Wikipedia:Teahouse

PrimeHunter, a Teahouse host

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

Ask a question

Question forumMeet your hostsArticles to improveBecome a host

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

Help Wikipedia

private editing/drafting

Hello, is there a way to work on a draft or severalpriv drafts privately? For a while, i thought my sandbox was a private draft workspace and just learned it was not. Thank you. L'Hommedusud (talk) 17:45, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi @L'Hommedusud, welcome to the Teahouse!

You can use the Wikipedia:Articles for creation process to create multiple independent 'Draft' articles, all of which can be worked on simultaneously. Qcne (talk) 18:19, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Ah, but if you're asking if these can be worked on privately, i.e. hidden from other users, then no; you'd have to work on the drafts in a word processor on your computer and then transfer them to Wikipedia when ready. Qcne (talk) 18:20, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Just to clarify, L'Hommedusud, every draft page and every sandbox page on Wikipedia is visible to everyone, if they know where to look. Cullen328 (talk) 18:28, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

understoood. Thank you guys L'Hommedusud (talk) 18:31, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

i see,the problem with word it doesnt show how things would look on wikipedia and i cant test tables, infobox , etc. , what about creating a draft to eventually submit it for approval, is this also accessible by other users? L'Hommedusud (talk) 18:28, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Yep, sorry- basically everything on Wikipedia is public by design. Qcne (talk) 18:33, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Yes, L'Hommedusud, this is a collaborative project by design, and any editor can take a look at any time at what any other editor is working on. Cullen328 (talk) 18:35, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

no worries thanks again L'Hommedusud (talk) 18:40, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

@L'Hommedusud One suggestion is to place your draft text into your sandbox but only ever "Preview" it, never publish/save it. To be absolutely certain you don't accidentally save work-in-process you can set Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-editing so that the software won't allow you to save unless you have also added an edit summary: which in this case I deliberately don't do! I copy/paste the growing Wikitext to and from an editor on my PC. Word is not good for this as it has the annoying habit of, for example, converting two single ' (for italics in Wikitext) into ". So I use WordPad instead, saving as rich text. Mike Turnbull (talk) 21:54, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Mike Turnbull's suggestion is a good one,L'Hommedusud. However, you will lose your work in progress if you experience a power failure. Cullen328 (talk) 22:41, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

From memory you can create a sub-page from your sandbox that you do not link to from anywhere - that way it will most likely never be seen by anyone else. You will have to remember the path though! Tony 1212 (talk) 23:02, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

That would not guarantee that no one would see it, as edits to it would still appear in the Recent Changes feed. 331dot (talk) 23:12, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Aha! Thanks for that. Tony 1212 (talk) 23:43, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

That'd also show up in the user's contributions as well. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:19, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

You can create userspace drafts that will be publicly visible, and editable by everyone, but editing someone else's userspace drafts is generally considered poor form. Edward-Woodrow :) _[talk] 13:30, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Editing expertise would be greatly appreciated for an “impossible” article..

Should I throw in the towel for Draft:Erin M. Jacobson article. I’m not sure there’s any editor out there who can help resolve this situation. If you think you’re able to salvage this project, please do so. Thank you in advance! Geo Lightspeed7 (talk) 20:03, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Geo Lightspeed7. An article is only deemed "impossible" if you fail to come up with at least three independent, reliably published articles that talk about a subject in some detail and depth. Have you found those?

To be frank, I'm not willing to look through over 70 references to check for you. So please tell us what you think the best three are? Just three; no more, no less.

If we can assess those, then we might feel this person meets our Notability Criteria for Biographies. My quick look over your draft left me with the impression that you have tried far too hard to squeeze everything about this person in. There's far too much trivial mention of things they may have done, and lots of irrelevant imagery. So, if we can meet the notability criteria, it might not be so impossible. But I'd probably expect to see two thirds of the content trimmed out to get rid of the trivia, and for you to follow the guidance given on the decline notice. I hope this helps. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:10, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello @Nick Moyes. Thank you for welcoming me to Tea House! I didn’t know that regarding the three “independent, reliably published articles that talk about a subject in some detail and depth.” After it was declined the first time, I thought it’d be beneficial to cram in everything that I could find about the subject. Anyhow, let me go over it again sometime this week and I’ll see if I can make it work with what you mentioned. Thank you @Nick Moyes for your expert advice! Geo Lightspeed7 (talk) 01:11, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Cut some, but still so much more to cut. David notMD (talk) 02:43, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello @David notMD. Thank you very much for your help! I really appreciate it! Geo Lightspeed7 (talk) 12:52, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

@Geo Lightspeed7 the decline notice says significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. You might start by removing absolutely everything that doesn't come from a source that meets those criteria - just cut it, don't attempt to rewrite or anything. (You can always go have a look at the draft's history to find anything you cut out, so don't worry about cutting something "important"!) That will help you see what in your draft is actually likely to contribute to "notability" as wikipedia understands it. It will be easier to edit and rewrite from that point than from trying to pare down less important references bit by bit. There's nothing wrong with using some of these less-important references to fill out the article, but make sure you've got a core argument for notability first. Remember that reviewers are volunteers who want to help but probably don't know or care much about your article subject, and are staring down a 4000+ article backlog. The easier you make it to read your article, the more likely reviewers will do so instead of skipping it in favour of one of the other 4000+! -- asilvering (talk) 02:58, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello @Asilvering. Wow! Thanks very much for the extremely helpful information! I see where you’re coming from. I will follow your expert advice and see what I can come up with. I did find about five articles that seem to qualify regarding her notability, so I guess I will start with those first. It might take a few days for me to rework it all, mainly cutting the fat, so to speak. Anyway, thanks again! Geo Lightspeed7 (talk) 13:01, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Adrenaline Rush (stable professional wrestling)

I want to create this page. Skyangel15 (talk) 01:45, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

You have created Draft:Adrenaline Rush (stable professional wrestling). It needs content and references before being submitted. David notMD (talk) 02:45, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

@Skyangel15 The "early lives" and other parts of your draft are full of assertions about what may or may not have affected the people you are discussing. Wikipedia has very strict sourcing requirements for statements about living people, insisting that there be no speculation, only factual content backed up by reliable sources. Your draft will not be accepted if it has such content. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:08, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Do signatures require 4 tildes or not?

If signed in, and editing is Visual mode, do we absolutely have to use the 4 tildes for our signature? I didn't know to use 4 tildes to sign my name in the talk section, and yet, my name automatically posted as my signature just from being signed in and hitting "post" anyway. Is this true? Am I missing something? Lilaponi (talk) 06:30, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

@lilaponi: the "new section" and "reply" tools do indeed automatically sign comments. ltbdl (talk) 06:56, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks so much! Lilaponi (talk) 07:58, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

New Page no longer showing up in Search

I created Jeremy Leibler and it was showing up in Google search but doesn't appear to be doing so now. Did something happen to cause this? It's showing up in Bing which makes me think its some sort of google issue. Has anyone seen something like this before and can shed some light on it? Thank you. Whitemancanjump23 (talk) 06:45, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Whitemancanjump23. The Wikipedia article shows up as the #2 hit on my Android smartphone Google search in California. Please be aware that Wikipedia has no direct control of how Google indexes Wikipedia articles. The only known path here on Wikipedia to improving Google search results is to expand the article, add relevant images, and improve its references. The Google algorithms, though imperfect, are generally biased in favor of higher quality. Cullen328 (talk) 07:18, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. Really appreciate it! Whitemancanjump23 (talk) 07:23, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Whitemancanjump23, vacuous promotional phases like "thought leader", which are utterly devoid of substantive content, may lead Google to downgrade the visibility of an article. I recommend that you remove all such non-encyclopedic terminology from the article. Stick to the neutral point of view. Cullen328 (talk) 07:26, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

ok. but what do you do when someone is a thought leader? is there an appropriate way to say it? Whitemancanjump23 (talk) 07:27, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Does it mean anything more than "people sometimes listen to what he says"? Maproom (talk) 07:43, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Whitemanjump23, and welcome to the Teahouse. The answer to questions like "what should we refer to him as" is always "how do the (independent reliable) sources describe him?" ColinFine (talk) 17:11, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Google search results are not the same for everyone. Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:37, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

