read the afd for coffee lounge it was a chat room Allaoii talk 22:27, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If you can't see the link in my message above I'm not going to waste more time yelling at a brick wall. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 22:32, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
nvm thought you meant something else now please reply to the other part of my message Allaoii talk 22:34, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
hi @Allaoii! the closest thing I know of to a socialization place like the former coffee lounge is the #off-topic channel of the discord and #wikimedia-social connect and #wikimedia-offtopic connect in IRC, both in external, unaffiliated places. happy editing!
i should probably check out and be more active in IRC too 💜  melecie  talk - 23:00, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
actually i just remembered something that could work but its never been used can you tell me how to get it going?
to find what im talking about go to department of fun and scroll to activities its the campfire one(im sorry i dont know how to do links) Allaoii talk 03:27, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If you're lucky you might even see someone send a message in one of these channels! ■ ∃ Madeline ⇔ ∃ Part of me ; 07:08, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
what? Allaoii talk 20:54, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nothing, just an offhand quip that those aren't always the most active channels. ■ ∃ Madeline ⇔ ∃ Part of me ; 20:55, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
im trying to get this one more active how can i do that? Allaoii talk 21:45, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Log in

I have 2 accounts. While trying to log in to my 2nd one, I placed all the username and password precisely and correctly. However, it displayed an error message and would not let me log in. I hadn't even changed my password. What is happening? I am getting worried Persura (talk) 22:19, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What error? Being vague here doesn't help you or anyone trying to help you. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 22:21, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It displayed incorrect username or password despite me adding the correct password and username Persura (talk) 22:28, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Usernames are case-sensitive (minus the first letter); is it possible you unwittingly added a different case letter on the username? —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 01:23, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Although the problem has been resolved now (must've been a technical or background error, i'm no expert in software), I wholeheartedly appreciate you taking the time of your day to help me. Thank you, and have a great week. Persura (talk) 02:21, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
maybe you used the username or password for this one Allaoii talk 22:35, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Essays

Hi! I joined Wikipedia a month ago, and I would like to know: how you do you make an essay in your user namespace? Thank you! Professor Penguino (talk) 01:34, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You create a user subpage to host the essay (User:(username)/(subpage title)), and then you just write it. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 02:05, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! Professor Penguino (talk) 02:12, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I guess I didn't know how to create a user subpage. Could you tell me where I can find the option? Thank you so much! :) Professor Penguino (talk) 02:49, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Never mind! I figured it out! Once again, thank you! Professor Penguino (talk) 02:53, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How do I figure out what I'm good at contributing to?

Hello! I want to add to Wikipedia, but I'm not sure what I could contribute to, it feels like many articles that need help are stuff that's already been covered by others, or are not in my field of knowledge (or beyond what I currently know). Noilaedi (talk) 03:28, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Noilaedi: Surely there are subjects that interest you academically, professionally, or as a hobby. Look at some articles on those subjects. If you see vandalism, fix it. If you see a claim that needs a citation, find a reliable source and cite it. If you see spelling errors or grammar errors, or you can rephrase the prose in a more compelling (but neutral) way, then change it. Make small changes to start out. If a topic that interests you doesn't have an article, then go to WP:AFC and start one in draft space. See Wikipedia:Requested articles for a long list of topics that don't have articles. ~Anachronist (talk) 03:55, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, I will keep that in mind! Noilaedi (talk) 04:01, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I need help how submit my draft for review

I need help how submit my draft for review Troba4 (talk) 04:24, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Troba4: You don't have a draft article. You have a page in your sandbox with no content. You need to write an actual article draft before you can submit it for review. ~Anachronist (talk) 04:32, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Source with markup like [[rfc:9110]]

Source [[Banana]] renders as Banana, a link to the "Banana" page.

But source [[rfc:9110]] renders as rfc:9110, an external link to https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc9110

Just curious, where can I find documentation about this behavior?

Thanks, netjeff (talk) 05:13, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi netjeff, welcome to the Teahouse. See Help:Interwiki linking and meta:Interwiki map. The latter has the entry RFC //tools.ietf.org/html/rfc$1. PrimeHunter (talk) 05:26, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Contributions

Hi! Some time back I signed up recurring small contributions. I use wikipedia enough that I felt I should help a little. But, even though I have ongoing monthly contributions, I keep getting nags to make a contribution.

