Wikipedia:Teahouse

GoingBatty, a Teahouse host

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

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.

To read the newest questions, skip to bottom
About the Teahouse

Most recent archives
1215, 1216, 1217, 1218, 1219, 1220, 1221, 1222, 1223, 1224, 1225, 1226, 1227, 1228, 1229, 1230, 1231, 1232, 1233, 1234

‘

Conflict of interest statement?

Hello, your guidance please. I am employed by a university to support a large scientific research network whose work is coming to a close after seven years. As this is publicly-funded research, I am trying to make sure the findings of the investigations are reflected in the topics covered by Wikipedia, and added to the encyclopedia if there is no appropriate existing article. To facilitate this, we have carried out a series of webinars to familiarize researchers with Wikipedia editing and are now trying to encourage further engagement with the editing process.

I am also collaborating with others in the programme in drafting articles, some of which are about the programme itself or about people who have been involved in its development. I have drafted a statement about possible conflict of interest / paid contributions and have shared it on my user page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Km4water. Can you tell me if there is anything else I should do to ensure there is no misunderstanding?

Many thanks! Km4water (talk) 21:23, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Km4water. You have made the declaration, thank you. But it sounds as if you are looking at Wikipedia as a place to publish your conclusions. That is not what Wikipedia is for. Even if your results are reliably published, the publication will be a PRIMARY source, and insufficient to ground an article, until there have been further publications, wholly independent of your project and its staff and associates.

You may draft articles about the project and its staff, but remember that each of these articles must meet Wikipedia's criteria, particularly for notability of its subject - which depends crucially on coverage in independent publication (or, for academics, alternatively on being cited in independent publications). You will likely suffer the usual problem for COI editors of wanting to describe what you know, rather than what the sources say.

As for adding the conclusions to existing articles: that is possible, presuming your results have been reliably published; but you should not do it yourself. Adding material (or citations) from your own work is a form of COI, and you should again use the edit request mechanism. ColinFine (talk) 21:38, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Km4water: A clarification of what ColinFine said from an academically-minded editor... Wikipedia is not a venue to publish primary research. A clinical trial of a new drug, a new commentary on Shakespeare’s writings, a catalogue of objects found in an archeology websites, etc. would not be accepted as articles.

However, many Wikipedia articles closely resemble review articles about their subject. A historical document, its discovery process, its scholarly discussion etc. makes for a fine article. For instance, our article about the donation of Constantine details at length what we know and do not know about the composition of that document, based on existing scholarly literature.

In fact a couple of articles were dual-published as Wikipedia articles and review articles in reputable venues. It is entirely permissible to write a literature review both for Wikipedia and for another journal - but pay attention to disclose that fact to both parties, otherwise whichever gets the text second will accuse you of copyright infringement. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 10:58, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

... a small addition to this, one which nevertheless matters: (1) if someone does write an academic review article of that sort in Wikipedia, it is fundamentally different to a review published in a journal. It is not owned by the author, and it may continue to evolve. It doesn't remain as a historical record of a named author's overview of the field in March 2023, it is in fact the basis for an ongoing article outlining the subject, which may ultimately end up expressing ideas with which the original author disagrees vehemently (it can do so, if those views gain traction elsewhere). And (2) named authors often write secondary review articles to propose their synthesis of the best way to understand things. Wikipedia does not. You cannot, here, combine your understanding of primary sources to create a review that generates a new and interesting viewpoint. The review must (unfortunately) stick to giving a balanced overview of the primary stuff and reporting what secondary stuff says. So it's quite hard to use Wikipedia to announce the results of an academic study, unless the study has been published "properly" elsewhere. Elemimele (talk) 13:13, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for these details. The intention is not to publish primary research in Wikipedia but 1) rather to update and add references to existing articles, 2) to provide synthesis of findings, and 3) add articles about notable topics that have not been included in Wikipedia. We are paying close attention to Wikipedia's notability guidelines. A question about "what the sources say": if a scholarly work is cited many times in other scholarly sources, does Wikipedia consider these citations to count for something? Km4water (talk) 15:59, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it counts for a lot. If someone publishes a piece of primary research, we don't know whether other academics regard this as good, bad, are influenced by it, or whether no one whatsoever has even noticed it. If it gets cited a lot, we have far better grounds to believe that it's a big enough part of the story that it should be used in a Wikipedia article. Some primary research is, after all, a one-off result of an individual academic or group, which never gains wide attention, and no matter how much it deserved attention, Wikipedia isn't the right place to correct that. Be careful about synthesis; you should avoid drawing any conclusion here that requires a logical combination of information from multiple sources unless that combination has already been made by someone else, outside Wikipedia (see WP:SYNTH). Be careful about the extent to which you add references to your own work; see WP:SELFCITE for guidance. Elemimele (talk) 17:12, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks -- this is helpful advice. Km4water (talk) 21:28, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Km4water, since you ask, it would help if you wrote straightforwardly. Your user page starts: "Hello, I'm a knowledge mobilization specialist [...]. I contribute in English." Pointing out that you contribute in English wouldn't have been necessary if you hadn't just talked mystifyingly of "knowledge mobilization" (which is absent from my own lect of English and, I suspect, from many other lects). As I continue to read, I vaguely infer that the term means PR -- which itself may have started as a windy euphemism but is now widely understood. Wording aside, you say you're "exposing researchers – in particular, Highly Qualified Personnel – to collaboratively sharing and improving the expression of knowledge through training and edit-a-thon activity". I hope that you've told them (i) to announce their own conflicts of interest, and (ii) not to cite their original research. -- Hoary (talk) 22:27, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Km4water: "Exposing researchers" should not be a purpose here. Wikipedia is emphatically never to be used as a publicity platform. That is not negotiable, and attempting to do so will get your account blocked. ~Anachronist (talk) 07:48, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am guessing that you intend the researchers involved in the project - such as Howard S. Wheater - to create articles about themselves. This is a horrible idea, doomed to failure. See WP:AUTO for why Wikipedia warns against attempts at autobiography. Also see Wikipedia:Notability (academics) for who might qualify as a topic of an article, preferably created by a person who has no paid or personal connection to the subject. David notMD (talk) 11:30, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is no intention to encourage people to post their autobiographies: Wikipedia policy makes it clear that this is not acceptable. There is a need to add biographies of people who have had a significant impact on certain fields of water studies, and we are looking carefully at what makes a good (and acceptable) article. In our Wikipedia webinars, conflict of interest has been explained and discussed at length. Km4water (talk) 15:43, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is a language misunderstanding here. "Exposing" researchers to Wikipedia and its editing practices is a form of training or framiliarizatio, not an attempt to publicise them or their work! But since you have not understood the wording, I will rephrase. Km4water (talk) 15:20, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I can see from your remarks that someone needs to create a Wikipedia article for Knowledge Mobilization. It is not a synonym for Public Relations. There are already articles for Knowledge Translation, Implementation Research, Knowledge Sharing, Evidence Based Practice (and Public Relations), which can be related. Simply, Knowledge Mobilization intends to make use of all of these in working to get knowledge into use. This can happen through changing knowledge production systems (such as those in academia), opening communication channels, encouraging scientist-user interactions, and using brokers to link previously unrelated field of interest to increase their potential for implementation. Km4water (talk) 15:35, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You are free to describe the nature of your work on your User page however you want. Regardless, all drafts of articles about the research program, the research and the researchers need to meet Wikipedia standards for neutral point of view (WP:NPOV) and independent references from reliable sources (WP:42). Given the work is coming to a close, it may be WP:TOOSOON to expect non-connected people publishing about it. You should be aware that if drafts are accepted by reviewers other editors will be able to edit those as long as they also provide valid references, and that you, as a paid editor (WP:PAID) will be prohibited from further editing the articles. Instead, you will be limited to proposing subsequent edits on the Talk pages of the articles. Given WP:COI, the same would apply to any articles the researchers manage to get approved about themselves (of if you end up creating those, you). David notMD (talk) 23:37, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, David. It seems sensible to capture factual details about a programme or institution while the people who can verify those facts are around. Analysis and interpretation of the influence and impact of the work would naturally follow and be added in future edits. Km4water (talk) 23:45, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Analysis and interpretation" should not be added in future edits unless those edits are summarizing analysis and interpretation carried out and published by people wholly unconnected with the original programme. ColinFine (talk) 15:18, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I can see the point, Colin, but with seven years' of research and review and citation of that research by scientists outside the programme there will certainly be that opportunity. "Wholly unconnected" is an interesting concept in the world of academia, as communities of practice are a vital part of knowledge creation and there is much overlap among institutions, projects (and fiunding). I think Wikipedia's weakness in representation of many areas of science may be partly due to this interpretation. Km4water (talk) 15:26, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Km4water It's not just an "interpretation". Verifiability is a core principle of Wikipedia. If you expect volunteer editors or even subject matter experts to add their own analysis and interpretation of scientific work to articles, that's not going to happen. Everything in an article must come from reliable, independent, published sources so that readers can verify. While, as you say, the world of academia has many connections, the usage here is primarily concerned with conflicts of interest, such as a university professor submitting a draft about their department head.