What's a "roof body"? -- Hoary (talk) 09:03, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Roof body appears to be a term used by some Jewish umbrella organizations. I wouldn't use that term without explanation in a general encyclopedia. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:14, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Seems to be a literal translation of the German "Dachverband". Lectonar (talk) 11:18, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Publishing Page

I’m trying to start a page about an old Chicago Irish band that my father in/law was a member of in the 1970-1990’s called The Irish Minstrels. ChicagoCymru (talk) 07:58, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

You have begunm and can continue, at User:ChicagoCymru/sandbox. You have the same content on your User page, which is the wrong place and needs to be deleted. However, keep the conflict of interest statement. Others here may be able to advise on music notability. David notMD (talk) 08:11, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Currently no article is titled "The Irish Minstrels"; so if your draft becomes an article, it can be so titled. (The complication in "The Irish Minstrels (Chicago)" is unnecessary.) Remember that everything the draft says must be based on what Wikipedia regards as "reliable sources". -- Hoary (talk) 08:50, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

I'm not sure if anyone has already given this to you, but in addition to Reliable sources as given by Hoary above, you may want to also read these other guidelines Notability for music topics and Your first article to guide your editing. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 11:07, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello ChicagoCymru, and croeso i'r tŷ te. Besides the good advice others have given you, I would suggest you also look at BACKWARDS. Writing so much as a single word of an article before finding the reliable independent published sources is like starting to build a house before you have surveyed the site to make sure it is suitable: there is a distinct possibility that all your work will be wasted. ColinFine (talk) 17:16, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

ChicagoCymru, the Chicago Tribune published an article on July 21, 1979 called "MICHAEL DUIGNAN, 49, LOCAL IRISH SINGER". I can't read the whole article because I am not a subscriber, but the snippet view says, Michael Duignan, 49, an Irish tenor, had been lead singer for the Irish Minstrels in the late 1960s and the 1970s. That's a start for you, if you can locate the whole article. Cullen328 (talk) 00:48, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

A question about the 2014 Olympics medal count

2014 Winter Olympics medal table - Wikipedia In this part I found a error about Aleksandr Kasyanov. It is said about this part that he is a composer amd died in 1982. It doesn't make sense. Can you change this part to the right person? 116.45.228.142 (talk) 13:32, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for letting us know. His name was misspelled and I have corrected it. Shantavira|^{feed me} 13:49, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Add a page in English to the Hebrew page https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/אהרן_מרדכי_פריימן

I would like to create a page in the English wiki, translated and possibly improved from the Hebrew page referenced above. Accelerator-physicist (talk) 13:52, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

@Accelerator-physicist You can certainly base a biography here on one in Hebrew. Please see WP:TRANSLATE for some general considerations. Also note that our notability guidelines here are likely to be more restrictive. As I don't speak Hebrew, I can't judge how good the sources used there will prove to be. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:09, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you Mike. I will look up the WP:TRANSLATE page. As a bilingual English-Hebrew person, I can evaluate the quality of the sources. However, many of these may be available only in Hebrew.

My intention for follow up action is to link this page to other English wiki pages such as Rishon LeZion, where I noted significant omissions, such as the names of the ten founders of the town. Accelerator-physicist (talk) 14:19, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

English refs are preferred for English Wikipedia, but non-English refs are allowed, even to the point that those are the only refs available. However, this may cause a delay in a draft being reviewed, a reviewers tend to select drafts for which they have competence. David notMD (talk) 14:43, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks David notMD.

Would a reference to "Geni" be acceptable? Please see

https://www.geni.com/people/Aharon-Freiman-Dror/6000000003784280830 Accelerator-physicist (talk) 18:50, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

@Accelerator-physicist, based on our Geni.com article, it does not seem to be a reliable source - apparently it is a wiki and its content is entirely user-generated. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:17, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Accelerator-physicist, and welcome to the Teahouse. While writing articles in English encyclopaedia about those people would be welcomed (providing they meet English Wikipedia's criteria for notability), in the meantime you could use the {{ill}} template to add links to Rishon LeZion. One the English target article exists, this will appear as a normal Wikilink to it, but in the meantime it would appear as a redlink, showing that the article does not exist, together with a small 'il' link to the Hebrew article, so that readers who can read Hebrew will be able to click that and go straight to the Hebrew article. ColinFine (talk) 17:25, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you ColinFine. I prefer to get this biography done on WP before linking to it.

As to notability, I found a mention of Aharon Mordechai Freeman in the English WP page Haviv Elementary School. Now, that is not a lot, but the town of which he was one of ten founders, Rishon LeZion, is definitely notable, and in that town he was an important figure, and appears well in the Hebrew WP. Do you consider that he meets the criterion of notability in the English WP? Accelerator-physicist (talk) 19:07, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

@Accelerator-physicist, notability is not inherited - no one is notable simply because they are associated with notable things. The overall notability guideline for people is at WP:NPERSON; there are some more specific guidelines for academics and athletes. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:21, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Cathleen Mann

Asking if someone can reconsider the pictures that accompanyCathleen Mannbio. I was looking her up and noticed there is painting OF her painted by her father but no paintings BY her. That seems… outdated? Cheers. 24.1.32.126 (talk) 15:43, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia can generally only use pictures that are not subject to Copyright, which is a very complicated issue, subject to laws which often differ between countries. Since Cathleen's father Harrington Mann died in 1937 (94 years ago), all paintings by him are likely now in the public domain: Cathleen died in 1959 (64 years ago) so her own pictures are likely still in copyright. An expert of this topic would be able to give more and accurate details, which however are beyond my ken.

(To clarify a point that others may otherwise raise. If a person is dead and no public domain pictures of them can be found, we are allowed to use one in-copyright picture of them to illustrate their article on this Wikipedia only (but cannot place it on Wikimedia Commons for use on other-language Wikipedias). If they are still alive, we cannot because in theory someone could visit and photograph them, and then donate that photo to Commons.)

The only way to legally include pictures by Cathleen Mann in her article would be for someone (presumably her heir) who owns their copyrights (not merely the paintings themselves) to voluntarily release them using the correct legal forms (which I will not bother to link) to Wikipedia unpaid and for unrestricted re-use on Wikipedia and elsewhere, for any purposes. It is unlikely that the copyright owner of such works would do so. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 51.198.140.169 (talk) 16:31, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

It is likely that her earliest paintings, exhibited more than 95 years ago, are in the public domain. If a careful copyright check confirms this, then images of those early paintings can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons and added to her biography. Cullen328 (talk) 18:58, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Nope - these are likely to be death + 70 years, & she died in 1959, so some years to wait. Johnbod (talk) 22:20, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

User:DefenderTienMinh07

User:DefenderTienMinh07 asserts that this is NSFW content:

Talk:Blackout gag

• search: "Tex Avery" "blackout gag"
• search: "Ernie Kovacs" "blackout gag"

....0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 15:49, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

So what? Even if it wasn't NSFW content, it still has to be reverted for its meaninglessness. ☀DefenderTienMinh⛤☯☽ (talk) 15:56, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Okay...I'm not sure why this is at the Teahouse, rather than at a dispute resolution forum. I don't see the point of 0mtw's post to the talk page, either, but nor do I see any particularly pressing need to revert it, either, or to label it as disruptive editing. I'd say it'd be best if y'all just leave it, and each other, alone. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 16:00, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

ok I'll ignore that. ☀DefenderTienMinh⛤☯☽ (talk) 16:11, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Why is social media not a reliable source?

