Wikipedia:Teahouse

331dot, a Teahouse host

Welcome to the Teahouse!
Your go-to place for friendly help with using and editing Wikipedia.

Ask a question

Question forumMeet your hostsArticles to improveBecome a host

New to Wikipedia? See our tutorial for new editors or introduction to contributing page.
Note: Newer questions appear at the bottom of the Teahouse. Completed questions are archived within 2-3 days.

Help Wikipedia

Miraheze

What??? When did that happen? Miraheze is run by WMF-banned users? It's recommended on the mediawiki.org wiki though. Can that seriously not go there? Among Us for POTUS (talk) 05:51, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Oh yeah, on here. Among Us for POTUS (talk) 05:52, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Almost nobody cares other than you, and that website is irrelevant. Cullen328 (talk) 06:16, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Erm. Mediawiki.org is an official WMF site. I'm simply asking because I feel that Miraheze is a good recommendation for people who want alternative outlets. Among Us for POTUS (talk) 06:21, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

If you want to ask, Among Us for POTUS, then a good place to ask would be Wikipedia talk:Alternative outlets. -- Hoary (talk) 07:06, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you Among Us for POTUS (talk) 16:20, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Among Us for POTUS, this was also being discussed on my talk page - if you have a question about by my edit, you should really just ask me directly (like the IP did)!

In any case, yes, a WMF-banned user has full access to the Miraheze servers, including users' private data, etc. I have no idea why people want to keep recommending it knowing that history. I request you undo your edit restoring it. Legoktm (talk) 07:07, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

I've removed it. Anyone wanting to readd it is welcome to argue on the essay's talk page for readding it. If they get agreement for readding it, then it may be readded. -- Hoary (talk) 08:57, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

That's quite surprising. What were they banned for? Among Us for POTUS (talk) 16:17, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

@Among Us for POTUSFor why someone is banned, Please contact ca@wikimedia.org Lemonaka (talk) 21:58, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

FWIW:Special:CA/John F. Lewis Lemonaka (talk) 11:48, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

"Erm" is not actually a word. It is something that certain people type when they have nothing substantive to say. Cullen328 (talk) 07:44, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Maybe it's just a disfluency... David10244 (talk) 08:34, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

I'm well aware that "Erm" is not a word. It's a slang. People use knowing that it's not a word for the same reason that they'd use, say, "wtf", knowing it's not a word. Among Us for POTUS (talk) 16:18, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Disingenuous, Cullen. Whether "erm" is a word or not, it has a prgamatic function - something like "I'm about to disagree, but I don't want to be to forthright about it". ColinFine (talk) 13:39, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

What does that even have to do with this conversation?? You adding that was more non substantive than the "Erm" itself.. Ogusokumushi (talk) 20:36, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

@Ogusokumushi I disagree; I think CF was right to mildly "slap back" (IMO). David10244 (talk) 06:18, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Not really. This is Wikipedia, not really the place for "slap backs". Correct me if I'm wrong though, I just thought the remark was unhelpful. Ogusokumushi (talk) 14:30, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Cullen's remark on the use of erm was unproductive, sounds vindictive, and I would've expected better from a Teahouse host. This has already gotten off-topic, so any further discussion on this particular matter should go to Wikipedia talk:Teahouse.

In any case, it seems other users like Hoary, Lemonaka, and Legoktm have provided helpful responses, which Among Us for POTUS seems to have found satisfactory. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:29, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Help

What was the last common ancestor of dinosaurs and mammals? Allaoii ^talk 19:09, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Allaoii. If you can't find the answer at Most recent common ancestor or one of the articles linked therein, you could try asking at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Science. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 19:16, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

We can't know exactly which species, but the last common ancestor of dinosaurs and mammals would have been one of the early amniotes. Note that since birds are dinosaurs, your question is the same as asking "what was the last common ancestor of humans and chickens". --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 20:35, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Allaoii, welcome to teahouse. However, this is a place for asking something related to editing wikipedia, you may have a try on Wikipedia talk:BIOLOGY Lemonaka (talk) 08:14, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

never mind the reference desk helped Allaoii ^talk 16:43, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Dude can you tell me what the answer was? I've been meaning to look it up.. Ogusokumushi (talk) 14:34, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

@Ogusokumushi, the answer is at the Science ref desk. Here's a direct link: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Science#Help. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:47, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! Ogusokumushi (talk) 16:20, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Terms used

Was wondering why some very credible people are listed as "Conspiracy Theorist"? This was a term invented at the time of the Kennedy to demonize any with alternative theory to what now seem impossible. Every cop. military planner, investigator conspire to theorize. They truely are conspiracy theorist. But would it damage them to have that above they're name and picture on this site. I believe it would. When I see Experts in a field listed as conspiracy theorist on this site it seems this site is not interested in either the facts or engaged in demonization against the person. A demonization title to discredit? I don't understand why that would be a title over someones picture unless thats all they do or have done. If one feels the need such a bogus title that litterally means a theory of two or more planning were would it end? Why not let people decide. Who decides who is a conspiracy theorist? Also that would make anyone on this site working with a co-worker to cowrite, edit etc.. a conspirator and me a conspiracy theorist for mentioning it. I have a theory this site conspires in subjectivity therefor im a conspiracy theorist by definition. So it's basically just name calling, demonization, arbitraty and capricious. Is this of fact? It's very subjective simply because we all are conspirators, all have conspiracy theory so is it just that certain people are to be demonized? Does that now mean that title goes above the ablum I've written, produced etc... the work in the oil industry, the electrical fabrication, plans, installs etc.. No I believe. It's just a part of me not a title. I'm sorry it just comes across as demonization in arbitrary capricious manner. Is they're work examined for validity or fact? Who decides lifetimes of expert factual work get stuck under a heading of conspiracy theorist? I believe this is more product of cancel culture. I also believe that some may warrant mention but not title. Not of relevence is the sense due to conspiracy theory has been misued and breaks further our langauge. Would it not be more prudent to simply list the claims as unproven or open/unfounded theory and allow people to conclude? Just the facts or is it just more propaganda? 69.169.10.167 (talk) 22:14, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Lemonaka (talk) 22:18, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources say about a topic. If the preponderance of sources describe someone as a conspiracy theorist, then we do, too. Wikipedia has a strict policy about how living people are written about, WP:BLP. If an article inaccurately summarizes its sources, please detail the specific errors on the article talk page. 331dot (talk) 22:20, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you!

It's a subjective terms when put together. So name calling, or slang term used by these "Reliable Sources"? I was suprised. Black's Law dictionary has no definition for these words together. So less accurate terms are ok, or slang is ok due to a proponderance? Your terms seem to indicate as to not demonize. Even if there is a preponderance to warn the reader, or discredit in fact & truth, would not this site be weary of this as a TITLE? Curiously how would you define Conspiracy Theorist? Most words used as a title have a legal definition. 2600:1700:A7D0:3DB0:90ED:93D6:B1B0:D407 (talk) 00:29, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Do you have a particular article you are concerned about that you can link us to? -- asilvering (talk) 01:57, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

I'm surprised to read that "Most words used as a title have a legal definition." What's your evidence for this? -- Hoary (talk) 06:42, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

What does Black's Law Dictionary have to do with anything? David10244 (talk) 03:58, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Rather than conspire to theorize, I define it as someone who theorizes about conspiracies. A conspiracy theory is a theory about a conspiracy, not a conspiracy to create a theory. HerrWaus (talk) 00:47, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

I get the feeling this person might be a conspiracy theorist Club On a Sub 20 (talk) 17:27, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

I mean it really depends on who is reading. I really don't see any way else to put it, and it's quite hard to find a term like "conspiracy theorist" and not have it seem offensive or subjective to anyone at all. Also just having simple beliefs and being a full on conspiracy theorist are different. You can casually believe in something and not let it consume most, if not all of your life, which is usually what the term is used for. Basically if it's such a defining personality trait then yeah, it should probably be used on said person. Ogusokumushi (talk) 14:41, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Why should you add references?

Just asking. Kernel123 (talk) 01:25, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

@Kernel123: See WP:Verify, a key policy of Wikipedia. RudolfRed (talk) 01:29, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello @Kernel123, welcome to Teahouse. Everything on Wikipedia must be verifiable through reliable sources - poorly sourced material may be removed. --Harobouri • 🎢 • 🏗️ (he/him • WP:APARKS) 01:32, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Also because wikipedia does not record what you or I think about anything. It records only what reliable sources say about a topic. It would not be much good as an encyclopedia if it did anything else. --Bduke (talk) 01:36, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

It's a difference of viewpoint between Wikipedia and some other encyclopaedias. Some encyclopaedias feel it's sufficient to give the reader a quick overview, and assume the reader wants to know no more; they aim to skim the surface of a huge range of general knowledge, and they're not bad things for general human education. Wikipedia prefers to go a step further: it likes to give the reader a foothold in the wider literature, so they can read further, and find out more. This has two important side-effects: it encourages readers to check their facts (not believe everything they read from a single source) and it makes Wikipedia a bit more reliable (although we strenuously deny our own reliability). It's also key to Wikipedia's operation as a "written by anyone" encyclopaedia. We need some credentials! You either get credentials by saying "Professor X, an acknowledged expert on worms, wrote our articles on worms" or you get it by saying "our articles on worms were written by goodness knows who, but they're based on a wide range of wormy reviews by many authors as knowledgeable as Professor X". WP chose the latter path. Elemimele (talk) 07:06, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

It's so that a reader in Manchester next week, or Minneapolis next month, or Mumbai next year, who sees the information and doesn't know whether it is correct (somebody may have made a mistake when entering it, or have misunderstood a source, or somebody else may have come along later and vandalized it) has a way of checking it, if it's important to them. ColinFine (talk) 12:38, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

To verify that information is correct? I'm sorry I just don't understand how this is even a question.. Ogusokumushi (talk) 14:42, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Are we really the largest encyclopedia here?