You have been told the same things several times by several experienced editors. They know what they are talking about. David10244 (talk) 06:18, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Km4water We don't need "people who can verify facts" to be around, since, as has been explained to you, facts are verified using published sources. David10244 (talk) 10:10, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Declined Biography submission.

Hello, i'm very new and trying to get this through was wandering is i could get some help. i believe i gave enough inline references in the draft but for some reason it was declined. I've corrected what i think was the error and would like for someone to please go over this with me. Thanks. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Cyrus_DeShield HistoryVille1 (talk) 02:04, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The section "Early life and career" is long, HistoryVille1. It has a grand total of zero references. The reader therefore has no reason to believe any of it. Everything the draft says must come with references to reliable sources, which of course must be independent of DeShield and of any company profiting from his work. Anything that cannot be so referenced must be cut. (I didn't look beyond "Early life and career". Anything beyond it must also be referenced, of course.) -- Hoary (talk) 02:10, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that. So i have references is it possible to get help completing this ? HistoryVille1 (talk) 03:08, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

HistoryVille1, if you reference everything that can be referenced, and cut everything that can't be referenced, and then ask here for help in some specific aspect of your already-greatly-improved draft, then it's likely (though not certain) that somebody will help. -- Hoary (talk) 06:38, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you have acceptable references, it is possible to make a start. You have been writing your draft backwards. Maproom (talk) 08:11, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I just did alot of fixing. was wondering if you could take a look at the draft for me. plz. HistoryVille1 (talk) 00:38, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I am new to Wikipedia editing/writing myself. But I think you have an amazing draft so far. There are more references needed in the "early life' section and also the next section. Dmarie100 (talk) 02:00, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Two of my pages

Page #1 is not notable, so I decided to make a page for the creator after I noticed he did not have one. Page #2 was declined to be published because of the lack of evidence, but there is not a whole lot of evidence to use. Page #1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Jim_Pickens Page #2: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Call_Me_Kevin&oldid=1145037337 KeyboardWarrior22 (talk) 23:15, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

KeyboardWarrior22, sadly, if there is no evidence (sources) to use, then the draft will not be accepted. See WP:N. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 23:22, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, KeyboardWarrior22. An acceptable Wikipedia article summarizes the significant coverage that reliable published sources that are entirely independent of the topic devote to the topic. Your drafts have no such sources. Cullen328 (talk) 23:27, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Youtube is not a credible source and for the most part cant be used. Neither can fandom. You have to find independent reliable sources for your article to be accepted. The first one has no chance of being accepted due to WP:N PalauanReich (talk) 23:28, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank all of you, I find it sad that my page cannot be published because no credible sources have been presented. I feel it's wrong that he will never have a Wikipedia page because of this, however, I can do nothing and completely understand. I have added more links, one where Kevin literally states his story on a video that describes my entire page. I hope it will be reviewed and approved, but I do not know how to re submit it, if even possible. So far, I agree, my page is not the best and maybe shouldn't be published. Although I also agree that he should have a page because his girlfriend does and he doesn't seem as respected. Any and all help is appreciated as this is my first and most likely last attempt at adding a page to Wikipedia. KeyboardWarrior22 (talk) 23:53, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree he should have a page, but there are unfortunately no secondary independent sources on him. This is a problem with many other youtubers as well. The only sources are youtube. I hope you do not get too discouraged though, there are many articles that are notable and have sources that need to be created. PalauanReich (talk) 00:02, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

KeyboardWarrior22, when you say he should have a page because his girlfriend does, that shows that you have no idea how Wikipedia works, despite several people trying to explain the basics to you. Cullen328 (talk) 00:02, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Correct, That is not quite what I meant. He should have a page because I think he has grown big enough to deserve a page. I made this for the giggles not knowing how Wikipedia works and expected it to be straight forward. Sorry for anything that made you infer that as that was not the reason. But when you said "that shows that you have no idea how Wikipedia works, despite several problems trying to explain the basics to you" Sounds a little rude, but that could just be me, I don't think it's enough to discuss further though. If there is any things you think I should make, I'll consider that as I love writing but too often do I have no ideas. KeyboardWarrior22 (talk) 00:08, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree Cullen328 comment was a bit rude, not exactly WP:DBN. A good place to start is the page of where you live or where you were born. Or any place or that you know well. Just know if you are related to a person or have a conflict of interest, you have to look at WP:COIE, which discuesses the the conflict of interest. I know Wikipedia can be an intimidating place for newcomers, but once you learn more about it and learn your way around, it becomes very enjoyable. Happy editing PalauanReich (talk) 00:39, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

PalauanReich, I do not consider it rude to point out the self evident truth that the editor was showing no signs of understanding how Wikipedia works despite several people trying to explain it. If we overly coddle people, they will just waste their time on drafts that will never become articles. I did not insult. I stated facts. Cullen328 (talk) 07:12, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, but your tone suggests otherwise. KeyboardWarrior22 (talk) 14:53, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is fundamentally counterintuitive that a YouTuber with millions (!) of subscribers should not be notable enough for a Wikipedia article, yet nevertheless that is the case here. This is, I think, a failing of the popular press, though it also reflects on what kinds of content are given the most weight in public discourse. There was some discussion of this on the Signpost regarding Technoblade, who only received significant media coverage after (and as a result of) his death, despite having tens of millions of viewers.

As mentioned at Help:Your first article, Creating an article is one of the more difficult tasks on Wikipedia. It's of course unfair that new users should be encouraged to edit and then be immediately discouraged from creating articles (possibly the most obvious way to contribute to Wikipedia), but that's just how things have panned out. @KeyboardWarrior22: there are plenty of help pages all over the place, but I think the quickest way to learn here is simply to improve articles, take advice from other users, and not become demotivated after they WP:BITE you. Good luck, if you still want to stick around. Shells-shells (talk) 01:01, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for agreeing! I love how much you were down to earth and now I kinda want to do this now. I think it will help because I'm writing a short film and I need the skills for the screenplay. KeyboardWarrior22 (talk) 01:21, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

To further explain PalauanReich's answer, YouTube generally can't be used unless the video is from a verified official account of a reliable source. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:42, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Makes sense, I think it's credible, but I understand Wikipedia's point of view. I also understand if this were allowed how it would change Wikipedia's credibility and other aspects relating to that. KeyboardWarrior22 (talk) 00:47, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@KeyboardWarrior22 A video of someone talking about himself is not useful for the same reason that an interview is not useful for showing notability. Wikipedia is not interested in what someone says about themselves, only what independent sources say about them -- independent sources with a reputation for credibility and fact-checking. YouTube videos do not (generally) have that. David10244 (talk) 06:53, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Enquiry About Confirmed Users

How may I become a confirmed user on Wikipedia who is allowed to edit all the pages? TheAtulKaushal (talk) 09:08, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can ya Help me add a Page 219.91.175.35 (talk) 09:16, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

IP editor: If you wish to draft an article, please read H:YFA and use the WP:AfC process. Click those links for details. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:12, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think this was an attempt to create a new section that the asker successfully did below afterwards. 331dot (talk) 12:19, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

TheAtulKaushal Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You become autoconfirmed when your account is four days old with 10 edits or more- which your account is long past. There is also the extended-confirmed level, which is 30 days and 500 edits. You are long past 30 days, but you do not yet have 500 edits. You may request edits to any article by making an edit request(click for instructions) on the article talk page. 331dot (talk) 09:24, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@TheAtulKaushal Just to point out that 331dot meant that, even for articles with extended-confirmed protection, you could still make an edit request on the relevant talk Page. Of course, for the vast majority of articles there will be no protection and you can go ahead and be bold with your edits. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:10, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Michael D. Turnbull Ji, I had an account on Wikipedia previously but this interactive online encyclopedia has quite changed since I deleted my old account. Thank you. TheAtulKaushal (talk) 09:26, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Protection of a page

Page Societat Civil Catalana is being removed the same content constantly by user Mariano211 and CrystallizedCarbon. Trying to talk with them has not been successful. They ignore the arguments and keep removing the same exact content. Is there a way to protect the page against their edits? 95.17.250.138 (talk) 21:43, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think they don't like the page saying that SCC defends the same thing as Spanish nationalist when they talk about the model of the Catalonian schools and they want to omit independent studies telling things contrary to what SCC defends. I think that's appropriate because it provides other points of view different from the ones provided by SCC. Otherwise the Wikipedia would be a place where you can only put propaganda. The source I'm providing is [1]. The text of the Wikipedia article is "On 5 December 2017, SCC denounces in Brussels an alleged indoctrination in schools of Catalonia in Catalan nationalism,[2] sharing positions with the rest of Spanish nationalism in this aspect. However, independent studies show that influence in political views is made by neighborhoods and parents, not schools."[3]"

These users keep removing the text from " sharing positions with the rest of Spanish nationalism in this aspect" onwards. 95.17.250.138 (talk) 21:51, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

IP editor, you have been edit warring and making false accusations of vandalism. A sincere content dispute is not vandalism. You really need to stop because your current behavior places you at high risk of being blocked. Cullen328 (talk) 22:06, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