Not really a question, unless that would be why am I being nagged to do something I'm doing. FrogEggs (talk) 05:47, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@frogeggs: i'm pretty sure wikipedia doesn't nag you do edit wikipedia. are you talking about banners? you can shut those off in special:preferences#mw-prefsection-centralnotice-banners. lettherebedarklight晚安 おやすみping me when replying 05:52, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@frogeggs:They could editors willing to help you edit because you are new to Wikipedia. SpyridisioAnnis (talk) 09:17, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sure this is related to WMF's fundraising banners. David10244 (talk) 06:50, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Controversial Reddit communities

r/sex should be added there. I asked properly with age and details about how to have sex as a gay-bisexual men with other men as a bottom and it was automoderated to be removed, and after getting it appealed by messaging a subreddit mod, an anonymous mod perma banned me and made any excuses to not allow my post to be posted in their subreddit because there was no 'women' involved and 'only men having sex with other men' topics.

All Reddit has to say is I should find a different subreddit and doesn't care if I get offended by them banning me because I was posting a homosexual sex topic. 110.235.179.231 (talk) 07:51, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No one has ever told anyone about r/sex being homophobic. Try searching "gay men", "gay", "male vibrators", and "pegging" no less than two years. It seems like the old subreddit mod was taken down by a new homophobic moderator, and was replaced with a new one by using a subreddit that gives you admin access after a moderator was inactive for a long time. 110.235.179.231 (talk) 07:55, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You haven't even explained WHY it should be in there. It's not controversial just because YOU were discriminated against. Ray 08:25, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Raymond Kestis, the Teahouse is supposed to be "A friendly place where you can ask questions." You could have just pointed out that some good WP:RS about r/sex would be needed. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:17, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I apologize if my message came off as openly aggressive. Relating to the topic, I can't seem to find any reliable sources relating to why the subreddit should even be on the list. In addition, this user lists being discriminated against as their only reason on why it should be there. Ray 09:22, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:31, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewing Time

Hello,

I have created this draft (Draft:Anna Pasternak) and submitted it for a review. It's been a while and no one has reviewed it yet. How come it takes so long? I have asked Wiki projects too. How can I help to speed up the process? Thanks Forgetwords (talk) 10:04, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Forgetwords Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. As noted on your draft, "This may take 3 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 2,695 pending submissions waiting for review." Reviews are conducted by volunteers, doing what they can when they can, in no particular order. Please be patient. There is nothing that you can do to speed it up. I see that you declared some kind of conflict of interest- if this is your job, please make the stricter paid editing disclosure(click for instructions).
Just noting that we don't need the whole url when you link to another Wikipedia article or draft; simply place the target page name in double brackets, as I did here. 331dot (talk) 10:08, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If you haven't, check in the "Review waiting" template where it says "Improving your odds of a speedy review". Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:23, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:PaykanArtCar

Hi, I created a draft article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:PaykanArtCar and it has been declined as the following reason:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are: in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements) reliable secondary strictly independent of the subject This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

I just wanted to ask for help before editing it further. My questions are: 1. I have included multiple sources from big published including e.g. Washington Post, ART News, The Guardian. In my opinion, these articles met above requirements but I could have been wrong and wanted to know if they are qualified. 2. If you have time to review one or two sources, can you point me into the right direction of which example in the draft is qualified and which isn't? (I understood external links or the PR should be removed) 3. Is there any other room for improvement that I should considerate when editing it for resubmission? 4. What is the minimum number of qualified sources I should have in the article to be accepted?