I'm new here so I just want to know. Sirhewlett (talk) 21:50, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Sirhewlett, welcome to the Teahouse. That depends on what you mean by "largest" and "here". Wikipedia's own article does claim it is the largest and most-read reference work in history. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 21:53, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

On the Guiness World Records, records show that Wikipedia is, the biggest encyclopedia online. Sarrail (talk) 21:59, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

@Sarrail, @Sirhewlett 55 million articles as of 2020? No. Per Wikipedia:Size_of_Wikipedia, the English Wikipedia has 6.5 million articles and 57 million pages as of now (Dec. 2022). Guinness says that in 2020, there were 55 million articles. (I presume they mean English WP.) I doubt that all WP languages have 55 million articles total.

Wikipedia and/or the English Wikipedia might be the largest encyclopedia(s) in the world, but Guinness has unfortunately messed up the concepts, and has wrong info. And bad grammar. And inexplicably places WP in the United Kingdom, which is not really a location anyway. David10244 (talk) 04:35, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Guiness World Records first says a total of 55,632,716 articles on 18 January 2020 and later: "on 18 January 2021, it had 6,231,239 articles in English, out of a total of 55,632,716 articles written in 315 languages." The first date is wrong but the quote is right. meta:List of Wikipedias says the current total articles is 60,121,102. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:42, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter Well, I was wrong. I was misled by the number of pages in en:wp being so close to the number of articles that Guinness mentioned. I'll strike my incorrect info.

I'm surprised to see that there really are that many articles, and also surprised to see that another language (Cebuano) also has 6 million articles. I thought that en:wp was "by far" the largest Wikipedia. I should have checked my sources. Now I have a better picture of all of WP!

Although, is WP one encyclopedia, or 300 encyclopedias? :P David10244 (talk) 12:46, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

The Cebuano Wikipedia has 6 million bot-generated stubs nobody reads. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:52, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter Oh, interesting. So WP has 55 million minus 6 million "real" articles... :p. David10244 (talk) 10:41, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

If we ignore similar articles in some other languages... PrimeHunter (talk) 11:58, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

@Sirhewlett And if you need a slightly more reliable source for the view that Wikipedia is the largest ever, then this arcticle from The Economist in 2021 gives that. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:08, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for not switching to that other Vector

Thank you, en.wikipedia, for not switching to that new style "Vector from mediawiki". Thank you for keeping wikipedia as we all know it! Sarri.greek (talk) 05:37, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Unfortunately, it has been decided that the English Wikipedia will be switching to the new Vector, probably next month. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 05:44, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello @Sarri.greek, welcome to Teahouse, to keep old style vector, why don't have a try on Special:GlobalPreferences#mw-prefsection-rendering. Set the preference appearance to vector-legacy may help you. Lemonaka (talk) 07:54, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you @Thebiguglyalien and Lemonaka: for your reply. I am so sorry that your community has accepted that Vector :( Is there a page with the Vote on this issue? the reasons of acceptance as the default, etc?) I come from el and en.wiktionary, with classic style. Sarri.greek (talk) 08:08, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

@Sarri.greek, I don't know either, a lot of tools also need to be modified a lot for this change, if my knowledge serves me right... Lemonaka (talk) 08:10, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

@sarri.greek: wikipedia:requests for comment/Deployment of Vector (2022) is where the request for comment took place. lettherebedarklight晚安 14:04, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

@Sarri.greek, the latest update post is here, and they do invite comments (but not votes, there's no voting to be done at the moment). 199.208.172.35 (talk) 15:35, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

FWIW, I've been using 2022 Vector for the last few months, and have no complaints. -- Doktor Züm (talk) 08:53, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Okay, I will have a try on that. Lemonaka (talk) 09:46, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

@Doktor Züm Translation tool on meta has terrible bug against Vector 2022, I have changed it back. Lemonaka (talk) 12:29, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Shauwn mkhize

im new here thanks for the worm welcome.i amrequest for shauwn mkhize's person or business email address. Im planning on opening a business i want our own business woman to help me on it.. 102.249.1.8 (talk) 13:07, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

As it says at the top of the page, the Teahouse is "a friendly place where you can ask questions to get help with using and editing Wikipedia". Wikipedia does not disclose email addresses for the subjects of its articles. - David Biddulph (talk) 13:11, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. Shauwn Mkhize has a link to her twitter feed, so you could contact her that way. Given that your only other post was to call somebody "soo rude" for giving an accurate summary of the position, I wonder if your "worm welcome" was intended ironically. ColinFine (talk) 14:13, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, @102.249.1.8, welcome to teahouse. Teahouse is a place for asking things related to Wikipedia. If you'd like to get somone's personal information, you are going to the wrong place. Please refrain from doing so, this is called Doxxing and likely to be blocked away. Lemonaka (talk) 21:16, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Her Instagram profile is linked from Shauwn Mkhize (Q107316660): you might be able to message her there if you can't reach her via Twitter. ⁓ Pelagic ( messages ) 07:27, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Moca, Dominican Republic

There are many issues I have with the forum for Moca, Dominican Republic. I am new here, so I am unaware as to how I can edit this page, but the lack of information on this town is a bit shocking. It is filled with culture and history, like how coffee is often grown there, and the name is based off of a palm tree. I deeply apologize if I have not formatted this correctly, like I said earlier, I am new. Thank you. Furudehanyuu (talk) 16:37, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

@Furudehanyuu Welcome to the Teahouse, and thank you for your interest in improving the Moca, Dominican Republic article. To learn how to edit, I suggest you start at Help:Introduction. When you're ready to add new information to the article, you would gather published independent reliable sources that have provided significant coverage of Moca, and use the sources as references (see WP:EASYREFBEGIN for a helpful video). You can also post concerns and suggestions at the article's talk page - Talk:Moca, Dominican Republic - to collaborate with other editors. Thanks, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 17:01, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Furudehanyuu, and welcome to the Teahouse, and to Wikipedia. Don't worry about the formatting so much: the important thing is that you have reliable published sources for any information you want to add: your personal knowledge is not enough. If you don't feel up to editing the article directly, you could open a discussion on the talk page Talk:Moca, Dominican Republic. ColinFine (talk) 17:01, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your help! Furudehanyuu (talk) 17:34, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

@Furudehanyuu: @ColinFine: You might take a look at the various versions of this article in other languages (there are a couple of dozen of them, though I suspect the Spanish-language one is likely to be the most comprehensive one) listed on the left side of the page. At the least, this may provide some ideas about other content to include. If you were to use the content directly (i.e. just translating it), then you need to give credit (I believe there's a template for this). I am not especially familiar with the precise conditions under which that's required, but at the very least, this will let you know what other people thought was content that would be relevant to this article. Fabrickator (talk) 16:30, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

It may give ideas about what to include; but unless the information is backed up by a source, it should not be included in the English version. ColinFine (talk) 17:01, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Confederation of African Football

why are my recent changes to the page regarded as 'not constructive'? M Bitton reverted my changes and I would like them to be return as they are very vital information! Mtu wa asili (talk) 20:47, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Good day, I noticed that one edit you made added Swahili as a language. Also you added a name in Swahili(?) which may have not been wanted. The editor that reverted you on the basis of "misleading summaries," most likely referring to when you said "Fixed typo" you changed the position of Arabic and French. ✶Mitch199811✶ [Talk] 20:58, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

I would like to note that I just glanced at the situation and I would ask the person who reverted you. ✶Mitch199811✶ [Talk] 21:01, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

@Mtu wa asili - Welcome to Wikipedia! I recommend you read Wikipedia:Canned edit summaries, but the TL;DR is that those buttons you see that say "Fixed typo", "Added content", etc, should only be used if you're actually fixing a typo or adding content. You aren't required to use them on every edit (though you are, to some extent, required to communicate with other editors).