And what about the rest of my claims? Even though I don't believe it's a sincere content dispute, I have come here seeking answers, tips and advice on how to proceed in order to let legitimate content remain in the article instead of being vandalised or edit warred or removed without justification by a new user registered for editing a single page and another user who looking at the page history looks like he only accepts advertisements. Stopping won't solve the issue. Do you think the content is not legitimate or that it is biased? Because that's what they say to remove it without explanation nor talk in the talk page. 95.17.250.138 (talk) 22:12, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am speaking as an administrator because I am concerned about your behavior. I have no expertise or interest in the content dispute. There are several forms of dispute resolution available to you. Please follow them. If you end up blocked, you will not accomplish your goals, so please be careful. Cullen328 (talk) 22:39, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

IP editor: You made the same sort of protest on the 14th March and were told in no uncertain terms that you have a content dispute that has nothing to do with vandalism as defined on Wikipedia. Subsequently, Mariano211 and I engaged with you on the Talk Page of the article. Now you are again failing to assume good faith with Crystallizedcarbon, a very experienced editor. It is unsurprising that editors may not want to engage with someone who calls them vandals and, even if they did, you must allow them some time to do so. Your latest protest is less than 24 hours old. Mike Turnbull (talk) 22:43, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Even though the content of Mariano211 was finally added because he brought some references although primary sources, CrystallizedCarbon removed them, too. I can't keep restoring text other people removes or removing evemts from unrelated parties. Mariano211 has not replied to anything I wrote, he only removes content. 95.17.250.138 (talk) 22:52, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My only goal is to preserve the content Mariano211 started deleting and afterwards CrystallizedCarbon in tandem. Mariano211 could have added content but instead he choose to remove it and add his own thing from unrelated events. 95.17.250.138 (talk) 22:55, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly! as pointed out by Mike Turnbull from the very first day of the dispute, my edits have nothing to do with "vandalism", which is a blatant insult I have never used to qualify the editor 95.17.250.138. The only and exclusive aim of the latter is to discredit SCC by linking it with extremist nationalist ideology, which is completely unfair and untrue. Under "Activism/8 October 2017" you can read (and nobody disputes that) that Nobel Prize of Literature Mario Vargas Llosa and Catalan Socialist Josep Borrell, current Vice-President of the European Commission, took part in the demonstrations organised by SCC (along with the Catalan Socialist party, which won last elections in Catalonia): who can accept that these personalities, widely recognised internationally, share that ideology? this would not be serious, to say the least, and detrimental to Wikipedia reputation Mariano211 (talk) 09:20, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Could someone review my draft please

Hi, I've been editing Draft:Filtronic after it's been rejected twice. Could someone please check whether I've adequately addressed the issues raised by the last reviewer? Thanks in advance. Hduncan mwe (talk) 22:56, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why would you think that being mentioned in parliament was encyclopaedic information? If somebody independent has written somethign about those appearances, maybe, but otherwise? (In other words, a section supported entirely by primary sources probably should not be there). ColinFine (talk) 23:33, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Hduncan mwe: Hi there! I suggest you remove the external links from within the article prose per WP:EL. You might be able to convert some of them to reference is they are reliable sources. Otherwise, remove them completely. Thanks, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 03:33, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hduncan mwe, your draft has 30 references. I doubt anyone here will be willing to wade through all those looking for any that attest notability. Which three do you think to most to establish that the subject is notable? Maproom (talk) 10:21, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A quoted company whose value at one point reached £1 billion should certainly be notable, and have had sufficient coverage in the financial and trade press etc, especially as the share price then declined dramatically. But a lot of this will be paywalled. I'm not sure that declining the draft was the right choice in the first place (or two places). Now improved, and I've moved, a tad boldly) to Filtronic. Johnbod (talk) 03:58, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Restructure of Road signs in Ireland article

Hello,

I would like to restructure the Road signs in Ireland article as discussed in talk page, namely removing the reference to Northern Ireland (since that is explained in Road signs in the United Kingdom, and instead adding a hatnote at the top of the page) and overall bringing it more in line with other road sign articles of Europe (for example, Road signs in Germany, Road signs in the United Kingdom, etc.). Is there anything I need to be aware of before making such a (big) change, or should this change not be made?

There are other notable problems with the article, those being original research (which has actually helped me to better understand the history of our signage) and a lack of citations (mostly following statements that our signage system is based on the UK's; while I think this is obvious enough it of course may not be to others, though I am not sure what should be cited to verify this). If it isn't suitable for Wikipedia, should it be removed?

Thanks in advance EthanL13 (talk) 23:36, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you cannot find proof backing up a claim, I would remove it.

Regarding the parentheses in the second paragraph: While there is wp:BLUESKY, I do not think that being based on the British system is a given. It being original could make just as much sense and Napoleon, Germany, or America influencing it is plausible. Summed up, it should be basic knowledge to fall under wp:BLUESKY, e.g. you drink through your mouth. ✶Mitch 199811✶ 02:15, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Thus it will be alright to remove the citation needed notes following references to the UK system? EthanL13 (talk) 12:19, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize for replying late. I would not judge that as being clear enough to not need a citation. For those claims you should find one. ✶Mitch 199811✶ 19:43, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

User:EthanL13/sandbox

I have made a possible restructure. Is there somewhere where this can be approved? EthanL13 (talk) 19:52, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am not super familiar with moving ideas from the sandbox to the mainspace. WP:Peer review I think would be the place to have the article be reviewed how you want it to be. You may also want to ask the Help Desk if you want to get a more experienced opinion. ✶Mitch 199811✶ 20:34, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I will do, thank you very much for all your help EthanL13 (talk) 21:17, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

PURDUE'S DADDY

Is this title because they just upset Purdue in NCAA tournament?Cockyrocky60 (talk) 01:21, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Good day. Could you link the article you are referencing. From what I can tell with the limited data given, it might be vandalism. ✶Mitch 199811✶ 02:06, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Purdue University, but not Purdue Boilermakers men's basketball has content on Purdue (ranked 1st in region) loss to the 16th ranked team on 17 March 2023. There is no Purdue's Daddy article. David notMD (talk) 02:56, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The second article now protected after several IPs added that Purdue is "owned" by FDU because of the upset. The loss information has been added without the hyperbole. David notMD (talk) 09:59, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I see it was vandalized Cockyrocky60 (talk) 02:30, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My listing

Hello … For many years my profile was shown on Wikipedia. Now it is gone. How do I again get my profile to appear. I will appreciate your help. Thanks! GoldenGo-Far (talk) 10:02, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GoldenGo-Far Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia does not have "profiles" or "listings", not a single one. Wikipedia has articles. It would help to know who you are or which article you are referencing. 331dot (talk) 10:06, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Is this: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beth Taylor the disappeared article? A case of WP:OLDARTICLE, it seems (Wikidata). WP:N is your first hurdle. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:54, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Page watchers

Hi, how do I figure out the number of page watchers if all they say is "Fewer than 30 watchers"? Dancing Dollar ^{(let's talk)} 10:11, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Dancing Dollar, and welcome to the Teahouse. I think that you don't. I can't find it now, but I'm pretty sure I have seen an explanation that the exact number is not shown if it is less than 30 by policy, and that it is something to do with privacy. ColinFine (talk) 11:04, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Dancing Dollar Yes, its not possible by policy, mentioned at H:W (although admins can get the number). Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:10, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I assume that the privacy issue is that if one learned that, say, 2 or 3 editors were watching a page or article, it would be possible to figure out who specifically was. 331dot (talk) 12:27, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I am aware, another commonly stated explanation is that its harder thatway to find low-or-unwatched articles where therefore vandalism is less likely to be immedately noticed, particularely on wikis with a small userbase and no equivalent of ClueBot NG. Victor Schmidt (talk) 12:34, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Alice Solves the Puzzle

Did Pete first appear in Alice Solves the Puzzle or Steamboat Willie? 86.8.119.252 (talk) 12:16, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Alice Solves the Puzzle. 86.8.119.252 (talk) 12:21, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Categorie per una pagina

Hi everyone, I created the draft on a national interest award: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft_talk:Premio_Best_LibertyCity

I would like to kindly ask for help with this page. Since it has sources and everything needed to be an encyclopedic entry, unfortunately I don't know which categories to associate it with. Can you help me? Artskylove (talk) 13:14, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, @Artskylove, and welcome to enwiki. We don't add categories until an article has been moved to main space, which only happens after notability has been shown. I'd suggest you go to the talk page of that draft and provide the best three (and no more than three) sources which support a claim of notability. You can find information at WP:notability. Valereee (talk) 16:30, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Great Atlantic Sargassum Belt