Thank you very much for helping! KP070707 (talk) 11:19, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Editors have reduced length by 1/3 in attempts to improve the focus of the article. You can resubmit to see if a different reviewer has concerns. David notMD (talk) 12:53, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

image upload

I was task to upload images of our church in the edit of our arcticle. How to do so? Jamkressa (talk) 13:03, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Jamkressa, and welcome to the Teahouse. You can upload free pictures at Wikimedia Commons. If it is a non-free file, you can use File Upload Wizard. Follow the instructions to help you upload the image. Good luck! Sarrail (talk) 13:06, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Jamkressa, and welcome to the Teahouse Freely licensed pictures of the subjects of articles are always welcome, and as Sarrail says, you can upload them to Commons. Please make sure that they are free to reuse: if you took them yourself, then you have the legal power to donate them as required, but if they are not your personal photos, then the copyright owner is the only one who can make that donation, and they should upload the pictures themselves, or follow the procedure in donating copyright materials. Despite what Sarrail said, it is very unlikely that a non-free picture will meet the criteria in the NFCC and be accepted by Wikipedia.
The fact that you said you were "tasked" to do this indicates that you have a connection with the church - I assume it is Church Body of Christ - Filipinista. If that is so, you need to read about editing with a conflict of interest, and you should stop editing that article directly. If you are in any way employed by the church, then you are a paid editor, and you must make the formal declarations required (see that link for the details). This is the most urgent thing you must do.
Once you have done that, there is another thing that is much much more important than uploading pictures. The article has essentially no sources. (It has one, but that says nothing about the Church, just that it has registered with the SEC). At present, the article does nothing to establish that the Church meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability, which depends not on what it is or does, but on what has been published about it by people unconnected with it. I have had a quick look, and failed to find any independent sources at all, but I have only looked in English. What somebody needs to do, in order for the article to remain in Wikipedia, is to find several sources wholly unconnected with the Church, that write about it in some depth. (These may be in Cebuano, if there are no English sources). If there are no such sources, then the article should be deleted. If you find suitable sources, Then you should make edit requests on the article's talk page for these sources to be added.
The article will probably then need to be rewritten to be based on what the sources say: Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only 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. But finding the sources is the first, essential. step. ColinFine (talk) 14:39, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Jamkressa, Welcome! WP, and the sister-site we keep most pictures on, Commons, are both very careful about copyright. You can upload pictures you have taken yourself here, but you can't upload pictures taken by others. That's the short version, but basically sound. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:40, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Fermurin

A Fermurin is a Giant bat like monster From LoverCraft. Fermurins can live in Kentucky,Antarctica and Madagascar. A Fermurin Is A LoverCraft Character. Fermurins Live In Hosterland. A Fermurin is a species of bat or monster. Fermurins go Extinct from Dinosaurs and Predators. Fermurins Are About to 46 Meters. Fermurins Do Like a Hastur,Nyarlathotep and Cthylla. Fermurin Is In Cthulhu. Fermurins would be scary. User123636 (talk) 13:17, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. Is this a question, or a statement about Fermurins? Sarrail (talk) 13:20, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, I now know what a _____ is, but this is the Teahouse, where you ask questions about using or editing Wikipedia. Do you want an article on a _____ Club On a Sub 20 (talk) 18:08, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Two global accounts.

Is it allowed to have 2 user accounts? I have 1 user account that I use for the english wikipedia and 1 user account that I use for the norwegian wikipedia. I never mix the 2 accounts. When I established the norwegian user account it was my understanding that it was local. Turns out it is global. Hawol (talk) 14:43, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hawol, see WP:SOCKLEGIT. As long as everyone knows you are controlling both accounts, and you don't participate in normal sock activities, you should be fine. Sungodtemple (talk) 15:27, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I understand. Thanks for response!--Hawol (talk) 17:07, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

DYK Nomination Question

If a DYK Nomination was posted before 7 days after promotion to GA, But it has not been reviewed and the 7 days have passed, What happens to that DYK Nomination. PerryPerryD Talk To Me 16:29, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@PerryPerryD The nomination stands and in most case will eventually be accepted. See Template talk:Did you know, which currently has some not-yet-approved articles going back to some nominated last September. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:14, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How to request an article.

I want to know if there is a specific way to request an articles' creation. I don't believe myself experienced enough to create an article, so is there anyway to ask someone else to do so? Club On a Sub 20 (talk) 18:01, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Club On a Sub 20. Please see Wikipedia:Requested articles but be sure to read the Preliminary note near the top. Cullen328 (talk) 19:36, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How do Renumbering in a simple wikitable?