In this specific case, I would ask @M.Bitton here. Do note that "misleading edit summary" isn't a good reason to revert an otherwise good edit - if the infobox content is in dispute, though, you two should talk it out. casualdejekyll 20:25, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

@Casualdejekyll: what makes it a "good edit"? The addition of a non-official language or the misleading edit summaries to make it prominent? M.Bitton (talk) 21:48, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

@M.Bitton, I can't claim to know anything about the topic of the article, I was just WP:AGFing. casualdejekyll 00:24, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Mtu wa asili, I randomly picked one of your edits from March. Special:Diff/1074868607 is obviously incorrect. The reference at upenn.edu is not published by University of Dodoma. ⁓ Pelagic ( messages ) 07:59, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

... and the number inserted contradicted the cited reference. - David Biddulph (talk) 08:21, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

redirect

I went looking for an article (Unconscious bias) and was redirected to Implicit stereotype. I would like to create/recreate the article on Unconscious bias and remove the redirect. There are more studies than there used to be, and I do not think it is adequately covered in the article that absorbed it. Can that be done? How? This is way beyond my skill set, but I would like to learn. Jenhawk777 (talk) 21:21, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

When you get redirected, you can click the link in the little "redirected from" to get to the actual redirect page. You can then edit that to turn it into an article. If you want to draft an article first, you can make a draft and then ask on WP:RM/TR or using {{db-move}} to have the redirect replaced with your article. ■ ∃ Madeline ⇔ ∃ Part of me ; 21:26, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Jenhawk777: Click this link [1], click edit, remove all the text related to the redirect and you can create the article that way. Alternatively, you can work on an article in draftspace and nominate that page for WP:G6 when it's ready to be moved to mainspace. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 21:26, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you so much for responding Madeline and Clovermoss🍀. I do appreciate it, but I must be missing something. I have now tried both approaches and cannot find any access to the original article. Additional suggestions? Jenhawk777 (talk) 22:16, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

@Jenhawk777: Are you talking about Implicit stereotype? Or the link I gave that doesn't automatically redirect you? I've taken a look at your recent contributions [2] and it doesn't look like you've made any related edits. Maybe I'm missing something context-wise? Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 22:21, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Edits to implicit stereotype? No, I am not interested in editing that one. I am interested in reopening and editing unconscious bias. If I type in unconscious bias I get the redirect that says it is a redirect to implicit stereotype; there is no access that I can find to unconscious bias. If I go to implicit stereotype, there is a little script that says it is a redirect from unconscious bias, click on that and it takes me right back to the same redirect page. The link takes me to the redirect page automatically. Jenhawk777 (talk) 22:27, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

@Jenhawk777: This link should work [3]? You can click edit source and just remove the redirect/create an article in a single edit if you want to. An example of what this looks like [4]. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 22:34, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

@Jenhawk777, as far as I can tell, there was never an article at Unconscious bias. It seems to have started life as a redirect. There is nothing to recover. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 22:35, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Although it was originally a redirect to Cognitive bias rather than Implicit stereotype. @Jenhawk777: You may want to see if the information you want to add can be incorporated into either of those two articles. Deor (talk) 23:36, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

I have just discovered that! I will now write one. I will also add paragraphs as Deor suggests. Should I reinstate the redirect until then? Thank you all so much! Teahouse rocks! Jenhawk777 (talk) 07:03, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

An edit i made was removed within about 1 minute

I added the entry of Freedom Factory Raceway(a legitimate business and raceway in Bradenton) to the Bradenton Florida wiki page and linked it to the owners website which is also the website for the raceway and the entry was removed within a minute, why isn't a legitimate business owner from Bradentons Business not allowed on the Bradenton Wiki page? 192.249.224.14 (talk) 03:28, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello! Hopefully you have a good day today. While Freedom Factory Raceway may be a legitimate business in Bradenton, Florida, it can't be placed there because the raceway is not enough to have on the article, and is not notable enough to be placed on the point of interest section of the place. Thank you. ✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 03:45, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, IP user, and welcome to the Teahouse. Any reasonable sized town will have hundreds of businesses: articles on towns would be useless if they listed them all. Wikipedia has a policy of only listing things that are notable. ColinFine (talk) 09:32, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

help

So, I can log in again. I changed my password so hopefully that will fix the problem. Anyway, on to the point. I found a Video Game that isn't on the wiki yet, and I might make an article about it later in the future. My problem is that there's no reliable sources for it. It's called "Extreme Car Driving Simulator" and the only results for it are the google play reviews and unblocked gaming websites for kids who procrastinate instead of doing their homework. Is there another way I can search for these sources (if any at all)? The Power is There at Your Command (talk) 03:43, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello @The Power is There at Your Command. Welcome to the teahouse! Unfortunately, if the sources don't exist, we can't have an article about it. You may want to try one of the sites listed at alternate outlets for other options. Thanks, echidnaLives - talk - edits 03:47, 16 December 2022 (UTC).

Ah, okay thanks. Aw man. 😥 The Power is There at Your Command (talk) 03:49, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, it sucks. Sorry. echidnaLives - talk - edits 03:51, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Well the game has been getting popular again recently with the updates, so hopefully, there will be some sources created for it in the future. Also, my own IP address has been threatening me apparently. It looks like it's stopped, but where to report if it happens again? The Power is There at Your Command (talk) 03:54, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

WP:AIV, most likely. Sarrail (talk) 03:55, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

K. The Power is There at Your Command (talk) 03:56, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

@The Power is There at Your Command, you may find something interesting at Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:24, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Who can upload the correct photo for me, please?

Hi. There's the wrong photo on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ekkehard_von_Kuenssberg The main photo is of Ekkehard's son (Nick) - but labelled as Ekkehard. Ekkehard really looked like this: https://www.qnis.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Ekke-Kuensberg.jpg I'm old, chronically ill - & not really up to learning something new. - Is someone able to replace his son's photo with the real one of him, please? Thank you. ROSIEDEUTSCH (talk) 04:43, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi ROSIEDEUTSCH. You can make a request that the file be uploaded at Wikipedia:Files for upload. You should try and include some information about the file's provenance in your request to help aid in the assessment of it's copyright status and also aid in verifying that it's really Ekkehard von Kuenssberg. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:49, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi ROSIEDEUTSCH. Sure - Ive deleted the offending photo and hope to load a replacement unless Marchjuly beats me to it (copyright isnt important for fair use). Sorry about the aggravation Rosie and hope your illness eases. Have a good xmas Victuallers (talk) 09:17, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Bahulakshi Devi

Draft:Bahulaksh I have made this article. Please help me to improve. Ayantik Basu (talk) 05:01, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Bahulakshi Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 07:25, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Ayantik Basu, the article has four titled sections. None of these four is even partially referenced. Everything must be referenced. Specify the reliable sources that you have used. -- Hoary (talk) 09:45, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Ok Ayantik Basu (talk) 05:37, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

please solve some problems in this artical

Draft:Brijendra Pratap Singh

why content tab come on top

please shift that after brijendra pratap singh paragraf and befour education paragraf Skpnthi (talk) 07:11, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

@Skpnthi the default behavior of MediaWiki (the software behind Wikipedia) is to place the TOC before the first heading after the initial page title generated for every page. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 07:21, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

 Done, the level 1 heading doesn't go in the text. That's title of the article. Cmr08 (talk) 07:17, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

BluOr bank Translation To English

Hi everybody!

I have one unresolved problem lasting for years: every time I try to ad an English translation to BluOr Bank`s (Latvian bank, working all over the Europe) page on Wiki, I get a ban and my translation being deleted. Reason: advertising. I am not trying to advertise something, I just try to ad a translation for the comfort of users that do not read in Latvian. Why Wiki don`t want to add it? Georgijs.nikitins (talk) 07:22, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

@georgijs.nikitins: this is your only edit to en.wiki, and the only other edit you have done is to update the employee count of bluor bank on lv.wiki.

if you wish to create an article, you may use the article wizard. lettherebedarklight晚安 08:18, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

You'll find advice at WP:Translation. Note that the rules here may well be different from those on the Latvian Wikipedia. - David Biddulph (talk) 08:21, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Protected article

I know quite a bit about vacuum cleaners and I noticed the page on Vacuum cleaners being very old / outdated.The images are also out of the 90's. I wanted to spend some serious time on it, but the article is protected by someone who is not around anymore I saw on his or her Wikipedia account (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Anthony_Appleyard). Can I just start with it? (I know this would take like a lot of time to improve this article.)

I'm also wondering isn't this page outdated in the first place because of this protection? SarahBx (talk) 07:51, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Please remember that Wikipedia content must be based not on what you "know quite a bit" about, but on what can be referenced to independent reliable sources. That said, you or any other autoconfirmed editor can improve the page. Other editors can make edit requests on the article talk page. It is of no consequence to the article that the administrator who protected it is sadly no longer with us; if a valid argument were to be made at WP:RFPP that the protection ought to be removed, any administrator could do so. - David Biddulph (talk) 08:06, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

UPDATE: Protection removed 16 December. Have at it! (with references). David notMD (talk) 15:28, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Why my draft declined?