This is what Scientific American and National Geographic call the blog approaching Florida. I think there should be either an entry with this name or a redirect to a different title if one already exists. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/heres-the-real-story-behind-the-massive-blob-of-seaweed-heading-toward-florida/; https://www.cnn.com/travel/article/sargassum-seaweed-blob-explained-florida-scn/index.html; https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/article/seaweed-blob-great-atlantic-sargassum-belt-beach-threat 2600:6C67:1C00:5F7E:AC39:F311:DC1E:D05F (talk) 16:24, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That does seem promising. New articles aren't generally what we do here at Teahouse, but I wouldn't be surprised if someone here was interested in creating that. Valereee (talk) 16:36, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Agree, it could be a redirect to Sargassum#Inundations, as that contains the relevant info, but I think it definitely merits its own article. which I will create soon. PalauanReich (talk) 22:24, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There's a blog approaching Florida? :-) David10244 (talk) 07:01, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Tyler Toney

Excuse me but could anyone help me with what I am doing wrong on my draft: Draft:Tyler Toney. He is definitely notable I just don't know exactly what I am doing wrong. Cdelapp (talk) 16:38, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Cdelapp, writing "He is definitely notable" won't convince anyone. You'll need to demonstrate it by citing suitable sources. There's advice in the comments at Draft:Tyler_Toney. Maproom (talk) 17:48, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Given he is one of five people making up Dude Perfect, what justifies an article about him as an individual? For bands, one person may go on to a solo career. This ain't that. David notMD (talk) 17:59, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Arfat Mia

Arfat Mia Arfatmia10 (talk) 17:24, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You attempted to create an article about Arfat Mia on your User page. This is the wrong place. It ~~will shortly be~~ was Speedy deleted, leaving no trace of ever having existed. The proper path for draft creation is described at WP:YFA. If this is about you, Wikipedia recommends against attempts at autobiography. See WP:AUTO. David notMD (talk) 18:06, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You should probably also read An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. ColinFine (talk) 18:59, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RfC

I would appreciate it if someone could provide a brief explanation of the RfC procedure soon. Thank you. Simoooix.haddi (talk) 19:36, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Simoooix.haddi, and welcome to the Teahouse. Have you looked at WP:RFC? That should answer your questions. If it does not, please come back and ask what specifically you need help with. ColinFine (talk) 19:39, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disable new user landing page

How do I disable the new user landing page? It's annoying if i want to correct an error i made in the address bar, check deletion logs, etc What sound does a duck make (talk) 21:28, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse, What sound does a duck make. You can turn it off in your 'Preferences' settings. At the bottom of the 'User profile' Tab, look for 'Newcomer Editor Features' and then unclick 'Display newcomer homepage'. Then click 'Save' to change these settings. Hope that helps you. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:25, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@What sound does a duck make: Nick Moyes's post is about an unrelated feature when you click your own username. I don't know whether the new user landing page can be disabled but if you make a single more edit anywhere at the English Wikipedia (including this page) then it should no longer apply to you and disappear. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:00, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers What sound does a duck make (talk) 01:41, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Publish draft

FYI

– Sections split. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:01, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Would you be able to publish an article for me? Gavriel111 (talk) 01:23, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Gavriel111: Welcome to the Teahouse. If you think your draft is ready, you can add {{subst:submit}} to the top of it. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:01, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Gavriel111, I have deleted Bimpin (and Draft:Bimpin, which redirected to it), as blatant promotion, exemplified by Bimpin's music is known for its catchy beats and relatable lyrics, which have resonated with listeners worldwide. Despite his relatively young age, Bimpin has already established himself as a rising star in the music industry. Unsurprisingly, this was not backed up by any reliable source. Surprisingly, nothing else in the article was either. I note that in this edit, you wrote Hi, this is Bimpin's manager. If you want to persist in attempting to create an article about this person (and I advise you not to), then as his manager you must read Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure very carefully and do what it says. -- Hoary (talk) 02:21, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. If I were to rewrite the article to be non-biased, would that be able to be published? Gavriel111 (talk) 02:40, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you can find three reliable sources that go in depth about Bimpin, yes you can. Esolo5002 (talk) 03:30, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Gavriel111, did you not read

If you want to persist in attempting to create an article about this person (and I advise you not to), then as his manager you must read Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure very carefully

(above), and within Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure also

Paid editing is further regulated by a community guideline, Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. This advises that those with a conflict of interest, including paid editors, are very strongly discouraged from directly editing affected articles, but should post content proposals on the talk pages of existing articles, and should put new articles through the articles for creation process, so they can be reviewed prior to being published.

? But if you've decided to ignore both my advice and this website's very strong discouragement, then could you? Probably not, because your obvious eagerness to create an article about your client suggests that your idea of "non-biased" and others' ideas of "non-biased" would be very different. Still, as Esolo5002 has indicated that it might be possible, you could -- here, in this thread -- present links to three reliable sources that each describe or discuss Bimpin in depth. (Be sure to read WP:RS before attempting this task.) -- Hoary (talk) 03:45, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I’m sorry about that. Below are only two reliable and notable sources in the music industry that talk about Bimpin as an artist. I was only able to attach 2 since these are the only two that were not from PR or an interview. I've just read the links you've sent to understand the rules. I apologize for my errors.

Lyrical Lemonade, "Who Is Bimpin?"

Earmilk, "Bimpin Reminisces about Heaven at Night"

Now, I completely understand how the article should be written, as it focuses on facts and statistics more than general observations and how I see Bimpin.

Once again, I truly do apologize for the misunderstanding and my communication. Gavriel111 (talk) 05:45, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Gavriel111. Both those sources are weak; they don't add up to "notability", as it's understood here. Maybe wait a year or two. -- Hoary (talk) 06:16, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, both of those sources attached are well known in music industry. I understand that Wikipedia requires more mainstream publications. I'm sorry to bother you but I've attached a completely rewritten short biography ONLY stating facts. Every fact stated has a source that would be attached and cited before being published. --------------

Gavi Shohet Zabin, better known by his stage name Bimpin, is an American rapper and recording artist from Chicago. Born on August 15th, 2007, Bimpin began making music at the age of nine, and at the age of 11, he released his first set of singles to SoundCloud.

Career

Bimpin’s most notable single, 2Life, has 300,000 and counting streams across all streaming platforms which earned him recognition from the Recording Academy. Getty Images showcases Bimpin on the red carpet at the first and 2nd Annual Grammys Next Gen party. Bimpin’s most recent Lyrical Lemonade write up reflects 2Life stating, “Bimpin’s new single, 2Life with Henny Hermes, KILJ, and production by Stafford Beats displays his versatility as well as his own way to deliver a message about the struggles of making it as a rapper.” 2Life introduced thousands of new listeners to the rapper, shortly before he released his most recent single, Heaven At Night.

Late 2018–present:

Bimpin is a rap artist who burst onto the scene at the age of eleven. According to SoundCloud archives, Bimpin’s debut single and album were titled, Needa Know and Capital City Feel. These early works are no longer available on streaming platforms. Bimpin is preparing for the release of his upcoming EP, Blinded By Colors as promoted through and seen on his social media feeds. Bimpin is an independent artist and has not signed a record deal or management agreement. Gavriel111 (talk) 06:39, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You are still struggling with avoiding promotional wording: "most notable, earned him recognition, burst onto the scene." Also, articles do not have future events: preparing for the release. See WP:TOOSOON. And you MUST declare your paid relationship on your User page before trying again. David notMD (talk) 10:11, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok thank you. I will fix the wording and delete future events. My relationship to Bimpin is that I am his manager, I will put that on my user page as well. Gavriel111 (talk) 16:36, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Is the draft ready be published?

Hi,

I'm curious about the draft(ESPNcricinfo Awards), which is almost finished and about to get published. What are the main things I left in it.. can you figure out? or it is completely ready.? —𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 02:52, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In a reviewer's comment on Draft:ESPNcricinfo Awards, Perfectodefecto, you've specified five of "the best independent sources", Among these, I selected a source from The Guardian, because the British newspaper is refreshingly free of any paywall. But it turned out to be this page of the Trinidad and Tobago Guardian. The article tells us that this or that player won this or that award. Does it say anything about the award, other than who won it? Is the award a trophy or cash or something else? Who pays? Is there an awards ceremony, and if so, where may it be viewed? How are the judges/jurors selected? How have pundits whose views are of note commented on the judgments, or tastes (or alleged biases) of the judges/jurors? What happened to make the awards suddenly take note of women, nine years after they took note of men? Et cetera. -- Hoary (talk) 04:28, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The textual content of the draft is just two unreferenced sentences. There's nothing about how the award-winners are selected, and no evidence that anyone cares who wins them. Maproom (talk) 08:10, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Consultant Advertising Services to Create Article

A case request at the Dispute Resolution Noticeboard asked for advice about a draft article, and I have advised the author to ask the editors here for advice about improving the draft. However, the submitter also mentioned that the subject received advertising from a consultant who says that they can help a client get an article in Wikipedia. I am not asking whether to use the services of the consultant. I know the answer, which is don't use their services. But is there anyone who is keeping track of these scammers and advertisers? Is anyone maintaining a list, or keeping information about them? Robert McClenon (talk) 04:59, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Robert McClenon I think you are looking for Wikipedia:List of paid editing companies. 331dot (talk) 08:57, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Logging in

I need to log in again and again for some reason . Can anyone help me with this? Crazy975 (talk) 08:33, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Crazy975 Hello and welcome. Do you check the "keep logged in" box? If you block your browser from saving cookies, this may require you to keep logging in. You should be able to whitelist Wikipedia in your browser. 331dot (talk) 08:54, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

From where can I check the "keep logged in" box? I also don't see an option for whitelisting Wikipedia or saving cookies — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crazy975 (talk • contribs) 08:57, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting and protecting a page

how can I delete a page created by me? And how can I protect a page from vandalism? I mean how can I protect a page from some users so those users can't edit the page ? Crazy975 (talk) 09:34, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Crazy975 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. If you are the only editor of a page or article, you can make an author request speedy delete proposal by placing {{db-g7}} at the top(as it appears when viewing this page, not in the edit window where I have coding to suppress its function). If it's a page in your user space, you can use {{db-u1}}.