Social media is not allowed as a source in articles. That includes comments too. But however, can you please explain why social media is not a reliable source? And can you please give me more information about this? Can you provide examples of why it is not very reliable? How though? 2600:1010:B193:5833:D57A:88E0:EF64:685A (talk) 16:29, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

It's very simple. Anybody can write more or less whatever they like on social media, which is jam full of scams, urban myths, fake news, and complete bullshit. Don't believe anything you read on social media. Shantavira|^{feed me} 16:39, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Examples of this? 2600:1010:B193:5833:D57A:88E0:EF64:685A (talk) 16:52, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Social media is a place where people, by definition, spew out whatever they want. We could try to create a list of social-media-propagated scams, urban myths, fake news, and complete bullshit, but it would be so big as to probably crash our servers. Edward-Woodrow :) _[talk] 18:44, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Maybe check out [1]https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/ for an ongoing list of social media fake information. Qcne (talk) 18:50, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi IP Editor, welcome to the Teahouse!

I could write a Facebook post proclaiming myself President of Antarctica, and then use that as a source for my new Wikipedia article Qcne, President of Antarctica. Hopefully you can see why that would not be appropriate for Wikipedia!

Anyone can write anything on social media and it's usually very hard to verify that the information is true. And usually anything posted by official (e.g. news organisations, government departments) accounts can be found directly on their website instead.

Have a read of Wikipedia:Reliable sources, specifically Wikipedia:User-generated content, which goes into a lot more detail. Qcne (talk) 16:51, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Why using multiple accounts to contribute to the same page or discussion is not allowed? Why multiple accounts can not be to look more than one person contributing to Wikipedia?

I read this part in Wikipedia sockpuppetry and it said: “Contributing to the same page or discussion with multiple accounts: Editors may not use more than one account to contribute to the same page or discussion in a way that suggests they are multiple people.”

Could you please explain why using multiple accounts to disguise as multiple people is forbidden. Why it is against the policy to use multiple accounts to contribute to the same page? How can using multiple accounts to contribute to same article suggest that there are multiple people? Is there a legitimate way of contributing that same page with multiple accounts? Why can not you use another account to pretend to be different person? How? And can you please give me examples about this reasoning? 174.236.224.237 (talk) 17:02, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi IP editor, welcome to the Teahouse!

Let's say you go to the Talk page of an article on Wikipedia, perhaps to suggest removing a part of someone's biography. Another Wikipedia volunteer responds and doesn't agree with your idea. In response, you create some extra accounts and use them to back up your initial suggestion. Now, it seems like lots of users are in favour of your idea! But in reality, it's just you and the other volunteer who disagreed with you. This is manipulation. Wikipedia relies on a system of agreement or consensus, so pretending to be multiple people to sway the conversation is not allowed.

Hope that explains it? Let me know if you have any further questions, Qcne (talk) 17:08, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

@Qcne Apologies if my IP changes, but can you give me more information on multiple accounts to look more than one person contributing to this article? 2600:1010:B193:5833:D57A:88E0:EF64:685A (talk) 17:17, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi again,

There's no rule against one person using multiple accounts to constructively edit articles (see Wikipedia:SOCKLEGIT).

The issue arises if you have multiple accounts and use those multiple accounts in a way to deceive other editors or make unconstructive edits. That is not permitted. This could include:

- using multiple accounts to evade blocks

- using multiple accounts to sway consensus in your favour

- using multiple accounts to make it purposely difficult for other editors to check your edit history, in order to conceal vandalism

Note that there's nothing wrong with stopping using an old account and starting afresh with a new account, plenty of editors have done this. It's called Wikipedia:Clean start.

Your best bet is to read the policy closely at Wikipedia:Sockpuppetry - it explains it well.

If there's anything you don't understand about the policy let us know. Qcne (talk) 17:26, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

@Qcne What does it mean if it says: “using multiple accounts to make it purposely difficult for other editors to check your edit history, in order to conceal vandalism”? 2600:1010:B193:5833:D57A:88E0:EF64:685A (talk) 17:56, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

All edits on Wikipedia can be seen by anyone. You can easily look at my, or any other user's, contributions.

Sometimes, a person might have two accounts. They use one account to make helpful edits, and another to vandalise Wikipedia. Other volunteers might not realise these two accounts are owned by the same person. This way, they can behave badly with one account while still making good edits with the other. Qcne (talk) 18:00, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

editing premisions

how do I know what level of classification I have for editing? Momgamer09 (talk) 18:17, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Enter your name in the box at Special:UserRights. Shantavira|^{feed me} 18:36, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Momgamer09. Please read Wikipedia:User access levels section 2.1.3. You are autoconfirmed. Cullen328 (talk) 18:43, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Lead section

Is one able to edit the Lead Section of an article w/o generating negative points for editing the whole page. See for example Vesna Goldsworthy . The Lead Section includes biographical information which should be amended. Even if a Biography section is added some information in the Lead Section is incorrect. Oldsilenus (talk) 18:41, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Oldsilenus. There is no such thing as "negative points". If you remove poor quality content for a valid reason, a negative number will appear in the edit history, shown in red, just as adding content shows up as green with a positive number. These are not "points". They are simply an indication of how many bytes were added or removed, and are in no way evidence of "good" or "bad" editing. Cullen328 (talk) 18:49, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Many ThanksOldsilenus (talk) 18:57, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

If you go to Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets, and scroll down to Appearance, you will find an option to add an Edit button to the lead section of each article, allowing you to edit the Lead on its own.. This button will appear next to the title of articles, where you may confuse it with the Edit button for the whole article, as I often do. It's useful, once you get used to it. -- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 21:38, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Clearing my Sandbox

my Sandbox contains an old version of an article that has been updated. I don't believe that I can clear it because contains an illustration used in the original article. Will one of the administrators in WP:Tea House clear it for me or should I just archive it? Oldsilenus (talk) 18:54, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Oldsilenus. You can clear your sandbox. All images used anywhere in Wikipedia are hosted separately (either on Commons or sometimes on Wikipedia itself), and removing a use of an image does not affect the image. ColinFine (talk) 19:09, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks WP:ColinFine . It worked properly. I may have been confused about another page removal situation.Oldsilenus (talk) 20:48, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Oldsilenus, a little note: to link to a userpage (which pings them), you input [[User:Example]], which will display as User:Example and ping them. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 08:50, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Naming conventions/redirects

Fairly newbie here. Created a page for Lillian V. Holdeman Moore. However, her given name (and in one obituary) is spelled Haldeman; she has published mostly as Holdeman Moore, so I titled the page Lillian V. Holdeman Moore. She also published under just L.V. Holdeman without the Moore surname and her dissertation is Haldeman. Should there be two redirect pages? I don't want to add to the clutter. Thanks!

PlantPoet (talk) 19:48, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

A redirect is certainly justified for every name she published under, or used herself in other contexts. (Two redirects is not clutter. You are unlikely to get to the amount of redirects to J. R. R. Tolkien!) -- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 21:30, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Should formal writing always be required in encyclopedic articles?