Today, I added a village into List of villages in Nakodar tehsil. Since it was #47 alphabetically, I had to manually re-number from there to #147. Very time-consuming. Is there a better or easier way to do this? JoeNMLC (talk) 19:24, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi JoeNMLC. {{Row numbers}} can be used but it's messy, works poorly with some tools like VisualEditor, and you first have to convert an existing table to use it. In your example I would actually remove the numbers unless they are used as designations in official documents or something like that. Pinging Premeditated Chaos who made the list. Who cares whether Dhaliwal is number 47 in an alphabetical list of selected villages written in English? It isn't even an official or large language of the area. The only use I can think of is being able to easily see the total number of villages but listing 147 numbers to provide one number is too much. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:24, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi User:PrimeHunter, tonight a did ce, chg wikitable to numbered div col with rules / solves problem of manual numbers in wikitable. While looking at List of villages in Bhojpur district as an example, I uncovered a bug with the "Div col|colwidth=15em|rules=yes". For rules=Yes, the rules do not display. So need to use lower-case letter "y". JoeNMLC (talk) 02:16, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
FWIW if I remember right I copy-pasted the list from a table from some census document and didn't bother to remove the numbers. I also don't care about the formatting really so whatever change works is good. ♠PMC(talk) 03:16, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@JoeNMLC: I'm not a fan of the list solution. The numbers still seem useless. The table could have been made sortable by population with one word (change wikitable to wikitable sortable). A list cannot be sortable. If further data like List of villages in Vazhapadi taluk is added then a list is poorly formatted compared to a table. The population already lacks vertical alignment. It's not so important currently but it does make it harder to spot large villages. Lists work better when there is only one piece of data. A good thing about the list is that you can have multiple columns when screen width allows it. Template parameters are usually case sensitive and {{div col}} does not claim to support Yes so it's not a bug to only support the documented yes. Some templates use the more fancy {{Yesno}} to support many forms of input but it's not required. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:50, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Add a page talking about me

Hello, i am asking if is ok if i create a Wikipedia Page about me (obviously without possible advertising systems such as sites and so on) like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/example Can i do it? Thanks OverloadedTechDev (talk) 21:02, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. That entirely depends on your notability, and if you can avoid a Conflict of Interest. In most cases, unfortunately the answer is no, due to Advertising, COI, and Un-Neutrality. However, If notability, Neutrality, No Coi, and No Advertising is used, The article would be allowed. PerryPerryD Talk To Me 21:04, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Also, the conflict of interest would have to be declared on your user page. PerryPerryD Talk To Me 21:05, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, thanks for the reply. In a short answer if i post a page about me even if i am not so much known to the world but i don't enter links like advertising (example social network asking to get followed or a website) but i remain completely neutral talking about me as what i did in my life and nothing else it would be ok? OverloadedTechDev (talk) 21:46, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@OverloadedTechDev, if you want to create a Wikipedia article about yourself, no, that would not be okay. Those must be based on significant coverage in reliable, independent, secondary sources. If you just want to create a user page with some information about yourself in relation to your Wikipedia editing, that is allowed - see here for more information. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 21:55, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No. Wikipedia article subjects must be notable in some regard. The guidelines are clear. If you believe you are notable according to these guidelines, there are procedures you can use to request an article be written here and here, but you will not be allowed to write it yourself due to the conflict of interest (well, you're allowed, but once someone else notices the conflict it will be reverted quickly). WPscatter t/c 21:59, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, thanks for the clarification now i understood how this works
Thanks again OverloadedTechDev (talk) 22:04, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