I have created a draft Draft:Ram Rati Bind which is about a politician who served as Member of Lok Sabha, Lower House of Parliament of India but that draft has been declined. I want the reason about it. This article meets WP:POLITICIAN because he has been members of legislative body at national level. (Please ping me if someone will reply.) ​​​​​​​𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝟕𝟐𝟖🧙‍♂️^{Let's Talk !} 08:07, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

courtesy ping to Cabrils. —usernamekiran (talk) 08:42, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, LordVoldemort728. You are correct that this person clearly passes WP:NPOLITICIAN and so Cabrils should not have declined the draft. Drafts that have a likelihood of surviving Articles for Deletion should be accepted, and in my experience, articles about verified members of national legislatures are kept pretty much 100% of the time. On the other hand, the draft consists of only three sentences and is pretty uniformative. Surely you can do better than this. A member of the Lok Sabha deserves better coverage than you have written so far. I have written seven sentences in response to your question, and you should be able to exceed that count and produce a more informative article to be proud of. Cullen328 (talk) 09:00, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

@Cullen328 I have added one more sentence that says, In Lok Sabha, he served as Member of Committee on Human Resource Development. ​​​​​​​𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝟕𝟐𝟖🧙‍♂️^{Let's Talk !} 09:08, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

@Cullen328 I have also found some mentions about him like

• https://speakerloksabha.nic.in/speech/SpeechDetails.asp?SpeechId=77
• https://www.hindustantimes.com/india/bsp-retains-three-ls-seats/story-ayqzGXfpyW0VaE5AAQjgsI.html

​​​​​​​𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝟕𝟐𝟖🧙‍♂️^{Let's Talk !} 09:16, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

If the added sentence, and those references (assuming they are reliable) are added to the draft, then that's probably sufficient. Ping me and I am happy to review. FYI in future it might be more productive (more efficient??) in the first instance to communicate with the reviewer rather than posting here. Cabrils (talk) 09:23, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi LordVoldemort728. It's probably helpful to include here the comment I posted on the draft when I declined it:

"Well done on creating the draft, and it may potentially meet the relevant requirements (including WP:GNG, WP:ANYBIO) but presently does not. Wikipedia's basic requirement for entry is that the subject is notable. Essentially subjects are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject. To properly create such a draft page, please see referencing for beginners or the article Easier Referencing for Beginners. Please familiarise yourself with these pages before amending the draft. If you feel you can meet these requirements then resubmit the page and ping me and I would be happy to reassess. As I said, I do think this draft has potential so please do persevere!"

I would also note the following from WP:ANYBIO (emphasis added): "People are likely to be notable if they meet any of the following standards. Failure to meet these criteria is not conclusive proof that a subject should not be included; conversely, meeting one or more does not guarantee that a subject should be included."

As my comment states, "I do think this draft has potential so please do persevere!".

Yes, being a member of a legislative body at national level generally should meet WP:NPOLITICIAN. However, as Cullen328 notes, the article is a bare three sentences. I declined the draft not because it was inappropriate for Wikipedia, but rather that is simply required the addition of a couple of reliable sources, which should be easy to find given the subject is a member of a national legislature. With respect, and my comment is, in my view, very respectful and encouraging, the draft is just not quite complete. Other reviewers may come to a different view, but I do feel I explained my reasoning in my comment, and as Cullen328 points out, the draft can relatively easily be amended to fix the issue. Again, as I wrote in my comment: "If you feel you can meet these requirements then resubmit the page and ping me and I would be happy to reassess."Cabrils (talk) 09:16, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

@ ​​​​​​​LordVoldemort728|​​​​​​ Draft amended and so now accepted. Cabrils (talk) 09:36, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

I think that we have a good outcome here. Cullen328 (talk)\

Disambiguation links added / Reverted

Hello. What's wrong to add working disambiguation links? 95.90.178.53 (talk) 10:56, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

You added a link to the dab page Sequencer. You presumably intended to link to one or other of the articles listed there, so you should have been specific. - David Biddulph (talk) 11:14, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

... mmh is not good to link through the wiki pages for readers too teach? Whats the correct disambiguation link for Sequencer? 95.90.178.53 (talk) 11:30, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Music sequencer ... got it :) 95.90.178.53 (talk) 11:31, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

done, I hope it's ok now. regards 95.90.178.53 (talk) 12:33, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Of more importance than the disambiguation link is the fact that PISCIDE has no references to independent reliable sources to demonstrate the notability of the subject, hence the article is at risk of being deleted. I see also that you are a member of the band, so because of your conflict of interest you should not be editing the article. - David Biddulph (talk) 13:02, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

But I know all details about the band which no fan can add correctly, we drive our own label. We live in the year 2022 ... what sources, the music speaks. What is to do know? You deleted PiCNT (talk) 13:37, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

@PiCNT, please read reliable sources and PAID. You cannot add information based on your own personal experiences and you should be making requests on the talk page rather than editing the article directly. 97.113.177.161 (talk) 13:49, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

lol, paid - the band is passion, we are friends and independent from any major - but the article was written by kinda major (see article talk) back in the days - but without no updates fixes etc for ages ... all I did was typo fixes, disco updates, added working disambiguation links - nowt more not less - it's your job or hobby to make wiki better ... so do it and take a look in the history of changes ... google is full of sources, and then you tell me again these links are not good ... it's crazy, anyway, if all wiki articles are written by "aliens" then who knows maybe wiki is completely "from another world" - I mean from time to time also wiki should ask the "living origin" to get more details known ... finally, do what do you like with our article - I'm out. PiCNT (talk) 09:51, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

@David Biddulph, new articles like this are just tagged, and left in mainspace? Finding sources is the best outcome, but based on what happens to other articles, if no one proposes an AfD, then ths unreferenced article might stay for a decade... I know that an AfD requires a wp:BEFORE, which would certainly help. (It ought to be a draft, until it gets sources.) David10244 (talk) 07:12, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Oh, wait, I suppose NPP will get to it at some point. Sorry for the intrusion... David10244 (talk) 07:15, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

It's been around much too long for NPP, but of course anyone can propose deletion if they wish. - David Biddulph (talk) 14:42, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

The Goodies

Micheal Bentine made some appearances in the 'Goodies', but there is no mention of him. Am I dreaming this? Should I include a reference to him? 176.22.125.130 (talk) 11:32, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

You can list him at List of The Goodies guest stars if you have a reference to a reliable source. - David Biddulph (talk) 11:36, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Where can I ask questions regarding the API

I'm a bit lost regarding the API usage, and I don't want to flood wikipedia with my questions. Vincent-vst🚀 (talk) 11:39, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Perhaps mw:API talk:Main page, or otherwise WP:VPT? - David Biddulph (talk) 11:44, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

thank you @David Biddulph Vincent-vst🚀 (talk) 11:54, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Q&A etiquette

Hi,

I have to admit to finding the Q&A environment confusing. When I post something it seems to get archived very quickly so when I see a reply it goes to a ‘content has been moved or deleted pop-up 9x out of ten.

My questions are: 1) how often is this archiving? 2) is it automatic or manual (ie can I rely on it being after a precise amount of time so I know I should check back within x days)? 3) if someone does reply and I can’t find their reply because it’s archived somewhere is that considered fine or is it poor etiquette? 4) when I can find a record of the edit that was there answer I can see an option ‘thank’. my reflex is to use that but then I wondered does it just jam up another editor’s inbox and so better saved for when someone has done some serious work in a collaborative context or as advocacy in a dispute over editing?

TIA EthicalAugur (talk) 13:27, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

EthicalAugur, if "‘content has been moved or deleted['] pop-up 9x out of ten" I'm surprised. (1), (2): I don't know. (3) Is what considered fine? Surely not your inability to find something; so, your looking in the talk archive? If yes, looking in the talk archive, of course this is considered fine. (4) Thanking somebody (by clicking the "Thank" option) doesn't clog up anything. (It's about as vapid as "Like" in Facebook.) -- Hoary (talk) 13:34, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Many aspects of learning to edit Wikipedia involve things that are not apparent until they happen and someone has something to say about it.

RE: your response to 1 and 2) be surprised then, because this is the case. It is a bit doing archiving of messages.

Re your response to 3) I was asking whether it’s considered bad etiquette not to respond to a reply on a post I’ve put up, particularly when that post is in the teahouse, it seemed like people making the effort to respond probably prefer acknowledgement of their offer of a helping hand. Sometimes that isn’t the case in social media so I was asking.

4) Your belief that ‘thanks’ are as vapid as ‘likes’ are noted. I wasn’t sure how ’thanks’ exist for the receiver. Thanks to @Asilvering I now know where these show up and can make a more informed choice about whether or not to use that function. It’s quicker than typing a reply and at least would let someone know that I’ve seen their message if working on a project together.