Hi there, I just wanted to know that are all formal words and vocabulary be added to articles. And is formal writing style required on Wikipedia? What about the word, “utilize”? Is it allowed? Thanks… 2600:1010:B193:5833:D57A:88E0:EF64:685A (talk) 21:21, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. You are going to want to read WP:IMPARTIAL and WP:TONE, which describes how content should be written as neutrally as possible and that it should read somewhat academic. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:23, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

The word "utilize" is perfectly cromulent to use in Wikipedia. The word "cromulent" is not as it is informal. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Words to watch. Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:43, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

How do I remove a template from a Biographical Page

I have a template stating that the page is too promotional. I have made the copy more neutral, removed links to websites owned by the subject and explained in the publishing comments. Yet the tag persists. Can anyone help? PR556667 (talk) 01:48, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

If you have made the article more enough neutral and removed the promotional links or other things , then the tag will be possibly removed soon, when any experienced editor visit the article. Happy editing and Thank you WikiAnchor10 (talk) 02:03, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

@PR556667 I see that you have worked out how to do this yourself at Tom Christopher. My main comment on the current version of the article is that it has a long list of his exhibitions that have presumably been copy/pasted from his own website. I think this should be cut down to those that actually have WP:INDEPENDENT coverage: and the website link used in citation #2 currently gives a "Page cannot be found" error! Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:37, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Regarding A Photo on News Website

I want to update the photo of article named Sunny Deol and I found a good and clear portrait on Aaj Tak News Site on this link

https://www.aajtak.in/amp/entertainment/bollywood-news/story/sunny-deol-gadar-2-seema-haider-anju-interview-seedhi-baat-show-sudhir-chaudhary-shares-acting-journey-tmovk-1751509-2023-08-05

Should I upload this photo of sunny deol on Wikipedia page because these images are non-copyright. WikiAnchor10 (talk) 02:00, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

WikiAnchor10, what is your reason for inferring that the images aren't copyright? -- Hoary (talk) 05:28, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

WikiAnchor10, every contemporary photo that you find online must be presumed to be restricted by copyright, unless you have solid, specific evidence to the contrary. Cullen328 (talk) 16:44, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

i think that there are many articles published daily on news website, did they have copyright of each and every photo thay upload on their site. WikiAnchor10 (talk) 17:54, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Yes, @WikiAnchor10, they very likely do. Please do not upload anything to Wikipedia on the assumption that it is compatibly licensed - you must have proof. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:26, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

You should screen shot the picture so any picture data that might offer hints about copyright status doesn’t show up. You can also make it less likely to be detected on a reverse image search by adjusting things like hue, contrast, aspect ratio, etc. Mrffcknt (talk) 02:22, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

No. The idea, Mrffcknt, is not to contravene copyright but to respect copyright. -- Hoary (talk) 08:10, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

A new invention should be in an encyclopedia as soon as possible?

Hi there,

I am new here and I face an issue with my first entry, that is a new object invented and not known very well of public, and was criticized because was considered "promotion or advertisement" a mere spam that is not the case. I would like to open a reflection about this in order to solve the difference of promote and inform. 2804:7F0:BC01:CE76:C17E:CD48:1EA7:8AD5 (talk) 02:14, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Roger Yokoyama, a new invention may be in this encyclopedia as soon as the conditions are right: there are substantive, reliable sources about it, it has been either written by disinterested editors or at least had its neutrality checked by disinterested editors, etc. Draft:Manuzela was about "an innovative fan item invented by Roger Yokoyama in Brazil". It certainly looked promotional to me. "The wide acceptance and success of the Manuzela led Yahoo Sports to declare that this innovative item is the future of fan items." Where was or is this declaration? We weren't told. The entire draft had but a single reference: to Facebook. -- Hoary (talk) 02:43, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks @Hoary for reply.

You are right, I did not perceived that point of view, for sure I was not imparcial when I tell the story about this invention. There is a similar product, older that has a page here,and I would like to know what exactly is expected to be a deserved information to be here.

Otherwise, I agree that the article has only one reference, I just did not know how to do that, but in the discussion I provided more references of notable newspaper, sports platform, patents, magazines that the object appear and was noticed, and was the official item of the most important sports event in the world, the Olympics.

I will find a neutral editor, or if you can help me will be amazing.

If thundersticks has a page why not Manuzela I guess. Thanks Roger Yokoyama (talk) 03:03, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

@Roger Yokohama: The criteria for inclusion is basically Wikipedia:Notability. Wikipedia isn't to be used for "exposure" or publicity or "getting the word out". A topic has to become notable on its own, by virtue of getting significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the topic. If no such sources can be found, then the topic cannot have an article here. Thundersticks has citations to multiple sources that are independent of the product or inventor. It isn't much, but it's enough to squeak by. ~Anachronist (talk) 03:13, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks @Anachronist for reply.

The notability wasn't the deletion cause, because I post more references in discussion that you can check with newspaper, magazines, international granted patents, video from an authority in the area, was the offical item of the most important event in the world.

But it is not my point, the notability, the point is what is the difference of promotion and information, that is my topic, and when and why it should or not be in an encyclopedia? Roger Yokoyama (talk) 03:34, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Dear @Hoary

Sorry I forgot to clarify the reference that you did not find, the declaration that "Is the future of sports Fandom" was in the video of Yahoo Sports that has in facebook only for now available, the original page of Yahoo exists but the video has some issue.

There is another page of Yahoo Sports with comments about that I will shared with the editor.

Thanks Roger Yokoyama (talk) 03:43, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Roger Yokoyama, the section header poses the question A new invention should be in an encyclopedia as soon as possible? The answer is a resounding "No!" For example, the United States Patent and Trademark Office has issued well over ten million patents. The vast majority of these inventions were commercial failures and were never discussed by reliable, independent sources and should not be mentioned at all in this encyclopedia. Wikipedia should have articles only about the much smaller subset of notable inventions that have received significant coverage in independent, reliable sources. Cullen328 (talk) 06:21, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks a lot @Cullen328 noted. 2804:7F0:BC01:E57A:1C64:1A4:95DA:D200 (talk) 07:45, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Roger Yokoyama, the last sentence: The Manuzela represents a milestone in the fan experience during sports events and demonstrates the potential of creative and functional ideas to captivate audiences worldwide. -- Hoary (talk) 05:24, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

@Hoary

I agree that the text is not neutral, noted, I will review and better, wait or ask for someone(editors) to know the story and be interested to tell to the world.

But my question isn't answered, an invention should or not be in an encyclopedia as soon as possible?

Inventions are made to the world, we have a short period of exclusivity respecting all patents laws worldwide. But essentially is a collective benefit, like a book, an encyclopedia or the Higgs Bóson.

I ask for you guys to tell me if we think the pertinence of a new object be available or not in the free and collaborative platform of information about everything in human society? Roger Yokoyama (talk) 05:48, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

@Roger Yokoyama: The answer to your question is, emphatically, No. There are no deadlines on Wikipedia. A new invention is not inherently notable merely because it exists. Therefore, it does not automatically merit an article here. Wikipedia publishes articles on notable topics only. An invention merits an article on Wikipedia only after it becomes notable. And it becomes notable, as Wikipedia defines "notable", by being written about in reliable sources that are independent of the invention or its inventor. ~Anachronist (talk) 06:00, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

I see @Anachronist

Thanks for clarify the process and policies.

I understand in the discussion that the problem of deletion was because the promotion and advertisement interpretation of the text that I agreed already, in this talk I understand that a invention per se is not automatically promoted to be in WP and I also agree.