how does the canvassing rule work

I'm currently being accused of canvassing, and I still don't know a lot about Wikipedia:canvassing rules, so I came here to get help, here in the brackets are a list of edits I've done that may be canvassing ([3], [4], [5], [6], [7]) and tell me which ones are violating and which ones are not and walk me through why, I really want to know, just so I can avoid doing so in the future. 4me689 (talk) 23:26, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@4me689 Who are you trying to bring into the discussion and why? Are they users you believe will agree with you? That's canvassing. It's best to avoid picking specific users to join a discussion or RfC to build a consensus. Pyrrho the Skipper (talk) 23:33, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@4me689: at WP:ANI you wrote "I am very very very very sorry, I will stop trying to canvas". And here you are, still canvassing. 23:54, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Maproom, your signature is broken... Sarrail (talk) 00:01, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
how am I canvassing here 4me689 (talk) 00:02, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
See Wikipedia:Canvassing. And yes, you have been canvassing. David notMD (talk) 04:35, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

how to edit

How to edit 99.45.217.53 (talk) 23:35, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello 99.45.217.53, and welcome to the Teahouse! Here's a helpful page to look at. Sarrail (talk) 00:00, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello IP user and welcome to the Teahouse! At the top right section of every Wikipedia article, there is a hyperlink that says "Edit." Press that, make your edits, provide an edit summary, and press "Publish changes." There you go. Helloheart (talk) 01:32, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Draft Rejected

I keep getting declined on this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Troy_Guard and I don't understand why. He is a notable figure, the facts are supported by reputable third parties, all sources are "from "magazines, journals, and news coverage (not opinions) from mainstream newspapers." per the Wikipedia guidelines. I am basing my submission off another notable Denver chef of similar renown, Lon Symensma, and cannot see any difference in the two submissions, yet I keep getting rejected. Please help. SJSchiffer (talk) 01:04, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'll look at one sentence. That first endeavor has, over time, turned into TAG Restaurant Group, a successful restaurant company housing all of Guard's concepts, including quick-casual, better bowls Bubu; modern Mexican Los Chingones (with sister fast casual concept Little Chingones); breakfast spot HashTAG; and neighborhood bistro FNG. "Concept" seems to mean "restaurant chain". I guess that "quick-casual" and "fast casual" mean "fast food" or "short order", but "better bowls" just mystifies me. "Sister" seems to mean "similar" or just "another". I don't know how a "neighborhood bistro" differs from a regular bistro. Nothing like this appears in the (feeble) article Lon Symensma. And all of it is based on one article, which is based on an interview. Not good. -- Hoary (talk) 03:22, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

H.O.R.G. - notable enough?

I've found a subject that I think would be good for a brief article. I've made several edits to existing articles, but this would be my first new article, so I'm very excited at the prospect! It's certainly not the most important topic in the world, but it's been written about in at least three published, reputable media sources, as well as being heavily cited in an article published in a peer reviewed journal of medicine.

H.O.R.G. conducts pseudo-satirical research and classification of various types of bread clips. I would contend that it's a notable subject due to it being an intersection of methodologically rigorous scientific parody and unintended practical use. Additionally, if bread clips are considered notable enough to have their own Wikipedia article, it seems like H.O.R.G. ought to qualify as well.

A username can have spaces? (talk) 02:31, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

HORG is a research enterprise whose taxonomic and other achievements have long impressed me. But you may be confusing (A) notability with (B) what Wikipedia calls "notability". The latter welcomes vast quantities of trivia (dresses, fictional guns, etc); taxonomic accomplishments, not so much. Well, specify the best "three published, reputable media sources", and then we can evaluate HORG's "notability". -- Hoary (talk) 03:30, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback on Draft Sandbox

I have started a new page for film producer, Kerry Heysen - looking for some feedback on the draft before I submit to ensure it is within the guidelines - or to change things as needed to be accepted. Thanks!

User:Gemmasalomon/sandbox Gemmasalomon (talk) 02:37, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Gemmasalomon – Before your draft gets sent to the mainspace (that is, the article space where any reader can see it) its subject needs to be notable. The general notability guideline states that articles require significant coverage in multiple, reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Your draft is mostly sourced to IMDb, which unfortunately is classified as generally unreliable here. You do have a citation to The Sydney Morning Herald—but alas, it only covers that she won an award. It looks like the sources need to be more reliable… see Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources for a general list of reliable and unreliable sources. Thanks. — 3PPYB6 (T / C / L)03:00, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What should I do with this redirect issue?