If an article or page is subject to vandalism, the vandals may be reported to WP:AIV. If there is a habitual, demonstratable problem with vandalism on an article or page, you may request page protection at WP:RFPP. Note that "vandalism" has a specific meaning, which is attempts to deface an article- it isn't edits made that you simply disagree with. 331dot (talk) 09:41, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok but what if the page is mine ? How can I delete my own page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crazy975 (talk • contribs) 09:44, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As I said, if the page is in your user space, place {{db-u1}} at the top. If it is elsewhere, and you are the only contributor, you may use {{db-g7}}. 331dot (talk) 09:48, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am just writing {{ and it asked for a corresponding template.

What should I write in the template?

Are you talking about deleting a page or protecting it?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Crazy975 (talk • contribs) 09:57, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Crazy975 To request deletion, you need to place exactly what I wrote- {{db-u1}} if it's in your user space.

Looking at your edits, you seem to want to preemptively protect your sandbox from vandalism- we do not preemptively protect pages. There must be a demonstratable problem with vandalism. Do you have reason to think that your sandbox will be vandalized? 331dot (talk) 10:00, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am doing this because I wanna have a experience of doing this .

I apologize

Btw , what if I want to protect a page created by me ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crazy975 (talk • contribs) 10:02, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also how did you view my sandbox without adding a view to it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crazy975 (talk • contribs) 10:05, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please make sure to properly sign your posts going forward with four tildes(~~~~) so we know you wrote them. As I said, we do not preemptively protect pages. There must be an actual problem with vandalism on a page, typically that blocking the vandals does not address. Sandboxes are not likely to be vandalized, as they are not easy to find unless someone knows it exists. I looked at your edit history, which any editor may view. 331dot (talk) 10:07, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sinebot is signing my posts no need to sign Crazy975 (talk) 10:09, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is much preferred that you sign your own posts. 331dot (talk) 10:10, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok ok but I am just doing so for practice . I was asking if it was my own page how can I protect it ?

I mean , I am trying to protect my page I order to learn this and do this more efficiently in the future Crazy975 (talk) 10:13, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As I said, you can request page protection at WP:RFPP but it will not be accepted unless you have an actual problem with vandals vandalizing the page at issue. Please do not request protection unless that is the case. 331dot (talk) 10:14, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Crazy975: Your user page is not "yours" per se as explained here; it's a loaner so to speak and you're being allowed to use free of charge. Others will for the most part leave it be as long as it is in accordance with Wikipedia:User pages. However, if you start using it in an inappropriate way or adding content to it that violates some Wikipedia policy (e.g. copyright policy violations, biographies of living persons policy violations, excessively promotional content policy violations) another user or a WP:BOT may edit the page if necessary, even without warning, to remove or otherwise address those violations.

You can't protect the page or prevent others from editing it yourself; only an administrator can do that, and they will only do so as a last resort to prevent serious disruption or policy violations as explained in Wikipedia:Page protection.

You can't delete a page yourself; only an adminsitrator can delete a page. If you want a page deleted, you will need to ask an administrator to do so. There are different reasons why a page may be deleted, and you can find out some more about them in Wikipedia:Deletion policy.

Finally, anyone can see your user sandbox simply by going to page and looking at it. You can't hide the contents of the page from public view. In fact, anyone can see anything you post on any Wikipedia page as explained here. If you want to keep something private, you shouldn't post it anywhere on Wikipedia. -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:17, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You type "db-u1" in the pop-up. Carpimaps (talk) 11:30, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"What I tell you three times is true." (Lewis Carroll). You have been told three times that protection only applies after there is evidence of vandalism. Vandalized articles get protected. At times, editors' User page are vandalized - often as revenge for edits to an article - an can also be protected. David notMD (talk) 10:22, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Okokok how can I tell an administrator to delete my page? There is a reason to delete my page: it's not needed and is bagus — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crazy975 (talk • contribs) 10:25, 19 March 2023 (UTC) Crazy975 (talk) 10:27, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've answered this question at least twice in this discussion. 331dot (talk) 10:28, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You can delete all content on your User page. You can delete all content on your Talk page. You can delete all content in your Sandbox. You have also been told how to use the Db function to request an Administrator to delete those pages entirely. Or, given that your account is less than a week old, delete content and abandon the account. Or, continue to be obtuse and your account will be indefinitely blocked. David notMD (talk) 10:31, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Using Template:Infobox mapframe

Hello. I am trying to figure out how to use the infobox map frame template for the Seat of Kew (Wikidata #: Q5355563). The Wikidata entry and the OSM relation ID are linked with one another but the template still doesn't work.

{{Infobox mapframe|id=Q5355563}}

Thank you in advance for your help. - GMH Melbourne (talk) 10:27, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Did you just add the OSM relation ID. It sometimes takes 1-2 days for it to work. PalauanReich (talk) 13:02, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@PalauanReich: Yes that must be the problem. Thank you! - GMH Melbourne (talk) 00:27, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Deciding between images

I am editing the Sargassum Belt article, and I was wondering what would be the best picture. The current one is a drawing of where it is, but I was wondering if the satellite imagery image would be better. I am wondering what you think? Current image

Satellite Image 1

Satellite Image 2 PalauanReich (talk) 13:20, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@PalauanReich: Just my opinion: I think the current image is best for the article's lead image, but I'd also include a thumbnail of your "Satellite Image 2" to show the development of the belt over time. Deor (talk) 13:40, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good. That's what I was thinking PalauanReich (talk) 13:45, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

One question. I tried adding the image, but the caption isnt appearing, do you know how to make the caption appear. Thanks PalauanReich (talk) 13:52, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Looks as though the caption has been fixed. Deor (talk) 14:47, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Arb-Com cases

Hello,

Are users (non-admin) that are uninvolved with a given dispute allowed to comment/participate in Arbcom cases? Just curious.

--Shadow of the Starlit Sky (talk) 13:35, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Some of the comments in the Talk page of the main case page and the Talk page of the Evidence page are by editors who do not have any involvement with the case. Be sure to follow the instructions at the top of the page, such as to comment in your own section, and any word limit. Robert McClenon (talk) 13:49, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Having problems with signing up for feedback request services

I tried filling out the template but it my username wouldn’t save. I’m not sure if it’s normal, but I don’t think I applied the submission. SensibleLeprechaun (talk) 14:23, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@SensibleLeprechaun: Welcome to the Teahouse. You went to the actual template documentation page at Template:Frs user/doc and changing the values there, which is not what you do. You need to call the template on whichever page you want by typing the name of the template (Frs user) and enclosing it within {{ and }}. There's more help at Help:Templates, and a section there on § Parameters if those are needed. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:41, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am aware of that now, I was really tired so I did not think too much about where I actually was. Thank you for the information. SensibleLeprechaun (talk) 14:46, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also, “on whichever page you want”, meaning categories? If I were to call the template on Film Semiotics for instance will it give me drafts to review? SensibleLeprechaun (talk) 14:50, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@SensibleLeprechaun: The documentation's not very clear, but I took these instructions from another user's talk page:

Go to the Feedback Request Service page.
Decide which categories are of interest to you, under the RfC and/or GA headings.
Paste {{Frs user|Jmajeremy|limit}} underneath the relevant heading(s), where limit is the maximum number of requests you wish to receive for that category per month.
Publish the page.