In terms of notability I am taking more sources including in wayback machine to provide for review and consideration once solved the neutrality and promotion issue of the article maybe it can be accepted finally. Thanks again, of all community for the patience and consideration of a new wikipedian. 2804:7F0:BC01:E57A:1C64:1A4:95DA:D200 (talk) 07:38, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Roger Yokoyama Above, you wrote: "If thundersticks has a page why not Manuzela I guess." The Thundersticks article identifies the first use of this item as a sports event in 1994. The Wikipedia article was created in 2007. If you are willing to wait patiently for 13 years, Manuzela may become popular enough and written about to warrant an article. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia; it is not a "platform of information about everything in human society." David notMD (talk) 12:03, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Dear @[[User:David notMD|David notMD],

Manuzela has since invented 10 year of existence, proved and recognized, I think that I can wait more 3 years.

I heard the inventor of Wikipedia saying that WP is exactly that, a platform with all human knowledge, in his words 2804:7F0:BC01:E57A:181D:36B6:1CF1:2D20 (talk) 16:39, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Nevertheless, by policy set by its community of editors, there are many things that it does not cover. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:51, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks @Michael D. Turnbull

Finally the answer that I inquired for this community. I think how many thoughts and inventions that we loose, we have some kind of judgements about what is important or not to know, what is dump and weak enough to be ignored, and how we will filter and just dictate the policies and blindly agree and follow as a good person. Is it not looks like with some other place that it replicate, or we replicate them? The first result of google isn't the best one all the time, relevance is quite questionable, what is worth or not the same, I invite you to search for this 3 similar products(thunderstick, caxirola and manuzela) and decide which do you think that is more encyclopedic in terms of state of art and bring more benefits to users. It is just a reflection. 2804:7F0:BC01:E57A:181D:36B6:1CF1:2D20 (talk) 22:25, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

A potential subject's "state of art" and its potential to "bring more benefits to users" are not considerations that Wikipedia uses to decide on whether or not to have an article on that subject. The only qualifying criteria are – "Is there enough information already published about it, independently of it, in multiple and reliable sources?", which we summarize as "Is it Notable?" {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 51.198.140.169 (talk) 21:59, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Where to find an index for all WP instructions

New here. Got help and reminders from experienced members who directed me to WP: ____ pages to get further guidance. I found those WP pages have excellent instructions. I wonder if there is an index of all WPs that I can browse. Sorry for my limited understanding of the structure. Thank you. Path2space (talk) 02:23, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

@Path2space: There are hundreds of such pages. You could start with Wikipedia:List of policies and Wikipedia:List of guidelines. ~Anachronist (talk) 03:10, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

A question

Is it discouraged to ask Wikipedians on their talk pages for their links on other websites besides Wikipedia? I know Wikipedia isn't social media, but there are some Wikipedians that I would like to know better and maybe talk with outside of Wikipedia. ABeeperPerhaps (talk) 06:49, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

@ABeeperPerhaps: Go for it! In my opinion, that policy (Wikipedia is not a social networking site) is about actual discussions.

I think that asking for other users' socials to take persona; discussions off-wiki is actually in the spirit of that policy, since you're not having them on the wiki. QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 07:02, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

@ABeeperPerhaps You can contact most long-term editors by using email, so you don't even need to use their Talk Page. Just navigate to their Userpage and use the "Email this user" link. Beware that your own email address will be included as the reply-to address in the message they receive. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:22, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

@ABeeperPerhaps: You have to enable email at Special:Preferences before you can mail other users with email enabled. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:31, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! Also, @QuickQuokka: thank you for the introduction. I was almost going to ask on here if someone could put one on my talk page as a starting point. ABeeperPerhaps (talk) 19:46, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Questions about styling

An exmaple, King Charles III

This isn't specifically about Wikipedia, but Mediawiki is Mediawiki.

Can you clip an image? Like if I wanted a circular cutout of a picture, do I have to upload a new picture? QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 06:51, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Also, another styling question:

Why is the following so goddamn tall, and how can I make it shorter?

Err, I know Charles used to talk to trees, but I don't think he ever was one. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 51.198.140.169 (talk) 12:07, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Haha - that's brilliant. Dare I say Ace(r) LOL. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:38, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Source code

<div style="display: flex; color: white;"> <div style="padding: 0 15px; background:linear-gradient(#c9dae9 10%, #c5d7e6 50%, #8ba2b9 55%, #adc3dd 100%); border-radius: 0 0 0 10px;"> [[File:Small_uppercase_letter_X.svg|10px|link=]] </div> <div style="padding: 0 15px; background:linear-gradient(#c9dae9 10%, #c5d7e6 50%, #8ba2b9 55%, #adc3dd 100%);"> [[File:Small_uppercase_letter_X.svg|10px|link=]] </div> <div style="padding: 0 30px; background:linear-gradient(#ddaca8 10%, #c87d74 50%, #b94635 55%, #d2836e 100%); border-radius: 0 0 10px 0;"> [[File:Small_uppercase_letter_X.svg|10px|link=]] </div> </div>

hi @QuickQuokka:! to answer your second question, it seems that it's in part due to the line breaks in your code. unlike usual HTML, <div> does not really hide line breaks coming directly after it and considers it like any other line break in the code, so everything has to be in one line (or if you would have to add a line break, it has to be inside the <div> tag, not outside). the rest of the size seems to be because the image is 10px high (and there is whitespace in the image), and there seems to be no way around it unless you resize the image. here's the output and corresponding code:

new wikicode!

<div style="display: flex; color: white;"> <div style="padding: 0 15px; background:linear-gradient(#c9dae9 10%, #c5d7e6 50%, #8ba2b9 55%, #adc3dd 100%); border-radius: 0 0 0 10px;">[[File:Small_uppercase_letter_X.svg|10px|link=]]</div> <div style="padding: 0 15px; background:linear-gradient(#c9dae9 10%, #c5d7e6 50%, #8ba2b9 55%, #adc3dd 100%);">[[File:Small_uppercase_letter_X.svg|10px|link=]]</div> <div style="padding: 0 30px; background:linear-gradient(#ddaca8 10%, #c87d74 50%, #b94635 55%, #d2836e 100%); border-radius: 0 0 10px 0;">[[File:Small_uppercase_letter_X.svg|10px|link=]]</div> </div>

happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 08:45, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

@Melecie: Thanks a ton! This really helps! This is designed to look like the Windows Aero window buttons, I made this for Uncyclopedia, if you'd like to take a peek at that page. QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 08:59, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Q1: See {{CSS image crop}}, for rectangular crops. Note that this requires the original image to be downloaded every time, so not really suitable for picking out a small part of a big original - it's best to create a new cropped image, upload it to Commons, and reference that. Also, it can't do non-rectangular shapes. -- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 09:07, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Impossible d'ajouter la traduction française

Je ne suis pas en mesure d'ajouter la traduction française pour Jonathan Mark Kenoyer. J'étais capable de traduire un article français en anglais, mais pas l'inverse. Quelqu'un peut-il aider? MERCI Aishe2111 (talk) 16:03, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

@Aishe2111: Cette page est destinée à obtenir de l'aide sur Wikipédia en anglais. Si vous essayez d'ajouter une traduction à Wikipédia en français, vous devez demander à quelqu'un là-bas. (This page is for getting help with the English Wikipedia. If you are trying to add a translation to the French Wikipedia, you need to ask someone there.) ~Anachronist (talk) 16:37, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. I am unable to log in to FR wiki or may be it I am doing something wrong? Aishe2111 (talk) 09:19, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

From looking at your account, it appears you have not even accessed the French Wikipedia with your account- this account should work there. 331dot (talk) 09:23, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

The Crashaw Prize

Another editor correctly noted that Vesna Goldsworthy is a winner of the Crashaw Prize. There is no Wikipedia article on this prize, but it is defined in the Richard Crashaw entry (in the Legacy section). Would it be acceptable to create a redirect from Crashaw Prize to Richard Crashaw? The legacy section might be later expanded, or another article written about the prize. Oldsilenus (talk) 17:10, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Oldsilenus, yes, that seems appropriate. The redirect should go to the Legacy section. Cullen328 (talk) 18:10, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

As always thanks. Oldsilenus (talk) 20:53, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Broken links on philosophy pages

What's good with important philosophy pages having broken links? Just asking about who is responsible for patrolling pages like personal identity.