Last month, a new article called Activities of Daily Living was created, which replaced a redirect to Activities of daily living. Links to the latter, such as this template (before I fixed it), now go to the article about the book.

What's a good course of action here? Fix all users of the old redirect? Move the article? Frogging101 (talk) 03:59, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Frogging101: The most appropriate thing to do may be to add a disambiguating hatnote to each article, which I have just done. Alternately, the novel could have a disambiguation in the title, such as Activities of Daily Living (novel), but I think that's unnecessary with the hatnotes.
As for other redirects, they should be targeted to one or the other article as appropriate. ~Anachronist (talk) 04:39, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I've fixed the other redirects. There were only three left. ~Anachronist (talk) 04:45, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank! Frogging101 (talk) 04:51, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How do I make my signature

How do I make my signature The night king kills Arya in the winds of winter (talk) 08:15, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@The night king kills Arya in the winds of winter, is WP:CUSTOMSIG what you're after? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:37, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Where to report possible vandalism?

A user User: Doluipritam19 frequently vandalising Sport in India, I told him, not to do unexplained edits, over linking. He frequently removing relevant 'Portals', He should be warned for this type of behavior. See this [8], The man should be banned for editing. he removed info without providing edit summary,Here [ https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/1121679464]], he never provided it, [ https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/1121679464] . Rock Stone Gold Castle (talk) 08:38, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Rock Stone Gold Castle, Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism is the place. And take the time to read the instructions. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:33, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Rock Stone Gold Castle, you provide three diffs that allegedly show "vandalising". I clicked on two of them. I saw no vandalism. Together with this older thread, this gives the impression that you're oddly keen to see vandalism where there is none. Please don't go to WP:AIV: doing so would be a waste of your and other people's time. -- Hoary (talk) 12:43, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Hoary:, Hi, but someone should tell him, that you have to provide edit summary, don't add dup links.Rock Stone Gold Castle (talk) 14:18, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Waiting for a page to be published

I am still awaiting for my page Draft:Mr. Dutch to be published. It has been a few months and I have not been notified of any problems. GabrielleNSmith (talk) 09:17, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • @GabrielleNSmith: I left a message on your talk page regarding paid editing.
The draft has not been submitted for review, therefore it will not get reviewed. You could submit it by clicking the button, but in its current state I am sure it would be declined.
You need to provide sources that demonstrate Mr. Dutch is a "notable" singer under Wikipedia’s definition of "notable". The most likely appropriate sources are independent reviews of his songs/albums. Interviews, podcasts etc. where he speaks are useless for that purpose (they are not independent). If you cannot find any such sources, stop working on the draft immediately, it is pointless.
Furthermore, the draft contains super-promotional language (renowned, Bursting onto the scene, brought the Afro Cyborg to life, flourishing talent in the lead section alone). But that can be fixed after you found sources.
TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 09:45, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Tigraan Noting that it was [9] submitted for review. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:15, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
As of 15 November, Draft:Mr. Dutch submitted, declined, edited, submitted, declined edited, submitted. David notMD (talk) 12:34, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Muscab ahmed qadaawe

Full name : muscab ahmed ismail qadaawe

Born: april 2007

Place birth name  : burburis DDSI Ethiopia Muscab ahmed qadaawe (talk) 12:52, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Muscab ahmed qadaawe, and welcome to the Teahouse, and to Wikipedia. I don't know why you have posted your name and place of birth here, but I'm guessing that you think it will some way cause you to be "listed" in Wikipedia. I'm afraid that Wikipedia doesn't work like that. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, and has articles only about subjects that meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability.
You may put limited personal information on your User page - your case User:Muscabahmedqadaawe (the link is currently red, because that page has not yet been created). But you should read Advice for younger editors before you post any more personal information anywhere. ColinFine (talk) 13:21, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Page translation in English

hello, I would like to translate an italian page in English but i don't understand how. Can you help? thanks you! Alberta Orlando (talk) 13:57, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Alberta Orlando, welcome to the Teahouse. Instructions are at Help:Translation. English Wikipedia's standards may be quite different from those at the wiki you're translating from - you may want to spend some time reading up on our sourcing standards. We also tend to be more picky about using inline citations. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:50, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Draft declined