I’d say that things work well for those of us who aren’t easily disheartened. I looked to join a group and straight away fell into a soggy pit of ‘is’ ‘is not’ WP:GRATUITOUS over a clearly gratuitous image. It’s no mystery why so few editors are women, the protocol and behaviour toward new editors makes politics look like a tea party, at least you get to know the actual names of the politicians. If I were to ever really seriously give this a shot I’d have to organise a team of people I already know to work in this space. I’m clearly far too much of a snowflake to take it on by myself. EthicalAugur (talk) 10:20, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

To answer your question 2, it is automatic, with the parameters set up to archive a thread at least 48 hours after the last contribution to the thread. - David Biddulph (talk) 13:41, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Unfortunately, the bot which used to deliver notifications of and links to archived posts is broken. I'm afraid there's not much more to do except check for replies more frequently. 97.113.177.161 (talk) 13:43, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

This makes sense. It was behaving differently to previous logins. EthicalAugur (talk) 09:46, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

"Thank" goes into a "thanks log" (here's yours, for example: [5], [6]). I'll thank you for your post so you can see what it does. That's it. You're just sending a smile to someone else. Anyone who doesn't like receiving the notifications for them can just turn them off, so don't worry about it. :) -- asilvering (talk) 00:48, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, that was really helpful. EthicalAugur (talk) 10:20, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Muslim population in Ethiopia

the U.S. State Department estimated that "approximately 45 percent of the population is Sunni Muslim." then why the Wikipedia page on Islam by country state that Muslim population on Ethiopia is only 31 percent?

and that's my source for evidence https://2001-2009.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2007/90097.htm Lion 19999 (talk) 16:15, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

@Lion 19999 Wikipedia can be edited by anyone, so it is only natural that mistakes will show up now and then. You can edit the page directly or by suggesting something at the talk page, as long as you have a reliable source. Granted, I see that your source is from 2001-2009, so it might no longer be accurate? Club On a Sub 20 (talk) 16:47, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

If you look at Islam in Ethiopia, the figure given is 33.9%, and is cited to the 2007 Ethiopian census, presumably a reliable source. THe IR Freedom Report that you cite states 45%, but gives no source to back that up. The figure you mention, 31.3%, in Islam by country, is cited to the World Factbook, published by the CIA, and labelled "2106 estimate".

Thus, all three figures are cited to what appear to be reliable sources. The 33% and the 45% are both 2007-9, and one is the official census of Ethiopia, the other an official publication by a department of a different government. that gives no sources for its figures. The third one is also from a US government publication, and gives no source, but is several years more recent.

It is not the job of Wikipedia or its editors to decide between conflicting information in sources, if the sources appear equally reliable, and often the best thing to do is to present the inconsistency - "source A says X, while source B says Y". But in this case I think that the fact that the 33.9% figure comes from the Census, and that the %31.3 figure is ten years later, but still similar, suggest that the 45% figure in the IR Freedom report is an outlier, and should be ignored.

One other point to note is that statistics of this kind are notoriously affected by definition. It seems likely, for example, that the census figure depends on the number of people who actually ticked the relevant box in their census, while the IR Freedom Report uses estimates from some other criterion: since it does not give the source of the information, it is hard to tell. ColinFine (talk) 17:28, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

@Lion 19999 As is usual with Wikipedia, you can see exactly which source our figure was derived from. In this case it is at this URL (cia.gov) which states that their figure is from 2016. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:34, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Advice on a non-communicative editor rejection

I received a rejection on an article submission and have not gotten a response from the editor who rejected it to see 1. their reason for rejecting, and 2. If my edits would be acceptable. Any advice on how to get them to respond, or how to move forward if they are not responding? Rushistoriia (talk) 21:08, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to The Teahouse, your draft Draft:James T. Andrews was not rejected it was declined for lack of reliable sources. Theroadislong (talk) 21:13, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Actually, Declined three times by three different reviewers, the most recent September 2022. You have reached out to the person who most recently declined it, but responses are not obligatory. The problem continues to be weakness with quality of references, plus some ref formatting weaknesses. David notMD (talk) 22:21, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

first page created in sandbox

I just created a page using my sandbox. User:Km4water/sandbox - Wikipedia Now I would like to publish the page. What do I do next? Km4water (talk) 21:37, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to The Teahouse, I have added the submit template, but please don't submit without improved independent reliable sources. Theroadislong (talk) 21:46, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks -- the references I have supplied look pretty good to me. Can you be specific? Km4water (talk) 22:38, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

@Km4water: Welcome to the Teahouse. There are buttons on the templated boxes at the top of the page that will allow you to submit it for review, but I can tell you right now no reviewer will approve it because you haven't cited properly. Please read WP:EASYREFBEGIN. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:46, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks -- the references I have supplied look pretty good to me. Can you be specific? Km4water (talk) 22:38, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

First, that is not proper referencing, those are hyperlinks, which are not allowed. Use guidelines at Help:Referencing for beginners to convert those URLs into properly formatted references. See any other article for what refs look like. The softwear will place a superscripted number in the text and insert the refs under References. David notMD (talk) 22:43, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Lydia Weld

I thoroughly enjoyed the article on Lydia (Rose) Weld, who was aunt to the person who raised me. When "Great Aunt Rose" heard in 1959 that my sister and I were to be sent to Baldwin School, a boarding school in Bryn Mawr, PA, she fired off a letter to my Aunt Dotty, Lydia's niece, in which she described her experience at Miss Baldwin's school, which she (and her twin sister Violet) attended in the late 1800's. It is a wonderful description, in her own words, of the school and of her world at the time. It's no question that she was a remarkable woman. Though only related to her by marriage, I am grateful to have heard the description of her experiences at Baldwin.

My Aunt Dotty died in 1986, and I always assumed that her Aunt Rose's letter was part of papers that she had saved. I spoke of the letter to other family members, and one of them located it, and sent it to me. I am elated to at last have it in my possession!

The question that now occurs to me is, can it be included in her Wikipedia page? If so, how? I have scanned the material, some of which is descriptive and not by her, but nevertheless interesting. The remaining pages were undoubtedly by her. I have a few family stories shared by those who knew her personally, but I don't know if they would add anything meaningful. The existing article, as far as it goes, seems accurate to me. Can the letter she sent to her niece be included in the page? Please let me know. I have scanned the pages, and can send them to you.

Sincerely yours,

Mariah Skinner 12.195.137.54 (talk) 22:29, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Mariah. What a delight for you to find the letter. Unfortunately, the answer is No. One of the core policies of Wikipedia is verifiability, which means that a reader anywhere, anytime, can in principle find the source for the information (eg online, or by ordering it from a library), and so we require that the information be contained in reliably published source. ColinFine (talk) 23:15, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Mariah: one way forward would be for you to send the letter to someone at the Baldwin School, who might be interested in having the story of Weld's experience there put on their website, given that she is of some notability. Once that was done, then the information would be published and could be cited in articles on Wikipedia. Similarly, if you could interest a local newspaper in publishing a modern article based on the letter, that would be equally good for citation. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:08, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

COURTESY TO TEAHOUSE: Article is Lydia Weld. David notMD (talk) 22:45, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Ray Byars

FYI

 – Split sections. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:48, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Ray Byars, Professional Motorcycle Racer and Harley Davidson Dealer from Beaumont, TX No References: I submitted an article for Ray Byars, an Amercian professional motorcycle racer and Harley Davidson dealer. After submitting it, an error popped up saying there were no references; however, I did have references. Could someone please tell me how to fix it? Cjmodica (talk) 01:00, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

@Cjmodica: Welcome to the Teahouse. It doesn't seem you're citing them in a way that the software recognises. Please read WP:EASYREFBEGIN carefully to learn how to properly cite material on Wikipedia. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:49, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

If you want more assistance, the title looks quite long. I'd suggest shortening it to Ray Byars. Sarrail (talk) 01:58, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Given that you created Tommy Byars with references I cannot understand how you created this draft without proper references. Fix it. David notMD (talk) 02:11, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

I don't know what I did wrong. Can you help me or show me which template to use? Cjmodica (talk) 02:44, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

See Theroadislong's comment. Which template are you askin' for, anyway? Sarrail (talk) 02:46, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, I think I have corrected everything. Cjmodica (talk) 04:11, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Need help to understand the gaps

Draft:Pocket FM - This article has been put down twice citing promotion. However, this is completely factual citing references for each and every facts. Need someone to help me out. Rahulnag07 (talk) 02:25, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

You have asked this at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk too. Wikipedia is not a place to merely tell about something, Wikipedia summarises what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a topic, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability.

Theroadislong (talk) 02:40, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Would appreciate a straight and to-the-point response pertaining to the problem areas. Even I have gone through the policies, and even I understand, Wikipedia is not about writing random things. The draft has references from reliable sources from all the news website, and still it was put down. Hence, I would really want to understand what I may have missed. May I request you to point to the mistakes that needs corrections. Thanks. Rahulnag07 (talk) 03:18, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Rahulnag07. Your draft throws out the word "global" in the first sentence as if that word has any encyclopedic value in the 21st century. It doesn't. It is nothing but a corporate buzzword. Your first reference is to Forbes which is notorious for publishing lightly rewritten press releases as so-called "news" coverage. Experienced reviewers know this. They are volunteers and do not want to waste time on poorly referenced drafts. The word "blockbuster" is another red flag for reviewers. That pretty much hollers that the draft is not neutrally written."Blockbuster" is an overtly promotional term devoid of encyclopedic value. A sentence like It is also exploring IP licensing for its audio-series with leading production houses and video OTTs. is an attempt to predict the future and what the heck does OTTs mean? I have never heard that jargon acronym before and the Wikilink leads to a disambiguation page, which is really bad practice. You describe the company's revenue as It has recently surpassed US$25 milliion as if that is an impressive figure. It isn't and you misspelled "million". You describe "funding rounds" as if that makes this company notable although every startup goes through funding rounds, and the dollar figures are not impressive, but you try to inflate the importance by making the unreferenced assertion that the investors are marquee investors, which is blatant puffery and marketing language. After reading your draft, I am left wondering "why is this company distinctive or interesting?" and ending up not knowing. Cullen328 (talk) 09:22, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Where to discuss a few ideas to improve pages about organisms: Also, places to learn about syntax and semantics

I have been editing Wikipedia articles for quite some time (close to a decade). However, I have started editing more often in the recent past.