SpicyMemes123 (talk) 17:34, 7 August 2023 (UTC) SpicyMemes123 (talk) 17:34, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

You can go ahead and fix them. There's not really a specific group of people that are responsible about a page - we're all volunteers here. Other than that, WP:RCP works especially on reverting vandalism and edits that are wrong, but made in good faith. You can discuss edits to the page further in the article's talk page, if you would like to ask something from the people who regularly edit it. NotAGenious (talk) 17:49, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Personal identity

Hi SpicyMemes123, and welcome to the Teahouse. Do your broken links refer to the redlinks in the References section? An editor will need to manually edit each problematic reference and remove the wikilink to the non-existent author. ContributeToTheWiki (talk • contribs) 17:56, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Query from IP

Moved from #Broken links on philosophy pages casualdejekyll 23:09, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

So what can i do in an edit? 2607:FB91:447:20C2:FD59:FD62:2F8F:880B (talk) 23:03, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

hi ip user! you can do anything that helps the wiki out, but some things you can do are present over at Task center. I recommend starting with something simple like copyediting or adding categories. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 23:12, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

What’s correct path now?

I have entered 2 inquiries about some misinformation regarding J Honkonen; the 2^nd entitled DOD retry. Without going into exhaustive detail I’ll just say that “”DoubleGrazing”” has offered to help. I sent information on this person’s talk page. I’m more than willing to wait for a reply but if I didn’t “talk” correctly I’ll need some guidance?? eg do ""I"" need to create a talk page? Eldyr88PHy$N (talk) 04:14, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello @Eldyr88PHy$N, and welcome to the Teahouse! To answer your question, no you don't need to create a talk page for DoubleGrazing to reply. Your talk page request was fine and was entered correctly, so they probably just haven't seen it. Grumpylawnchair (talk) 04:32, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

P.S. I've made you a talk page with my talk-back notification. Grumpylawnchair (talk) 04:38, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, @Eldyr88PHy$N, got sidetracked onto other things.

I'm copying the below message here from my talk page, to keep the discussion in one place, and in the hope that others may contribute:

So… an online copy of his obituary is apparently unavailable. But I did locate the newspaper clipping my mother saved. I do not have the page or publication # but the date of the obit is January 4 1969, the day after he died. In addition I also have a copy of the death certificate; rendered by the city clerk of Gardner MA. (He expired in a hospital there following complications of an accidental fall). It also lists DOD as 1/3/1969. The DOD copy is dated 1/6/1969. Both of these list him as John J Honkonen. Sort of an Americanization of his Finnish name as he was more widely known as Jallu in his Finnish ‘circle’. If necessary (and with some direction) I could photo either of these and upload to you. (?) Eldyr88PHy$N (talk) 02:53, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

My take on this, FWIW, is that January does look like the correct DOD; the question now is, how to evidence that? If we knew the newspaper where the obit appeared, that could be cited as an offline source, even if we don't find a digitised copy online. Otherwise, would scanning the death cert and uploading that be acceptable? I realise it's not a published source, per se, but it would at least provide the necessary evidence. Of course, given that this edit would need to be made to the Finnish Wiki, the real question is would fi.wiki rules accept that as evidence. Views, anyone? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:15, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for responding. So… you’re not going to believe this; or maybe you will. I tried again and found the obituary via a newspaper archive. I’ve PDF’d a clipping which clearly shows the obit published on page 2 of the Fitchburg Sentinel, Saturday, January 4 1969. (is this information enough… and/or how do I send the PDF itself to your talk page? Eldyr88PHy$N (talk) 13:45, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you @Eldyr88PHy$N, based on that information I have managed to locate the obit via Newspapers.com, and it does indeed confirm the DOD as 3 January. On that basis, I have corrected the date on the Finnish Wikipedia. Glad we got to the bottom of this! :) -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:19, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you so much!

In other websites it’s still listed as May but as long as one( eg Wikipedia) is corrected that’s good enough for me. I guess now we’ll see if someone else (perhaps from Finland or Sweden) tries to change it back. Since this was my only project I don’t know if I’ll be back at the Teahouse although checking in to see what is being discussed might be fun. Anyway thanks again! Eldyr88PHy$N (talk) 14:54, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Well I’m back. It occurred to me to take another step. Would it be possible to actually create an English Wikipedia page with this information?  Other than the DOD date error the information on the Finnish Wiki seems to be correct. I did however want to include 2 additional tidbits. Mr Honkonen directed the New York Laulumiehet choir on Finland Day June 23 1940 at the (1939-1940) New York World’s Fair. (and) again he directed the aforementioned Laulumiehet choir during a benefit concert for Finland in honor of Sibelius’s 75^th birthday. Sibelius turned 75 in 1940. The concert itself was on Sunday May 18^th 1941 at “The Town Hall” 123 W 43^rd St NY,NY. (I have the actual program guides for both of these) Eldyr88PHy$N (talk) 16:04, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

@Eldyr88PHy$N: I thought about that, but unfortunately the Finnish (or Swedish) Wiki sources aren't enough to establish notability here on the English-language Wiki, and without that we cannot create an article. If you can find multiple secondary sources that are both reliable and independent of the subject, and provide significant coverage (not just passing mentions) of Honkonen, then it might be feasible. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:02, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi and thanks. I don't think I can provide enough sources to 'meet demands'. It was a thought I had to toss out there. Thanks for updating as you did. Eldyr88PHy$N (talk) 18:31, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

PS: I've made the same corrections to the Swedish Wiki. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:33, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

I spent 10 seconds asking how I missed the Swedish Wiki. Then decided not to worry anymore. Thanks for fixing that as well!! Eldyr88PHy$N (talk) 18:34, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

What is the mistake or error with our article ?? Could you explain clearly..We are production house , we are creating for our movie team members

What is the mistake or error with our article ?? Could you explain clearly. We are production house , we are creating for our movie team members Trimatis (talk) 05:08, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Thanuja Theethira is probably the draft article Trimatis is referring to. Karenthewriter (talk) 05:38, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi Trimatis. It's not clear which article you're asking about? Is it, by chance, Draft:Thanuja Theethira? As explained by InterstellarGamer12321, the AFC reveiwer who declined the draft, there's nothing to clearly indicate how the draft's subject staisfies Wikipedia:Notability (people). In other words, although the draft has lots of content, it's supported only by single citation so there's nothing to indicate that the actress its about has received the type of significant coverage in reliable sources to clearly demonstrate that she satisfies Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Unless you're able to demonstrate the actress is Wikipedia notable, it's going to be near impossible for any article created about her to be accepted regardless of who tries to create it.