 – created section header. — 3PPYB6 (T / C / L)14:38, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I had my article declined due to lack of reliable sources. However, I have added at least 15 sources (wikipedia ones) and more than 15 references to highly reliable webpages. I don't understand what I am doing wrong... Ltsassistanteliamep (talk) 14:16, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Courtesy link: Draft:Loukas Tsoukalis - 199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:45, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Ltsassistanteliamep, and welcome to the Teahouse. Judging from their titles and sources, most of the references in Loukas Tsoukalis are not independent sources. Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only 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. Which of your sources are all three of reliable, independent, and containing significant coverage of Tsoukalis.
Also, judging by your user name, I must ask if you are connected with Tsoukalis? If you are, you have a WP:conflict of interest. If you are employed by or for him, then you are a paid editor. Neither of these prevents you from editing, but they do place restrictions on what you may do. Please raad those links carefully. ColinFine (talk) 15:38, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Renaming an article

I have found an article (Cetomacrogol 1000) about a chemical that uses the tradename instead of the chemical name, without a corresponding article for the chemical name. Should I move the article to the chemical name? I know that PubChem uses Cetomacrogol 1000, but I'm not sure what wikipedia should use. Balnibarbarian (talk) 14:42, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On the other hand, it seems that wikipedia or pubchem may have copied each other. Balnibarbarian (talk) 14:49, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The general answer is given by WP:COMMONNAME: what do the bulk of the reliable English-language sources call the substance? Since the article cites no sources at all, it's hard to tell from looking at it, and it is entirely possible that the chemical does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, and the article should be deleted.
Looking in Google books for Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL and Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL seems to indicate that both are widely used. ColinFine (talk) 15:51, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! I'll check these. Balnibarbarian (talk) 15:58, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that it doesn't seem notable, and have tagged it with {{prod}} as NN. - UtherSRG (talk) 16:11, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Warning about Undisclosed Payments for Creating Wiki Page

Dear Wiki Editors: I recently had my accepted my Wiki article on Vincentian musician Frankie McIntosh accepted by the Wiki editor Devanian Wombat. However, the editor ONE1596 put up a Warning Heading regarding the possibility of “undisclosed payments” and that the article on Frankie McIntosh may need “clean up.” 

I assure you that I received no payments from Frankie McIntosh, the subject of the article, or anyone else. The page was written completely gratis by me. Is there a form I must sign to confirm this? 

I do not believe I violated Wiki’s “neutral point of view” policies. The laudatory language regarding McIntosh’s work as a music arranger does not come from me. These are published, direct quotations from well-regarded Caribbean Music critics Dawad Philip (Amsterdam News), Nelson King (Caribbean Life and the Vincentian), and Les Slater (Class Magazine). The final paragraph on McIntosh’s accomplishments comes directly from the remarks at the ceremony where he was awarded an honorary Doctorate from the University of the West Indies (as reported by Nelson King in Caribbean Life). I included these quotations as a way of summarizing his accomplishments and establishing his notoriety through outside sources. Are these quotations not appropriate? If so, I will remove them.

I would greatly appreciate your advice regarding anything else that needs to be done to “clean up” the article. This is my first attempt at a Wiki article and would like to get it right!  I am not sure about the best way to communicate with you is.   I just removed the Warning Heading and tried to explain the situation to ONE 1596 when I clicked “Publish Changes” after editing out the Warning. Is there another procedure I need to go through?  t My user name is: Raylaur15. Looking forward to your advice and thanks for your time.