1. Still, I lack a clear understanding of all these syntax and semantics related to discussing issues and coding pertaining to the non-visual editing of articles. Do you know any place that is a good starting point for quick reference and still not highly technical? I am conformable with writing on topics and citing relevant primary literature as I was trained as a chemist and Biophysics with bachelor's and doctoral level education in Sri Lanka and the US. But I often find it is too demanding to deal with jargon and technical explanations provided on help pages. Moreover, the technical details provided are often not elaborated enough or only provide details to be useful if you already know some HTML or related coding languages. I don't say it is not useful, but I already have some background and am comfortable enough to search and find relevant information. However, this process takes away time to do actual editing of pages. Also, this might prevent actual subject matter experts from editing and adding information to Wikipedia pages.
2. There are no clear-cut ways to reach moderators of each page, and they often need to spend some time digging here and there to find where and when to report issues that go out of control.
3. Visual editing is limited to editing text here and there and but not adequately address editing and manipulations of images and such. Lipwe (talk) 04:58, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

@Lipwe: for 1), perhaps Help:Cheatsheet is a way to start source editing. Help:Introduction also has topics on both visual and source editing. Help:Wikitext is more advanced and lists a lot more possibilities. For 2), there are no "moderators for a page x". Content disputes should be generally resolved at the associated talkpage, following the BRD cycle. We do have admins and an arbocm, but neither of those settle content disputes. Things that went out control (i.e. when content disputes became conduct disputes) should generally be reported to some noticeboard. For 3), I believe most experienced editors and the WMF are aware that the Visual editor does have its limitations and problems, including but not limited to working only on pages that contain Wikitext (which is still the mayority) and poor mobile support. Victor Schmidt (talk) 08:13, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Lipwe, what kind of organisms are you interested in? You might find collaborators, and places to discuss ideas, at some if the many biology-related wikiprojects. Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory/Science#Biology ⁓ Pelagic ( messages ) 10:07, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

My new article submission got rejected. Need some expert help in getting it done.

I belong to Ghoghari Vishasrimali Jain community. It is a very minority sub-caste of Jainism. I recently got the history of the same and want to publish it on Wikipedia so that the Ghoghari community world wide can be aware of their history. I created the article here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Ghoghari_Visha_Srimali_Jain but unfortunately it got declined. I am not a pro-wikipedia creator but its a genuine effort and not meant for any commercial purpose. So if someone can look at it and guide me on how can I improve as per standards and can submit it again. Thank you in advance. Dharmeshrdoshi (talk) 06:28, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

@Dharmeshrdoshi You need references: footnotes to where the information is from. Have a look at WP:REFB and the links in the decline notice. -- asilvering (talk) 06:31, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. As I have mentioned that I find this historical references from some old regional language magazine scanned pages and that too is no where online. So I can't give any reference. My idea is that let it come on Wikipedia and if any other contributor having more idea about this can add more details to this page. Unfortunately, there is nothing available for Ghoghari Visha Srimali Jain community online and it is my sincere effort to have this page as the start point. Dharmeshrdoshi (talk) 12:40, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi,@Dharmeshrdoshi, welcome to the Teahouse. For submitting an article to be accepted, please give us Reliable sources to prove this article has enough notability. Happy editing. Lemonaka (talk) 11:32, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. As I have mentioned that I find this historical references from some old regional language magazine scanned pages and that too is no where online. So I can't give any reliable source reference as defined in the policy. My idea is that let it come on Wikipedia and if any other contributor having more idea about this can add more details to this page. Unfortunately, there is nothing available for Ghoghari Visha Srimali Jain community online and it is my sincere effort to have this page as the start point. Dharmeshrdoshi (talk) 12:41, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

@Dharmeshrdoshi There's no References under ==reference==, what are you talking about? Lemonaka (talk) 12:43, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

If you can't give any reliable source reference as defined in the policy, then there can be no article. Note that sources don't need to be online. You can give a citation to the magazine, perhaps with relevant parameters (such as date) filled in at {{cite magazine}}. - David Biddulph (talk) 12:49, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

I wrote a Master's Thesis in 1992, when "on-line" was still a novelty and rare. It didn't occur to me to look for my sources on line, and I doubt if I would have found anything (I don't actually remember the state of the Internet back then). It always seems a bit funny to me when people worry about whether picking up a physical book or journal to do their research (or who seem to think it's not allowed). I happen to have easy, physical access to one of the world's major libraries. And it sometimes feels a bit like laziness--getting flabby--that I look up pretty much everything on line now, disregarding the fact (that some people don't even realize) that most of it ISN'T on line. Uporządnicki (talk) 13:18, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

please move this page draft to artical (live space)

please move this page draft to the article (live space)

Draft:Brijendra Pratap Singh

I create this page with available reliable sources. this is the biography of the Madhya Pradesh state cabinet popular minister. and may I redesign this page please move this draft to live space on Wikipedia. I don't have a move option in my Wikipedia account so please help. Skpnthi (talk) 07:16, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

It was submitted for AFC review just a day and a half ago. The submission box says: "Review waiting, please be patient. This may take 4 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 3,501 pending submissions waiting for review." - David Biddulph (talk) 07:35, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Skpnthi With the edit you made to this page, you should now be autoconfirmed and can directly create articles or move them from draft space. However, as you don't have a lot of experience in having articles accepted, it is highly recommended that you allow the review process to play out, so that if there are any problems with your draft, they are found now, and not later. Do you have a particular need to have the draft appear in the encyclopedia quickly, and ahead of thousands of others also waiting for reviews? 331dot (talk) 07:44, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Much of the content is not referenced. This will lead to the draft being declined again. Work on referencing everything (or deleting what cannot be referenced) while waiting for a review. If you decide to skip AfC and make it an article, the New Pages Patrol may revert it to draft status, or even start an Articles for Deletion (AfD) review. David notMD (talk) 08:27, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

User:Maproom removed seven references because those existed only in References rather than being embedded in the text of the draft. If those references have value, copy them and insert into the text. David notMD (talk) 08:38, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

continuation

please move this page draft to the article (live space)

Draft:Brijendra Pratap Singh

I edit again this page with available reliable sources and remove without resource content. this is the biography of the Madhya Pradesh state cabinet minister. and may I redesign this page please move this draft to live space on Wikipedia. I don't have a move option in my Wikipedia account so please help. Skpnthi (talk) 13:17, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Presumably you didn't read the replies which you received above. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:26, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

I'm not an expert, not involved in the process, have never attempted to create an actual article. But I suspect that to get anywhere with this draft of yours, one small thing you need to do (and I'm not saying there isn't a lot more) is, get rid of phrases like:

• "... one of the most eminent members of [his party]"
• "... has been doing remarkable work in ..."
• "With his bright academic future ..."
• "Seeing his diligence and his commitment to good work and excellence ..."

There are a couple of other questionable points; these are just the most blatant points that make your draft a CV/resume, not an encyclopedia article. Uporządnicki (talk) 15:10, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Is young stanna have a twin

I want to know — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.113.35.161 (talk) 12:05, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, @41.113.35.161, welcome to the Teahouse. However, your question is too vague for me to understand. For stanna, please see Stanna Lemonaka (talk) 12:28, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Young Stunna

Going through your edits, I assume you're referring to the singer Young Stunna? Unfortunately, I'm not familiar with him, but we have a reference desk where someone may be able to answer. You can click here to ask them. ◇HelenDegenerate◆ 18:02, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Creating new page

I need editing help as too much writing and reading are hard for me to comprehend due to my dyslexia Nesoul (talk) 13:45, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

What exactly do you need help with? Please read the reviwer notice at Draft:Halftime Chat R&B Podcast, and if there is anything there that you do not understand you are welcome to ask a more specific question here. Shantavira|^{feed me} 14:59, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Nesoul, and welcome to the Teahouse. I echo Shantaviraj in asking what it is you need help with. But I would point out that, as well as lacking proper references, the draft is written in a completely inappropriate style for an encyclopaedia, which is what this is. An article speaks with Wikipedia's voice, not the voice of the subject or people connected with the subject. An article should summarize what people wholly unconnected with the subject have published about it: that's all.

I also observe that your user name Nesoul, is close to the name of the proprietor, Nnamdi E.S. Okoye; which leads me to ask: are you Okoye? If you are, you should declare this fact on your user page (see WP:COI), and bear in mind that this makes the already difficult task of writing an article much more difficult, because you are likely to find it hard to write with a sufficiently neutral point of view for Wikipedia. ColinFine (talk) 20:44, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

@Nesoul Did you take that picture of yourself? It's listed as "own work". David10244 (talk) 07:20, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

What does ISBN mean?