Obviously, replace Jmajeremy with your username.—Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:22, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Effort to correct Japanese naming convention

I am very new to this and hope this is the right place to ask. In Japanese, the correct order of speaking someone's name is their family name followed by their first name. Across Wikipedia and many other western sources of information this order is reversed. Where might one go to discuss potentially changing this policy, so that the family name is put first? Alonewestand (talk) 17:14, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Alonewestand Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Perhaps I misunderstand you, but if you want to change all articles about people so that their family name is first, so that Joe Biden would be "Biden Joe", that is not going to happen. Articles about people are titled by the most commonly used name for the person, and based in their culture. Japanese names should be as they are in Japan, and names in Western countries like the US/UK should be as they are there. If you still wish to attempt to change the policy, the Village Pump is the best place to start. 331dot (talk) 17:25, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think I did misunderstand, so I am striking this. Please disregard. 331dot (talk) 17:28, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

However, "correcting", say, the people at List of Japanese Americans is not the way to go. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:31, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Alonewestand en-WP:s guidance on this is at WP:JTITLE. If there is something there you wish to discuss changing, the place to start is the talkpage of that page. Hope this helps. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:26, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note also that there are templates like this:

The article Yoko Ono is titled per WP:COMMONNAME. Because, you know. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:47, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Looking for articles to edit

So I want to fix grammar on Wikipedia, is there some kind of directory or something like that where there are articles that need some fixing? Vamsi20 (talk) 20:42, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Vamsi20 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. A good place to start is the Community Portal. 331dot (talk) 20:47, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Vamsi20: Welcome to the Teahouse. As a shameless plug, you may be interested in the Guild of Copy Editors. We currently have a drive to reduce our copyediting backlog as much as we can. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:00, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I will be working on fixing them :)

Vamsi20 (talk) Vamsi20 (talk) 21:09, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Vamsi20: Wikipedia:Lists of common misspellings/Grammar and miscellaneous may also be of interest. Edward-Woodrow (talk) 22:07, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not understanding why my article is not approved

I attempted to write an article about Marshall Weber https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Marshall_Weber and was given feedback that there were not enough references. So I added more references. I believe that they are reliable, they include mainstream newspapers and other arts sites. One of them was the website of a non profit that Weber founded. He has founded other non-profits as well, and has had a career as an artist. I could remove that reference, but not sure that is helpful. I am not sure what else to do. I stuck a big list of links ("more info") at the bottom, which is messy and could be removed but I am at a loss. The process has taken a long time, perhaps I did not see a notification when it was reviewed again. This article is more thorough than others that I have created without the push-back. I have a difficult time figuring out how to communicate with the various editors and reviewers, so may not have done everything possible. I got no response to my comment on the talk page. A consultant of some kind from "Wiki Submissions" contacted Marshall Weber to help him make the web page, but he is not the one writing it, and this is not a commercial endeavor. It seems weird that commercial (?) consultants are trolling the rejections.... FYI, like other artists that I have made pages for, I know him personally. All Wikipedia entries that I have created and edited are out of personal interest, because I admire the subjects work. Thank you ::User:cleshne — Preceding undated comment added 21:21, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Just cleaned up the citations a bit. You need to either move that list of references at the bottom into in-line citations in the article, because you should only have 2-3 external links. Find what info you go from the sources and add in the reference to that appropriate section. And delete the rest besides for maybe his website. PalauanReich (talk) 22:58, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: the feedback did not say that "there were not enough references". It said that the references were not good enough. It was hoping for better references, not more references (though it could have made this clearer). Maproom (talk) 06:54, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, cleshne, and welcome to the Teahouse. "Commercial consultants" (aka scammers) troll the rejections because they've seen that they can prey on people who don't understand what Wikipedia is, and think that it's like most of the internet, and you can get on it by paying enough. This is wrong on two counts: first, that Wikipedia will keep articles only if their subjects meet the criteria of notability, and secondly, that "being on Wikipedia" (actually, being the subject of a Wikipedia article) may not be what they want: see an article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. Such consultants are absolutely not approved by Wikipedia (even the honest ones), but as long as they act within Wikipedia's rules, they are free to work here.

On the subject of Draft:Marshall Weber: nothing from Weber or his associates, or anything founded by him, counts towards establishing notability. As well as being reliable, most sources need to be independent. Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. ColinFine (talk) 11:48, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why cant i make the page Cherry Bettan?

I want to redirect it to my user page, dont worry. CherryTheFurby (talk) 23:12, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@CherryTheFurby welcome to Teahouse! We don't have pages. We have articles. And Wikipedia Articles cannot redirect to User pages or vice versa. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 23:16, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ik they are called articles. i just wanted to make a fanon wikipedia article thats my user page. CherryTheFurby (talk) 23:19, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

CherryTheFurby Your user page is not for that purpose, it is a place for the named user to tell about themselves as a Wikipedia editor or user. Wikipedia is also not for writing fanon- there are websites for that purpose, but this isn't one. 331dot (talk) 23:35, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

CherryTheFurby, an article summarizes what reliable sources have said about some subject that's demonstrably notable. Improving and perhaps sometimes also creating articles is why we are here. A user page is entirely optional; but when it exists, it says something about the user as editor. I don't know for sure why you can't make "the page Cherry Bettan"; but as Google shows zero hits for the string "cherry bettan", I'd guess that the reason is an utter lack of notability. -- Hoary (talk) 23:44, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@CherryTheFurby: Your account is too new to make articles (including redirects in the article space) but your purpose isn't allowed anyway. Wikipedia is a serious encyclopedia, not for things made up by the users. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:23, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

among us (2018)

https://siivagunner.fandom.com/wiki/Among_Us_Trap_Remix this is my source, can i let me edit the page now Silent bays (talk) 00:18, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fandom is not a reliable source as it is user generated. What page do you want to edit? PalauanReich (talk) 00:27, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

among us but it didnt let me before Silent bays (talk) 00:31, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What specifically do you want to add? PalauanReich (talk) 00:34, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Among Us Trap Remix, is this the one I played? Let's check it out.

I'm assuming what they are trying to add here is a mention of the Trap Remix to Among Us#Memes and mods. 💜 melecie talk - 01:14, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Silent bays, the article Among Us is "semi-protected". This means that new editors can't edit it directly. If you have a suggestion for improving it, then describe this precisely and clearly at the foot of Talk:Among Us. (Further up in the same talk page is an excellent example of a successful edit request.) If your suggestion depends on something you've read at Fandom, it will fail. -- Hoary (talk) 00:41, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ok Silent bays (talk) 01:27, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hibernia

What does the word Hibernian mean 2601:646:C200:3240:843A:3EF4:F04A:8A74 (talk) 00:44, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hibernia is the Latin name for Ireland. So, Hibernian is a synonym for Irish. In the future please ask questions like this at the Reference desks. Cullen328 (talk) 00:50, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Or, next time you can try visiting the Wikipedia page of the same name (e.g. Hibernian). GoingBatty (talk) 14:16, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Pending draft

I submitted a draft, Draft:Santhal Family, on 15 December, 2022. It has been pending review for over 3 months now. Now I usually just leave drafts at that, until they get reviewed by someone. However, I received no reviews or updates at all on this one, and it's been like that since December. Any way I can speed up the review procedure? And, if not that, can I remove the submission tag and publish the article directly (of course, even in that case, someone will review it later)? I have created a couple of appropriately-referenced articles on Wikipedia before, so I am confident this won't be a bad idea. What step must I take? Thanks! Dissoxciate (talk) 00:49, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

AfC is an optional process, and if you already confident about the notability you can just move it to mainspace. Note that it will have to survive NPP. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 02:29, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Dissoxciate: All you can do is wait. I left a comment in the draft, however. One paragraph needs major re-work. ~Anachronist (talk) 03:41, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The image you have in the draft is of a different sculpture by Beij. David notMD (talk) 08:27, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Image corrected. David notMD (talk) 17:02, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright Violation Procedures or Vandalism?

A user has completely erased the body of the Killing of Tyre Nichols page on the pretense that it has been "riddled with copyright violations." The listing they filed on the Copyright Investigation page is blank - it contains no information substantiating the allegation of copyright infringement. A Copyvios report finds that the page does not violate copyright. I have restored the original and provided an explanation on the talk page. The user has refused to engage on the talk page and erased the page four times now.

Is this actual copyright violation procedure or vandalism? Can you really just nuke a page and claim that it's copyrighted with no need to substantiate the claim or wait for the admin/copy clerk team to investigate? Combefere ❯❯❯ Talk 07:46, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Combefere As it clearly states in bold in the template the only people who may remove copyvio blanking templates are admins, copyright clerks and VRT agents. There are no situations in which it would be appropriate for you to remove that template. Even if the article is not a copyright violation that is a determination to be made by the people at WP:CP.

The report at WP:CP is not "blank", it clearly states that the article contains copying from sources. On the talk page of the article they have explained in more detail that the issues are copy pasted sentences and unattributed quoting.

Earwig's copyvio tool is a tool, you need some degree of experience with interpreting it's output and some familiarity with copyvios to figure out what the results mean. You cannot just say "the percentage is low, so it's not a copyvio". There are plenty of ways of committing copyvio that the tool cannot detect, e.g. close paraphrasing, rearranging sentence fragments or copying from offline sources, and there are situations in which the tool will give false positives.