Raylaur 15

Frankie McIntosh Raylaur15 (talk) 14:45, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Raylaur15, and welcome to the Teahouse. The way that Wikipedia articles get developed is that somebody makes a change, and either everybody else accepts it (and possibly makes further changes) or somebody else reverts it. If this happens then the proper course for the first editor is to open a discussion with the reverting editor, and anybody else who is interested. This process is explained in WP:BRD.
In your case, after Devonian Wombat accepted your draft as an article, Onel5969 looked at it, and tagged it with {{COI}} and {{UPE}}, because in their opinion the article had those problems. You reverted their edit (which you are entitled to do, though you confusingly asked them to do so, in your edit summary), and it is up to One15969 to discuss it with you if they think it should still apply.
Your statement on the talk page that you have not received payment for the article is adequate: you do not need to "fill out any form". But since you didn't know to ping One15969 (or Devonian Wombat, for that matter) they may not have seen your post on the talk page - I have pinged them here.
You have done nothing wrong, but rather than a long defence here and on the talk page, it might have been more productive to ask One15969 what it was that led them to think that you had a COI or were paid. (I do not believe you have stated whether or not you are connected with McIntosh, i.e. whether you have a COI).
Note that both Wombat's acceptance of your draft and One15969's insertion of the tags, are expressions of their opinions as Wikipedia editors: other editors may agree or disagree with either of them. Unless there has been a discussion which has achieved a consensus, no editor "speaks for Wikipedia". Having said that, they are both experienced editors, with demonstrated understanding of Wikipedia policies. ColinFine (talk) 16:40, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Raylaur15 - if you are not connected (that is, you do not have a CoI) how did you arrive at the exact '19 August' birth date, and how were you able to take a close-up image? (The image you are claiming as your own work) And from where did you obtain the 1997 Commemorative Stamp? Posted this here as nothing is ongoing at article Talk.--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 16:56, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Improving article

The subject's biography is also available on Wikipedia in Nepali and Maithali languages. By getting in touch with the writer and using information from the Nepali language Wikipedia, I attempted to update it in English. I read the author's works, and I sought to inform the reader about his works rather than giving a biography. I want assistance. Thanks Chitkarm (talk) 14:56, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Courtesy link: Draft:Nawa Raj Subba Sarrail (talk) 15:00, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
An article in English Wikipedia about a person should be biographical, and should be almost entirely based on reliable independent sources which contain significant coverage of the person. Works by the subject, or that are written or published by the subject's associates or institutions, may have limited use as primary sources, but they do not contribute to establishing that the subject is notable, and the bulk of the article should be based on independent sources. ColinFine (talk) 16:43, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How to delete an article?

I saw earlier that there is a way that editors can vote to delete articles. I found an article Al Qaida Al Nooraniya that I want deleted. How do I start the vote? Ghost of Kiev (talk) 15:22, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ghost of Kiev, and welcome to the Teahouse. You can hold the page up for WP:CSD, or follow the deletion process. Sarrail (talk) 15:29, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
ok thank you Ghost of Kiev (talk) 15:37, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Draft declined

Hello, I received help yesterday on a submission that was declined. I made all suggested changes (he went through my sources line by line), and it was rejected again. I made further changes and checked all of my sources again, and they do comply with the standards. It was rejected again. Any advice would be welcome before I resubmit. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Troy_Guard SJSchiffer (talk) 15:53, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@SJSchiffer I made a couple of very small copyedits, but in my opinion, the article is in good enough shape and sources are pretty substantial. I think this article is fine. I added a comment on the Talk Page. Pyrrho the Skipper (talk) 16:56, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Steward

What is a steward on WP? Additionally, what is a checkuser and how do you become one/ (kuvxira) (talk) 15:53, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @(kuvxira), welcome to the Teahouse. The answers to your questions can be found here and here. Stewards are a sort of universal administrator; check users have access to special tools which are used to help detect and prevent abuse of the platform. Both are positions of high trust and require a lot of experience and demonstrated reliability before they're bestowed on anyone. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 16:05, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you IP. (kuvxira) (talk) 16:09, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Question about the draft ? Please advise how to improve it.

Hello :) I wrote an article about an open source software product for live video streaming. It is my first article ever created, and I would like to ask for help regarding the improvements. It has been a long work for me, and I would like to make it beautiful before publishing it. Thank you. Here is the draft: Draft:Datarhei Restreamer TronJavolta (talk) 16:13, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@TronJavolta You are going to have to find sources that are independent and reliable to establish notability for your article. Right now, your sources are mainly user-generated content such as wikis, and blog content. Unfortunately, sources like that generally do no help establish notability. Pyrrho the Skipper (talk) 16:35, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]