Finally, it appears that you are editing on behalf of a company that represents the actress you're trying to create and article about. If that's the case, I strongly suggest you read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure before doing anything else. Conflict of interest editing is highly discourage by the Wikipedia community because it can and usually often does lead to some seroous problems. Undisclosed paid editing, however, is prohibitted by the Wikimedia Foundation's wmf:Terms of Use and can lead to an account being indefinitely blocked. In addition, accounts aren't allowed to be created for "company use" or otherwise "shared" among multiple individuals. If your account's username is intended to represent your production house, then that would be a violation of Wikipedia's username policy, and is another reason why it could end up being blocked. So, before worrying anymore about the article you're trying to create, I suggest that you first make sure your username complies with relevant Wikipedia policy and then make sure to properly declare any connection you might have with Thanuja Theethira. Once you've done those things, it will be easier for you to continue to work on your draft to try and bring it up to Wikipedia's standards. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:42, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

I removed peacock and puffery wording. Before any more work on the article, declare your PAID status on your User page. After that, provide references for all facts before submitting again. David notMD (talk) 10:16, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

If you are new to Wikipedia reading Help:Your first article and Help:Referencing for beginners will be useful. Every piece of information in an article needs to have a reference after it so readers can see where your data comes from. Many sources have user-generated content, which may not be accurate, so checking your references at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources is helpful. Remember that Wikipedia is not a social media site to be used for promotion. It is for well-referenced articles on notable subjects. If a draft article is rejected by a reviewer, and it is then resubmitted for review without correcting all the problems, there is very little chance of the article ever being accepted. Do not submit your draft article for a third time unless you understand all the problems, and have done what is needed to get the article up to Wikipedia standards. Karenthewriter (talk) 14:23, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Deleted page

Hi,

please advise how to retrieve the deleted page. I am a new user, I 'd like to get back the material from the deleted page, so that I can use it to learn my mistake and to make improvement. Pande Dewi (talk) 07:55, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

WP:REFUND might be able to help. NotAGenious (talk) 07:59, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi

Would it be possible to send me the material via my email? I do not have the back up of the sources in my page. Thank you Pande Dewi (talk) 19:29, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Pande Dewi. Speaking as an administrator, the deleted page was overtly promotional. Restoring it would get you started on the wrong foot again. My advice to you is to begin by gathering a list of indisputably reliable, independent sources that devote significant coverage to this person. Then, summarize what those sources say, studiously avoiding any trace of promotional language, as called for by the neutral point of view. Cullen328 (talk) 08:07, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello,

I understand my mistakes, the language used was promotional. I don't have the back up of the data in the deleted page, therefore I hope you could send the material via my email. Thank you Pande Dewi (talk) 19:37, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

When to publish an edit?

Hi! Just wondering what's the consensus on how often you should be publishing new edits when making changes to a page? For example, should it be every sentence? Or every bit of content made using one reference? Or every paragraph? I'm a bit confused, especially as edit counts seem so important but one edit could consist of any amount of content. (I've tried researching this but couldn't find an answer). Thanks! Madeleinehales (talk) 09:01, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Madeleinehales, welcome to the Teahouse!

It's really up to you. I swing from really tiny edits at a time (spotting spelling mistakes, etc) to 2000+ byte changes which could be whole sections. The only two issues to watch out for are if you try and hide vandalism by burying it in edits (I am sure you won't do this!); and the editor/browser/computer could crash, loosing all your work, so you may want to do editing in chunks so it publishes regularly. Qcne (talk) 09:09, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

I would add that if you are going to extensively edit an article and it will take some time to do- be it all at once or in a series of edits- you may want to consider adding {{inuse}} to the top of the article, to alert other editors that active work is being done on the article. 331dot (talk) 09:11, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

I'll also note that it may make sense to publish your edits after every major change just so that you can succinctly summarise it in the Edit Summary. It may be harder for other editors to work out what you've changed if you just have One Big Edit, whereas breaking it into logical steps with brief Edit Summarys makes it easier to track changes. Qcne (talk) 09:13, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi Madeleinehales firstly, edit counts are NOT important (other than giving you additional rights after 10 and 500 edits).
As for the question, I tend to edit by section, although if the page is being heavily edited, or your internet connection frequently drops out, you might edit in smaller sections, to avoid edit conflicts with other editors, or loosing your edit in an outage. The one thing I would avoid is making a lot of changes / additions in one large update, as, if another editor disagrees with part of it, they will often revert all of it. - Arjayay (talk) 09:16, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks @Qcne, @331dot, @Arjayay for providing some clarity! I will use all your advice moving forward :) Madeleinehales (talk) 09:23, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Madeleinehales Looking at your string of edits on LHCf experiment I consider that a good approach, especially as your Edit summaries indicate the place and nature of your edits. David notMD (talk) 10:19, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Adding >70,000 bytes in one edit. But I wouldn't recommend this approach for novices. -- Hoary (talk) 11:47, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

wikipedia visualization

Hello. I have been hunting for projects or websites related to wikipedia visualization, I am asking here in case anyone can recommend some or point me toward where I can find more of these projects?

resources I found so far:

https://seealso.org/ (curated visualization)

https://github.com/densitydesign/strumentalia-seealsology (very cool semantic area visualization of related wiki pages)

https://www.wikiverse.io/ (pretty but kind of useless)

thank you! 2001:FB1:EC:57DE:5959:DBE3:673D:E1E3 (talk) 13:22, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

IP editor. Thanks for the links. The first one is especially interesting. There are official Wikimedia statistics at this link (and linked from there) but none as visually striking. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:49, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

I am concerned that a user might be engaged in sockpuppetry

I am concerned that a user might be engaged in sockpuppetry. What is the proper course of action for me to raise this concern? Many thanks in advance! -- TheLonelyPather (talk) 14:04, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

I suggest you follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations. Shantavira|^{feed me} 14:10, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, Shantaviral! I have made a claim at WP:SPI. TheLonelyPather (talk) 14:26, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

references for a book series

Hello,

I am trying to submit a request for a Paige for a book series that has been around for about ten years now. But I am not sure how to find appropriate references for this book series. Like, I can find a bunch of sites that sell the books, and blog posts about it. But how does one find 'objective, notable, etc.' references for a book series. Draco1629 (talk) 16:20, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Draco1629! It's great that you are creating a page for something you find notable. I hope you'll believe me when I say I completely understand where you are; the first article I ever created was for a TV show called The Stanley Dynamic, and I struggled a lot with the reliable sources requirement. You can check out the sources on that article to see what I managed to find, and see if you can find similar sources. The Wikipedian who was assessing my article all those years ago referred me to a page they made, User:Joe_Decker/IsThisNotable, which gives an easy guide to understanding notability.

Here's one article I found online from the Idaho State Journal. I found it by searching an online document library called Proquest. You might have access to something similar through your library or school, if you are part of any. Otherwise, you can go through Google or other search engines, or explore the Wikipedia library (I haven't used it, but it seems great!). If you need more help, you can reply to this or ask me on my talk page. Good luck! Aamri2 (talk) 17:12, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

@Draco1629 I couldn't either (Draft:The McCracken Adventures), searching google-news only gives me Amazon. One reason for that may be that these books are self-published, and that often means less coverage. So the sad conclusion may be that atm you can't make an acceptable WP-article on this book-series. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:13, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello

I am Zeytoon from Afghanistan but I live in Italy, I am using shared IP in here and 1 year I was working on Wikipedia and made more than 100 articles and edited more than 1000 articles, but I don't know why I got a sock puppetry alert and all of contributions deleted because if cross-wiki spam.

I am native Persian and I speak, Pashto, English, Arabic, Spanish, Italian and French.

I have made this account about 1 or two months ago, but I have not changed my IP.

How is it possible to work on Wikipedia and recreate the last subjects I have been created and work on better Wikipedia about personalities, Poets, Singer,... which are eligible for Wikipedia.

Thanks for your precious time for reading this and I am waiting for the answer. Grapexels79 (talk) 16:33, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Zeytoon, and welcome to the Teahouse. Once you have created an are using your account, your IP address becomes invisible to almost all other editors. This account has edited only in en-wiki and in Wikidata, and I don't see any sock-puppet notifications on either.