WikiWikiWayne's edits are not vandalism under any reasonable interpretation of the wikipedia definition of the term, and you should stop referring to them as such. 163.1.15.238 (talk) 13:03, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

draft : hossein saei

Hello, I hope you are well. I wrote a draft about the profsor and actor named( Hossein Saei)ssand used as many sources as possible. Please fix the problem and confirm the page. I wish your always be healthy ............. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Hossein_Saei

This is the ID of the actor : https://www.imdb.com/name/nm14636468/?ref_=ext_shr_lnk Tinaabdollahi (talk) 07:52, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Tinaabdollahi. Your draft is nowhere near ready to be accepted. It is poorly written, poorly structured and poorly referenced. You mentioned the actor appearing in a film but you linked to the article about a month in the Islamic calendar instead of an article about a film. That makes no sense. Several important assertions in your draft are unreferenced. That's not acceptable. Cullen328 (talk) 08:00, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, you are referring to the old draft. I made this edit yesterday, March 19, and all items have been corrected. Unfortunately, user User:Dan_arndt deleted Tinaabdollahi (talk) 10:39, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Tinaabdollahi It was deleted by an administrator as being unambiguous advertising. Using Wikipedia for promotion is never acceptable. If you based your draft on the rubbish written on IMDB (as you linked above), then I'm not surprised you got the tone wrong. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:27, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Tinaabdollahi: If you haven't already done so, I suggest reading Help:Your first article. GoingBatty (talk) 13:46, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mike's point = IMDb is not accepted as a reference because even if the information is true, content there is added by anyone, with no editorial oversight. For same reason, Wikipedia articles cannot be used as references. See WP:42 and WP:BACKWARD for insight on referencing before trying again. David notMD (talk) 17:06, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

After looking at your Talk page, clear that several Administrators have Speedy deleted your attempts to create a draft about Hossein Saei. Perhaps time to stop trying. David notMD (talk) 18:22, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Pending Draft

Hello, I have submitted the Draft:Right to Recall Party but it was declined. Now I have improved it more references. Can you please check the draft and give suggestions to me. Thanks Info.apsharma (talk) 08:12, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Info.apsharma Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You have submitted it for a review and it is pending; please be patient. 331dot (talk) 08:32, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Content is extremely detailed for a political party that has never reached 1% of votes in any election. David notMD (talk) 08:47, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sort of like the Libertarian party in the United States. But yes, there are many irrelevant details in that draft. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:43, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Muir Seamount

"This was interpreted as indicating an increase in flow [form] colder waters of Antarctic flow, and the stagnation of the North American flows.[3]"[4] The word "form", seen in brackets in the example quoted from the 4 sentence of the 2 paragraph, is this the correct word in this sentence? My head wants to say "from" instead, but I'm not certain enough to edit it forthwith. (Plus, I don't know how to edit it...) RCMisNapping (talk) 09:01, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy link: Muir Seamount. That sentence makes little sense, even if you replace "form" by "from". It has been there since the article was created. I think it'll need someone with access to the source cited to figure out what it's meant to say. Maproom (talk) 10:29, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@RCMisNapping There is enough of the citation available at this URL for me to be fairly confident to change the article's wording as I've done here. Feel free to reword further if you think that would help. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:20, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Red link for someone who already has a Wikipedia page

This page: List of fellows of the Society of Antiquaries of_London has a red-link entry for "Reverend J. Charles Cox (1844–1919), Author" but I believe Wikipedia actually has a page about this person here: John_Charles_Cox though that page gives his birth year as 1843. Not sure what to do. Neverkippled (talk) 13:32, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Neverkippled: Hi there! I suggest posting your question on the article's talk page: Talk:List of fellows of the Society of Antiquaries of London. If you don't receive a response in a couple days, try posting your question at Talk:John Charles Cox. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 13:39, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Neverkippled GoingBatty gave good advice, though I quickly checked the source which actually stated 1843, so I think the 1844 was a typo. Nice spotting! ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 17:04, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I got a message from another user who connected up the link, so I think it's sorted out now. Thanks for the helpful replies! Neverkippled (talk) 17:38, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Jumbled links

Novice editor. Article internal links to various universities redirect ok in edit mode and publish mode, but "Download as PDF" jumbles these internal links in a somewhat random manner. Billyboybliss (talk) 14:43, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Billyboybliss Welcome to the Teahouse. Are you referring to problems in the draft User:Billyboybliss/sandbox in your sandbox? If not, please specify which article. Your draft has various problems that you may be able to fix yourself after reading H:YFA and information about inline citations at WP:CITE. If not, come back into this thread with a more specific question and someone will help. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:39, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Billyboybliss: I have made some tests on different pages. It appears that if a link is broken into two lines in a PDF download then clicking anywhere in those two lines will go to the target of that link. If a line both starts and ends with a broken link then the ending link controls the target. I didn't find this bug in a quick search of our bug tracker. I will search more carefully later and submit it if I don't find an existing report. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:46, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@PrimeHunter, @Billyboybliss Ah, yes, I see now after looking carefully at the download. The issue is most obvious in the text with multiple wikilinks in one line (The Education University of Hong Kong, Queen's University at Kingston, Rhodes University, Stellenbosch University, and University of Victoria). In the .pdf all the links within a single line point to the article which is the last on the same line in the download. That looks like a Wikipedia bug, nothing to do with any shortcomings in the draft. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:59, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

After trying some other articles in mainspace, just in case there was something odd with the sandbox , I found that the bug is not always obvious but is certainly present in mesotrione, for example in the section Mesotrione#Agricultural use which has a large number of consecutive wikilinks to species names. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:12, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Edit War

Hello, I am trying to improve Education Ecosystem page, but an editor keeps reverting my changes. I have mentioned my edits on the talk page of the article. Can someone please check and let me know why I can't remove the blacklisted references and format it a bit? Thank you Shakycatto (talk) 17:04, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Shakycatto: Welcome to the Teahouse! I see you have also engaged I am Being Here to Help You on their talk page. I hope you'll continue your conversation with that editor, and hope others will engage on the article talk page discussion you started a few hours ago. I don't think any of the references are "blacklisted", but some are considered "unreliable". GoingBatty (talk) 17:26, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@GoingBatty Hello, I am much obliged for your response. Well, I say, I very much hate to edit-war, but I have mentioned quite fairly that "unreliable" sources are not enough to remove loads of information. But anyway, thank you for the clarification to @Shakycatto, a new user whom you really can't blame. I'm Here to Help You (talk) 17:38, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@I am Being Here to Help You: Would you prefer that Shakycatto tagged the "unreliable sources" with {{unreliable source}} or find a more reliable source? GoingBatty (talk) 17:53, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Probably find a more reliable source, but what I wanted was to stop @Shakycatto from erasing the information without evidence of it being incorrect. I'm Here to Help You (talk) 17:56, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@I am Being Here to Help You & @Shakycatto: I changed some of the "unreliable" sources to use {{cite press release}} to clearly show they're not independent sources. GoingBatty (talk) 17:58, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for helping out! I'm Here to Help You (talk) 18:01, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Removing information when there's no evidence that it's correct is fine. Adding unsourced information in the hope that someone else will do the hard work of finding sources is unreasonable. Maproom (talk) 18:25, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What a weird article! It says plenty about the subject's fund-raising, but little about what it actually does. It "intends to teach people how to build complete products in future technological fields" - so one day it will write courses about topics that don't exist yet. Maproom (talk) 18:18, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bhai nand Lal page copy editing

So I am working on fixing this page: Bhai Nand Lal I am focusing on the grammar, and fixed the early life section, but the section below it states that a man of Hindu faith cannot have such knowledge of the Quran. However, Lal was a Sikh which is confusing me a lot. Plus, the bad grammar and spelling used in the article makes it hard for me to understand what is going on.

The only reference is a really long book in Punjabi (i think that is what it is) so can someone help me in understanding what the article says? Vamsi20 (talk) 19:27, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The page isn’t linking for some reason Vamsi20 (talk) 19:28, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Vamsi20, it wasn't linking because you included nowiki tags around the link, which disabled it. I've removed them for you. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 19:34, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oh. I was in the visual editor which might have had something to do with it. Vamsi20 (talk) 19:36, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Does anyone have an answer to my original question? Vamsi20 (talk) 19:49, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That paragraph is very confused, and in particular it is not made clear who held or stated that view. Earlier in the paragraph it refers to a "non-Muslim", and I wonder if it might be that the Mughals disdained to distinguish between different non-Muslims, and simply called them all Hindu. ColinFine (talk) 19:51, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I wonder about that too.

Also, I see no other record of that entire paragraph happening except for that Punjabi book (the only reference), maybe I’m missing something there.

There’s no record I could find about the letter and the interpretation. Will do more research into the Hindu subject. Vamsi20 (talk) 20:05, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I did a bit more research and I found this from sikhwiki.org’s page on Lal:

” When he left the service of Prince Mu'azzam, cannot be determined exactly. The premise that he was dismissed by Aurangzeb owing to his father Chhajju Mall's having been a favourite of Dara has been proven false by the fact that he continued long in service under Prince Mu'azzam. There is a story that Aurangzeb had been dissatisfied with the meaning or interpretation of a verse from the Koran and had given the matter over to the Ulama. No one was able to settle the Emperor's mind on the subject when Prince Mu'azzam asked Nand Lal to take a try at giving an interpretation that might satisfy Aurangzeb.

Nand Lal's version was sent to the Emperor who was, it is said, delighted with his interpretation, but when he noticed the name was a Hindu name, Aurangzeb is said to have become upset that an non-believer should have a better mastery of the Koran than his own court theologians. However, he was given a robe of honor and a monetary reward, but the Emperor is said to have thought that such a scholar should be persuaded to accept Islam.”

So I think the Emperor got confused and thought Lal was a Hindu due to his name, or just was dissatisfied at his being non-Muslim.