I do not know what it means 2A00:23C5:A8C:C601:3563:7BB5:30B1:ED6C (talk) 15:05, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

See ISBN, and for WP uses, WP:ISBN. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:37, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Unable to figure out reliable sources

My article Draft:ESPNcricinfo Awards was declined for not containing required reliable sources. But, my article already had required references at Draft:ESPNcricinfo Awards#Awards by Year that's why, I couldn't figure out the actual reason. May I know what was the actual reason for which it was declined.? Perfectodefecto (talk) 16:43, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Is this about Draft:ESPNcricinfo Awards?Special:Diff/1127743368 is the version declined. Which has one source and wass the award itself be cited. So there is no independent sourcing to establish notability. The current version may pass as it does have additional references, though I have not reviewed them.Slywriter (talk) 16:54, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

@Perfectodefecto Your article draft is mainly about who has won the Awards, which is clearly important BUT not as important for Wikipedia's purposes as first showing that the Award itself is notable. Your could highlight those sources that are WP:INDEPENDENT of the rewarding body and themselves reliable by using the {{AfC comment}} template at the top of your draft to highlight the (say) WP:THREE sources that best illustrate this. Making the reviewer's work as easy as possible is the best way to go. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:45, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Reverting vandalism

Hi, a recurring vandal has once again been editing the Sandbanks page. Could someone with the ability please take a look and revert the edits from the last few hours? Thank you. Dontgiveupthedayjob (talk) 18:10, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Handled. Consider installing Twinkle which makes reverting to a specific revision easier, among other things. ■ ∃ Madeline ⇔ ∃ Part of me ; 18:41, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks you for the help, I've installed it and will give it a go in future! Dontgiveupthedayjob (talk) 22:31, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Whenever i'm on WP:RCP i use something called twinkle which makes RCP much easier, reverting vandals is just a singe click, highly reccomend.

OGWFP (talk) 20:58, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Not vandalism. User:EncyclopediaUK is editing in good faith on whether notable people (Wikilinked names, in blue) live or have lived on Sandbanks from personal knowledge as a resident. I recommended to E that the proper place for the dispute is the Talk page of the article. David notMD (talk) 22:14, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi thanks for the help, I referred to it as vandalism because of the talk on the article page and because it has been going on for a few years under different usernames (variations on encyclopaedia) and IP addresses. Hopefully it's good faith and they take your advice. Dontgiveupthedayjob (talk) 22:29, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Yes I've spent years trying to correct the mistakes. I used citations and references etc many times.

Wikipedia just reverts to the old, incorrect, information as if the legacy info is reliable (it is not and the citations do not even support the legacy info if you read them).

You will note it is the only thing I have ever edited on Wiki. It is literally too difficult to correct inaccuracies.

• Harry Redknapp used to live here. He moved to Canford Cliffs. This info was removed by some admin dope who doesnt know who Harry Redknapp is ("UKs top 10 most famous people").
• Graeme Sounness never lived on Sandbanks, he lives in Lilliput.
• Geoff Boycott used to live on Sandbanks. (heard of him?).
• Jamie Redknapp never ever lived on Sandnbanks. His parents did.

I placed citations before. They got wiped. I'm basically giving up now and cancelling my DD to Wiki.

Fixing a single page is a sisyphean task and has become pointless. EncyclopediaUK (talk) 22:51, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

I've added Geoffrey Boycott for you with reliable sources. If you have reliable sources for any other person feel free to add them. Unfortunately first hand experience doesn't count. Any chat or comments can go on the talk page. Dontgiveupthedayjob (talk) 23:33, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

oh and Celia and Nick Sawyer do live here. They are lovely. EncyclopediaUK (talk) 22:52, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Rules: No names added unless existing Wikipedia article about those persons. No names added unless confirmed by a reference. If there is a dispute, i.e., one refs says lives on, another says lives near, debate on Talk page. David notMD (talk) 23:06, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Use of different reference templates

Hi,

I was wondering whether or not using different reference templates in the same article is against Wikipedia's guidelines? I created an article awhile back (this one) and I decided, for stylistic reasons, to use different templates: the shortened footnotes as well as the typical <ref></ref> template. However, I've read that an article must have a consistent citation style and was wondering if this applies to reference templates. I have seen other articles do a similar thing, but I'm unsure if they are properly adhering to Wikipedia's guidelines.

Should I change it? Earle Bartibus Huxley (talk) 18:34, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

@Earle Bartibus Huxley, articles, including feature articles, often mix sfn templates with the use of regular citation templates. The shortened footnotes are especially useful for book sources which are cited multiple times for different pages, but often aren't needed for other sources used. See the Richard Nixon article. StarryGrandma (talk) 23:56, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

@StarryGrandma Thanks. Earle Bartibus Huxley (talk) 12:20, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Sport rivalry notable enough for article?

Hi, this is a new account but I've been on Wikipedia for about a year. I'm considering starting work on the Gerwyn Price - Gary Anderson Rivalry in Professional Darts, the sources I've found so far are listed here. I'd appreciate a temperature check on whether you would consider this topic notable enough to warrant it's own page (as opposed to expanding existing pages)? I know that this is an informal forum and the opinions here don't guarantee a consensus but WP can be disheartening when you spend time on something only for it to be deleted so this would make me feel more confident about starting. Thank you! Resequent (talk) 18:46, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Resequent. Let me begin by saying that I am an American and know very little about professional darts popular in the UK, although I am familiar with the recreational game. You should be aware that sports rivalry articles in general are controversial and many have been deleted. If you enter WP:RIVALRY in the search box, you can find quite a few such debates, mostly about professional tennis and American team sports at both the college and professional level. That being said, the most important factor is the quality of the coverage in reliable, independent sources. Are there other darts rivalry articles? Can you get input from other editors who work in the darts topic area? Cullen328 (talk) 19:23, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the reply, I wasn't aware rivalry articles were controversial, although WP:NRIVALRY did strike me as being fairly unsupportive of the subject. There are no current darts rivalry pages. I think it's probably better to assume it's not notable in this case then to save effort. Resequent (talk) 19:32, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

@Resequent, fwiw, I see they are mentioned at List_of_sports_rivalries#Darts. NRIVALRY sounds somewhat brusque, I read it as "existing is not enough." Category:Sports rivalries is far from empty. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:37, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

...ok, that may have been because you added it. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:45, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Without looking at the sources, it's possible that a mention on their wikipedia pages would be WP:DUE as the bar for including information is much lower than a stand alone page. Slywriter (talk) 20:49, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Are acknowledged rivalries between teams more likely to be accepted than between individuals? David notMD (talk) 22:16, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Can I ask a Wikipedia Articles Reviewer to review my Article

Hi,

If an article is already submitted but, it is taking a long time to get reviewed. Then, can I ask a Wikipedia Articles Reviewer to review my article at any time on talk page.? Thanks. Perfectodefecto (talk) 18:47, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

At the top of the draft it says: "Review waiting, please be patient. This may take 4 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 3,498 pending submissions waiting for review." Why should your draft take preference over the thousands of others? - David Biddulph (talk) 18:52, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

As best I can tell, you have submitted three drafts this month, two have been declined and recently resubmitted, and the third submitted today. How dp you get to "...is taking a long time to get reviewed."? David notMD (talk) 22:24, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

And in direct answer to the question, asking for a review on the talk page of the submitted draft gets nothing. If a reviewer looks at a Talk page at all, it would be after already having selected to do the review. David notMD (talk) 04:13, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Not sure if this is a question or a clarification or a proposal

I want to ask if there is a timespan to an unblock request, like how AFDs are usually addressed after 7 days. Even ANI gets addressed within a stipulated timespan. Is there any guideline/policy/essay that says unblock requests will be addressed after a stipulated period? This is for educational purposes. HandsomeBoy (talk) 20:34, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

HandsomeBoy, WP:UNBLOCK just says usually resolved in a day or two or more contentious may take a week or more. Not sure that matches reality. I'm not sure if there is any further direction given to Admins elsewhere that they should resolve in a specified timeframe. Though I do know some admins will procedurally close Unblock requests that sit around too long without any admin reviewing. Slywriter (talk) 20:54, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Using file from other language Wikipedia

Hey,

I was wondering whether it was possible to use a file from a Wikipedia of a different language on the English Wikipedia. I am specifically looking at this file to be used on the top of this page. I looked around everywhere but can't seem to figure this out :[

Thanks Soggy Pandas (talk) 22:27, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Soggy Pandas. When you say "a file", do you mean what Wikipedia means by a File (some media, or an external document, imported as a whole) or something else?