To know how to create an article in English Wikipedia, please start by reading your first article. ColinFine (talk) 17:32, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

@Grapexels79 and ColinFine: And for those few who CAN view your IP, they won't unless you're very suspicious. QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 18:31, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your response, I am familiar with Wikipedia, Even I have a course about Wikipedia in Udemy. Grapexels79 (talk) 18:31, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

@Grapexels79 I see no evidence of the account you are currently using ever having edited other language Wikipedias. In fact it has made very few edits. So, re-reading your question, it appreciate that you're saying all you editing was done whilst not logged in; i.e. as an IP user.

If you can tell us the titles of a few articles you created on English Wikipedia, I, or other administrators here can look to see the reason for their deletion. If, for example, you edited as an IP user, then it's possible that someone before you was allocated that IP address and used it to edit Wikipedia. If they were then blocked, it's possible that those edits you legitimately made from the same IP address after it had been re-allocated to you might have looked like WP:SOCKPUPPETRY, or a check user linked to Ip address to the same person. In that instance, all articles and many edits created by a sock puppet account are liable to be deleted.

You might not wish to publicly tell us what your your IP address was, but I'm not sure there is much more explanation we can offer unless you feed us something to work from, such as deleted article titles with unambiguous spellings that we can search for. I hope this helps, and I can understand your frustration.

(If you are wary of making public your IP address, you can, if you wish, email me directly and let me know your IP address, and I will take a look at its contributions. I would not reply by email, but would do so on your user talkpage.) Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 21:17, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

How do I change a pages title?

This page:List of homeschooling programmes has programs misspelled. How do I change it's title?

Classical-music97 (talk) 16:49, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello @Classical-music97 and welcome to the Teahouse! The article uses British English and, as far as I can see, uses the correct British spelling. (I use American English, so I may be wrong. Please correct me if that is the case.) List of homeschooling programs (using American English) redirects to the article. WP:TITLEVAR and MOS:ENGVAR may be helpful resources. Cheers,  綾かなあ?  (talk) 17:12, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

it's "its", not "it's" cogsan • (give me attention) • (see my deeds) 17:38, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Homeschooling isn't as prevalent in the UK as it is in US (UK figures are a bit vague) so it might be that a change for 'programmes' to 'programs' is due? Knitsey (talk) 17:48, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

That's not how it works. See WP:TITLEVAR. Shantavira|^{feed me} 18:37, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

What wikipedia policy to reference to justify sticking to important word choice in the references?

Hi,

I'd like to make a protected edit request arguing that a certain wording choice in an article deviates in meaning from what is supported by the references, and that this should be fixed by rephrasing that wording to stick to the references' word choice.

What is the wikipedia policy I should reference when making this sort of argument? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citing_sources is quite long, I wasn't sure what phrase to use to search for this particular policy.

Many thanks in advance! eyal (talk) 18:15, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

@Eyal3400: I don't know if there is such a policy. Wikipedia editors should be writing the articles in their own words, paraphrasing what the source says. RudolfRed (talk) 18:31, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

In my view, Eyal3400, the applicable policy is Wikipedia:Verifiability. You should propose specific alternate wording that you believe more accurately summarizes the source. Cullen328 (talk) 18:34, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! Will do. eyal (talk) 20:03, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

The problem I have with the current wording is that I believe that it is too heavy handed/general, and means things which none of the references imply. eyal (talk) 20:04, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

@Eyal3400 That is an error that can easily occur, especially when one is either being hasty or trying to reword and avoid using the existing phraseology, or maybe not having the greatest command of English, or maybe just the subtle nuance of that particular choice of words. Cullen328 is quite right to suggest making an WP:EDITREQUEST which explains your concerns and offers a better alternative form of wording along with your reasoning.

If you're still struggling, consider that it might possibly be appropriate to use the original phrasing from the source within a quotation. For example: 'The Times newspaper reported the incident in 2020, describing it as "sheer bloody mayhem".[ref]. Not sure if this will help much, but 'good luck'! Nick Moyes (talk) 20:39, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

A question about rollback bot edits

Why do administrators and global rollbackers have the technical ability to mark rolled back edits as bot edits, but not every rollbacker on the English Wikipedia? Thanks. signed, 64andtim (chat) 18:38, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Is this a worthy source?

Hello, I am working on making a new page for The APT foundation in New Haven Connecticut. My first draft did not include proper sources. I found an audit of the organization that includes descriptions of their practices.

https://portal.ct.gov/-/media/DOC/Pdf/PREA/2021_2022AuditsHalfway/2022-APT-Foundation-New-Haven-Substance-Abuse-Facility-PREA-Audit-Final-Report.pdf

Does this source meet wikipedia's guidelines? Ksundy414 (talk) 19:48, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Ksundy414. That is a standardized government document, and is therefore a primary source. It appears likely that every similar facility in that state has a similar report. Accordingly, it is routine. Although primary sources can have limited usage, notibility is established through secondary sources, specifically, significant coverage in reliable sources that are entirely independent of the topic. What makes this particular treatment center different from other treatment centers? Wikipedia is not a directory of every treatment center on Earth, only the notable ones. Cullen328 (talk) 20:02, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Citing through an online newspaper paywall

Can I cite content behind a paywall of a notable newspaper source that I can see in detail because I am a subscriber? (Non-subscribers can see the article headline only). It makes it difficult to verify the content, but no different to content I cite in a book I own giving the page number, publisher etc. This can't be verified unless you "subscribe" to the book by owning it or borrowing it from a library you subscribe to. Walton22 (talk) 20:08, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. A paywall is not a barrier to using a source on Wikipedia, see WP:PAYWALL. There is no requirement that a source be easy to access or free to access. A book in a library can be cited even if someone has to travel to the library to review it; a book in a foreign language can be cited too. 331dot (talk) 20:12, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Walton22 Welcome to the Teahouse. The simple answer is ABSOLUTELY, YES! We require factual statements to be referenced to sources that allow verification. We do not stipulate that they have to be in English, or available for free. Anyone with access to a library, bookshop should be able to find that published source from the other side of the world - but they might have to pay to do so. Nick Moyes (talk) 20:13, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for the quick answers. Much appreciated. Walton22 (talk) 20:33, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

I do not see a "Thank" link on article history pages - why?

Screenshot of 2023 FIFA Women's World Cup history page

This must be something I'm doing (or not doing) because the ability to thank other editors is alive and well. But I cannot see a "Thank" link for edits made by other registered users on an article's page history. Why might that be?

For clarity, I understand that to receive notification that another editor thanked me, I must have such a notification enabled in on my preferences page, which I do, but I'm talking about my being able to thank another Wikipedian. Thanks! Mark D Worthen PsyD (talk) [he/him] 20:28, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

@Markworthen That's a curious issue. I've currently got two accounts running (my admin account, plus a 'new user' account I have specifically for for making screenshots for training purposes). I've looked at the revision history of 2023 FIFA Women's World Cup in both of them, and the 'thank' link is visible against every entry on each account. I'm not aware that it can be turned off by a user, so I'm wondering if you've only just started experiencing this whilst logged on today. Or has it been ongoing for a while? If the former, maybe try logging off and logging on again in case something didn't quite load up for this particular session. Failing that, this might be a question best left to the real experts over at WP:VPT. NM Demo 2 (talk) 20:58, 8 August 2023 (UTC) (oops, now re-signing this from the correct account!) Nick Moyes (talk) 21:01, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Creating an article in Japanese

Hello, I just created an article in English but I'd like to make it so Japanese audiences can find them. How do we go about creating articles in different languages?