The only info I could find about Mughals not distinguishing non-Muslims is that they treated non-Muslims like second-class citizens, but there is no info of them calling every non-Muslim a Hindu. Vamsi20 (talk) 20:14, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That may be. But I'm afraid that you need reliable sources, and anything called "xxxwiki" is likely not to be one. If you want to go further with this, you're going to need to consult that book. ColinFine (talk) 22:59, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How do I propose a new change?

I think I figured out how to solve the Bonnie and clyde problem with wikidata. We need to be able to have Wikidata anchors on sections. One with a wikidata anchor may have links appear to other sections or articles in other languages. Removing a wikidata anchored section would require approval closer to deleting or merging an article. Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (talk to the cutest Wikipedian) 20:31, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You're proposing a change on Wikidata, so you need to argue it there. It wouldn't surprise me if it has been discussed before. First read d:WD:Bonnie and Clyde problem, and follow any relevant links. Then if you still think your idea is a goer, suggest it at d:WD:Project chat. ColinFine (talk) 23:02, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reference help please

Hello. I am currently trying to create a draft in my sandbox. I am trying to use a source more than once in the article, but it is being duplicated in the reflist. How do I stop that from happening? QuicoleJR (talk) 20:35, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please ping me btw. QuicoleJR (talk) 20:38, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

QuicoleJR, please read WP:NAMEDREFS. In brief, you fully define the reference once, assign it a name, and then invoke it using the name of the reference in some wikicode. Follow the syntax carefully. Cullen328 (talk) 20:44, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. QuicoleJR (talk) 20:59, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@QuicoleJR To assist you re-using a named or numbered reference, both of our editing tools offer you the ability to find and redeploy them. In our source editor, click the little clipboard icon next to 'Named Reference' in the toolbar. In Visual Editor there's actually a seperate tab you can click to reuse a reference. Weirdly, that editing tool doesn't let you name the reference yourself - it simply numbers them. So I name mine using the Source Editor on first use via the Cite popup window, and then switch back over to the other editor if I want more of a WYSIWYG feel whilst editing.

I hope this has helped, and not confused you further! Nick Moyes (talk) 21:56, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

COI question

Sorry for asking this again, but I am still a bit confused on the COI guidelines. The Grain de Sel Togo, Inc. article has been almost entirely created or edited by its founder, Khoun75. I added the COI template on the page but still am wondering if I should message him or post something on the talk page. Also the article beginning can be improved to focus more on the organization. PalauanReich (talk) 21:45, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Khoun75 has never edited their talk page, and has had very sparse edits. Maybe post a template warning about COI, since they are unlikely to see it. Lastly, the article gives off promo, with imagespam and extra peacock like Grain de Sel Togo provides technical and academic support to Fulbright scholars from Africa. It shouldn't take too long to clean up. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 23:03, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If Khoun75 is the founder of the organization, then in Wikipedia's terms he is a paid editor (whether or not he actually receives money in that capacity), and he must make a formal declaration of that status. ColinFine (talk) 23:04, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Silly question

Is it “wrong” to create an article about your mother, who is not especially famous or anything? Luek 10m (talk) 23:05, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's no so much wrong as it violates our policies on Notability, and would likely violate others on WP:RS, WP:Verify and WP:CITE. So it's very much not a good idea to attempt it, although I am sure she is a lovely woman (and don't we all feel our mothers deserve one, lol?). He iro 23:11, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

She is indeed. Thanks for the advice. Ima get into all these regulations :) 2A0A:A541:1C0:0:E18B:F1E8:3614:E544 (talk) 00:18, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I guess I wasn’t logged in, but it was me. Luek 10m (talk) 00:22, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Luek 10m. That's a fairly common question. I suggest you take a look at Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything and Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not for some general information. If after looking at those pages, you feel your mother is Wikipedia:Notable for some reason, come back here and post why. Someone will then be able to provide you with more specific information. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:13, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Luek 10m (talk) 23:17, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Biography Removed From Wikipedia - Please Help

Hello, I am new here and would definitely like some help. I wrote the following article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Hygord_Am%C3%A9d%C3%A9e , it was published to wikipedia, and then taken down the next day. :( I was wondering what exactly can I do to get it republished. I included resources and links to the publications (books) written by this individual. Any and all guidance would greatly be appreciated. Manywords4u (talk) 23:36, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Manywords4u Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Your draft is completely unsourced. An article about a person must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the person, showing how they meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person. You're kinda doing this backwards; you've written a text, but have no sources. This is akin to building a house without first building the foundation. You should gather the sources first so you have them to summarize. Please read Your First Article. What sources do you have? 331dot (talk) 23:47, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

NOT REMOVED. Per the article's View history, it was moved to Draft:Hygord Amédée. Listing books by a person is allowed, but contributes nothing toward notability. David notMD (talk) 02:59, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Copying a file from another language's wiki?

Hello! There is a non-free photo of Vladimir Alatortsev that exists on the Russian and Latvian versions of his page, but not the English. To add the photo to the English page, should I download and reupload the file manually, reentering relevant copyright information in English, or is there some kind of wizard I should use to copy it over? Here is the photo in question, from Russian. Thank you in advance. Kaasterly (talk) 00:30, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Kaasterly: If it is still under copyright, then it will have to meet all the of criteria at WP:NFCC to be used here on en Wikipedia. WP:MCQ might be a good place to ask about it. RudolfRed (talk) 00:40, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I know, there is no wizard. You will probably need to download it and reupload it with the information in English, if it can be used here. RudolfRed (talk) 00:41, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That answers everything I needed; thank you much! Kaasterly (talk) 00:47, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geoff_Lord

Hi there, I made changes to Geoff Lord's page however it has now reverted to the old information again. I can't see any communication notifying me what I did incorrectly so I can ensure that the new information is used. Are you able to assist? Fairlight6 (talk) 00:43, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Fairlight6: Welcome to the Teahouse. The revert in question (which you can see by going to Special:History/Geoff Lord) was concerned that your edit had a promotional tone. Looking at phrases like

Geoff Lord’s mission in life is to get one million kids moving[1] every year via Belgravia Group’s various initiatives including learn to swim programs.

and

Geoff puts his success in business down to persistence, determination and empowering his teams, and lives by a quote by Calvin Coolidge

it was an appropriate revert. Please review Wikipedia:NOTPROMOTION, as that is not the goal of Wikipedia. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:21, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for your help Tenryuu. I will remove those phrases and anything else I think might sound like promotion. Is there a way to edit the content that I originally changed, or do I need to start from scratch with my editing? Fairlight6 (talk) 01:25, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also, your image is in violation of copyright so I tagged it for speedy deletion. You have to show they released the image under a creative commons license or it is in the public domain. PalauanReich (talk) 01:28, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Warning for vandal

If a random new account deletes everything in an article and just adds a redirect what warning would I use the regular warning template or only warning template? (I'm not trying to be a fake admin or anything I just look for new users to welcome and saw this) Sateurni (talk) 01:43, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sateurni. WP:REDIRECTing an article is not necessarily vandalism; there could be a very good reason why the article was redirected. So, before you add any user warnings, it would probably be better to try and figure out why the article was redirected. The first thing to do would be to check the article's talk page (including any archives) to see whether there's any discussion related to redirectng the article. Then, I suggest checking the article's edit history to see if you can find any edit summaries related to redirecting the article. If you find nothing on the article's talk page or in the article's edit history, then perhaps follow the guidance given in WP:BLAR. Now, having posted that, it appears that your question is specifically related to Uhm Tae-woong. What you did was correct because that is actually a case of disruptive blanking. Most likely it's one person creating multiple accounts to continue trying to disrupt the page. You could warn this editor with a user warning, but most likely they won't care. They've already been reported to WP:ANI and will most likely just create a new account if they're blocked. Probably the best thing to do would be to request page protection first and then let administrators deal with the various accounts. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:25, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If 오늘의 우승자 지니 20220112 is the user in question, was CU blocked by the Materialscientist. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 02:34, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Change username

Is there a way to change your username without making a new account? I looked in preferences but didn’t see it. Orson12345 (Talk • Contribs) 02:54, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Orson12345: there sure is, head over to WP:CHU to go over your options. WindTempos ^{(talk • contribs)} 03:01, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Adding to an Wikipedia article a reference to one's own research?

My book 'There was a garden in Nuremberg' is based on known facts bolstered by research. Though it is a novel, it includes a reference list to the sources consulted. Those sources are in a foreign language, so may not be accessible to an English speaker. May I insert the details of my book where relevant? As an example, the page of Benno Martin has a narrow coverage which I can expand. My knowledge is based on a German book by Hugo Grieser, "Himmlers Mann in Nuernberg" published by the Nuremberg City Archive. Thanks! Michalsuz Michalsuz2 (talk) 02:59, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Michalsuz2: It would be best if you cited the original sources, even if not in English. Non-English sources are not a problem. If you want to cite your own book, don't do it. You may suggest it on the article talk page and see what others say about it. ~Anachronist (talk) 03:05, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thank you! Shall do. Michalsuz2 (talk) 03:11, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]