If you mean Wikipedia's sense, it depends whether the file has been uploaded to Commons or not. If so, it can be directly used in any Wikimedia project (in particular, any language edition of Wikipedia). If not, it will have been uploaded to the particular Wikipedia it is used on. You can download it to your divice, and it may be possible to upload it to English Wikipedia and use it here, or it may not, depending on its licensing. See Image use policy. ColinFine (talk) 22:43, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

It isn't on Commons, as it is a logo, which is non-free, so I suppose it will have to be re-uploaded to the English Wikipedia. FYI, I have linked the file in question above.

Thanks for the answer :) — Soggy Pandas (talk) 22:52, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

@Soggy Pandas The file you linked is an .svg file which probably means there are additional problems given that such files are vector graphics that can be zoomed, becoming high-resolution in the process and hence arguably copyright infringements. The safest thing to do would be to transfer a .png version of adequate (low) resolution for the article, uploading it on English Wikipedia by carefully following the instructions at WP:LOGO. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:23, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

draft pages

Is there a way ti view DRAFT PAGES about a particular person or subject, which have not yet been published? DrGeorge22 (talk) 22:38, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Dr George, and welcome to the Teahouse. If you know the name of the draft, you can search directly by putting Draft:name into the search box. If you do not, you can use Advanced search to search for the name in any draft by specifying "Draft" as the namespace (and removing other namespaces such as "Article" if necessary. See Help:Searching ColinFine (talk) 22:46, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Required Reliable Sources

Is it really necessary to gather all the third party reliable sources for each & every content, when the article is about on Awards and very long in length.

Can I have some idea, how much minimum references should I provide for such kind of articles.? Perfectodefecto (talk) 04:57, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Partially answered on your Talk page. You have started to reference confirmation of the award winners (yes, that could get very long!). However, your declined draft Draft:ESPNcricinfo Awards is about the awards, and you have no references yet about the creation and importance of the awards in the world of cricket. For example, what is the history of the awards, and how did it come to be owned by ESPN? David notMD (talk) 10:41, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Publishing articles translated using the "Content Translation" tool; they're NOT machine translated (that functionality is disabled), I just like the interface

Hello, I'm a relatively new user who has been working on translating a few articles from Japanese Wikipedia to English. I've just hit autoconfirmed status today, which as far as I know allows me to create new articles, including articles that are primarily translations of articles from other Wikis. I've been using the Content Translation tool to work because it's 1000x more convenient to use than plain text editing and it's just sort of where Wikipedia first pushed me when I first started. However, publishing anything directly through this tool seems to be a privilege reserved exclusively by extended confirmed users (which I am a long ways away from); but I am allowed to "save the article as a draft", which results in the article just being published to my user page. My question is, how would I go about changing this draft to a "real" article without losing all the fancy Wikipedia formatting stuff? I'm aware there's also some tagging stuff relating to attribution I have to do as well since it's a translation of another Wiki's article, and I'm not ready to actually publish it just yet, I just want to know how I'll have to go about doing that when the time comes. Thanks a bunch! Abnormal Shrimp (talk) 05:11, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

@Abnormal Shrimp: See Wikipedia:So you made a userspace draft. Once the draft is ready for the "main" encyclopedia, it can be moved there, including the entire page history and all edit contents. Victor Schmidt (talk) 08:43, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Okay great that's just what I was looking for, thanks! Abnormal Shrimp (talk) 12:12, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

@Abnormal Shrimp: Some things to remember about translating Japanese article's into English so as to create a corresponding English Wikipedia article is WP:TFOLWP and WP:OTHERLANGS. Any English Wikipedia article you try and create will need to clearly meet WP:N for it to have a chance of surviving a deletion challenge. Non-English sources can be cited to establish Wikipedia notability, but they may be harder for reviewers to assess. Moreover, as someone who has a little experience on Japanese Wikipedia, the Japanese Wikipedia community doesn't seem as rigorous as the English Wikipedia one when it comes to trying to cite only WP:SECONDARY reliable sources. Any source that is a blog or otherwise user-generated is going to be more highly scrutinized on English Wikipedia and perhaps quickly discounted than perhaps it might be on Japanese Wikipedia. In addition, You might find WP:PRIMARY sources (like official websites) much harder to use on English Wikipedia than perhaps on Japanese Wikipedia in general, but they have pretty much zero value when it comes to establishing English Wikipedia notability. There are also WP:MOS differences between Japanese Wikipedia and English Wikipedia that you will also need to be aware of when translating into English. These aren't related to a subject's Wikipedia notability per se, but they may be mentioned by reviewers and cited as a reason for declining a draft if there are too many problems. So, it might be a good idea, if you haven't done so already, to take a look at WP:JAPAN because it provides quite a bit if information on how English Wikipedia articles about Japanese subjects are expected to be written; WT:JAPAN is also a good place to ask questions about such articles. — Marchjuly (talk) 09:26, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Wow, okay, that addresses a lot of other questions I had during the translation process as well! Multiple times I came across something that I wasn't sure how to move over/translate but I was sure there was probably a precedent for; now I know where to go to find out! Providing sources definitely kind of scares me as for one article in particular I'm nearly positive there won't be any English sources for it, but practically all the sources in the Japanese article are from books, and the article itself is in the Japanese "Good Article" category, so I'm hoping it won't just be deleted outright! Thank you for all of the information! Abnormal Shrimp (talk) 12:17, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

@Abnormal Shrimp, your sources must be WP:RS, but they don't have to be in English, see WP:NOENG. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:11, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Request for advice about Draft:Yaoi hole

I appreciate your advice on how to improve my article on Draft:Yaoi hole, which was rejected on the grounds of notability.

• I know there are not many instances where the term "Yaoi hole" is defined in terms of notability, but I assume that gender expression in YAOI is a much debated topic. I have added some sources, I wish you could tell me how many sources are needed.

• I received a comment that there is a sense of WP:SYNTH in some parts of the article. I have addressed the tags I recieved, and I appreciate your letting me know if there is anything in the rest of the article that you feel is a synth.

• There was a comment of concern about the large citation on classification. The tree diagrams in the article were created by countless people on the Internet as Internet memes, copy-pastes, or templates, and the text was all completed in 2003. Kaneda did not process the text, merely introduced the text. As I understand it, there is no copyright on Internet memes. I thought I incorporated the story of how the tree diagram was created into the article, but my explanation may have been insufficient. Should I strengthen the explanation in the article, or include it as a note, or let me know if you have a better idea.

• I think my draft is probably rough around the edges. However, since the English version of the Yaoi article is substantial in terms of the amount of text and sources, if I had the help of the Yaoi editors, I think my draft could be refined. I would like to enlist their help, for example, would it be permissible to ask them to proofread the draft in Yaoi's talkpage? Also, if there is another appropriate place for the request, please let me know.狄の用務員 (talk) 12:56, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Left align sidebar

Hey I want to left align some contents in a Template:Sidebar but not all. I found these "heading{{{n}}}class" parameters in the documentation. But I've got no idea how to find out what values these can take. Talpedia (talk) 14:00, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Censorship

Why did you CENSOR Robert Malone and his truth revealing information. You scrubbed his book. Because of that, I will NOT contribute and I do NOT trust you and I will not visit anymore. CENSORSHIP is NOT constitutional, helpful and is very damaging. ( Reference the amount of harm being discovered with regard to the shoved on us shots). Maybe you don’t want our constitution. Then go find a better country. 67.214.28.210 (talk) 14:50, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, IP editor. I'm not sure who your comments are supposed to be addressed to and I don't know who Robert Malone is, but please remember that most Wikipedia editors don't live in the US and telling us to "find a better country" doesn't make much sense. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:07, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Since I have no idea which Robert Malone or WP-article you are talking about, I have no idea. And per your statement you will not read this, but Merry Christmas anyway! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:07, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Help with Mongolian Wikipedia

Hello, fellow Wikipedians, I have recently found a Mongolian Wikipedia article about MongoDB, but although I am not Mongolian, and don't understand the Mongolian language, it is clear to me that this is not an encyclopedic article, but rather a copied tutorial from somewhere else. I think this page should be deleted, but I don't know the process of doing that in the Mongolian Wikipedia. WP:Help for non-Mongolian speakers is clearly inactive, and WP:Хурал is protected. Can a Mongolian please help me? QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 15:18, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Please help with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:BellSoft

I drafted the article about a company that does significant work supporting a specific JDK and JRE: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:BellSoft. This support is essential for the software developers' community because it allows them to have a choice. Sometimes a new company decides which environment to use in their devices or software bundles to rely on Java (or a language also compiled to Java bytecode). If the company has a choice, it's better for everybody. Thus, it's important to share the knowledge about the choice.

If someone unfamiliar with software development in Java reads my drafted article, it may not look clear enough. It needs improvement.

Therefore, I'd suggest first improving the Java Runtime Environment article, which a reader of my article may first look at, if they are not familiar with the topic enough. To be precise, Java Runtime Environment needs to be created because now it redirects to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Java_(software_platform)#Java_Runtime_Environment. It is much harder to read and understand than, for example, https://www.redhat.com/en/topics/cloud-native-apps/what-is-a-Java-runtime-environment.

What else would you suggest to improve my article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:BellSoft? Thank you! Philip Torchinsky (talk) 15:26, 18 December 2022 (UTC)