Wikipedia:Teahouse

Bonadea, 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

is there software to auto-format wiki-references?

I see, that some editors are able to qucikly create cited references in a complex formate like . I wonder, if they use software, which allows for such automativ formtating. Walter Tau (talk) 16:03, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teashouse, Walter Tau! You can use RefToolbar for making advanced citations like this one. Davest3r08 (talk) 11:41, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for all your suggestions. Unfortunately, all of them would be steps back for me: since I have an EndNote license, and since all my databases are stored on the EndNote platform, if makes sense for me to use EndNote to automatically generate citations in the wiki format. I am sure there are other wikipedians, who are paying for EndNote, and would love to take advantage of it while wiki-working. This brings us to the next question: is there someone, who actually works for Wikipedia Foundation, and who can make such formal request for a new Output Style to Clarivate= the current owner of EndNote.

The request can be placed here:

In order to request a new Output Style,the Journal Editor or Librarian would require to fill up a form and submit them directly.

They can use this form to request and include a new Output Style : https://clarivate.libwizard.com/f/EndNote-Output-Style-Request-Form .

The content team will then review and process them.

You can also refer to our Knowledge base Article to check here:https://support.clarivate.com/Endnote/s/article/EndNote-Style-Filter-Connection-or-Word-Template-Requests?language=en_US for further details. Walter Tau (talk) 16:16, 22 September 2023 (UTC) Walter Tau (talk) 16:18, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Walter Tau

Use what suits you best then. Good luck editing Wikipedia! Davest3r08 (talk) 22:31, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

References

• @Walter Tau : There are many Citation tools that can help with this. Personally, I use ProveIt for most of my citations. It isn't perfect, but a lot faster than inputting everything manually. —Kusma (talk) 16:08, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

thank you very much for your reply. I suspected, that something like Citation tools existed, but I did not know, what they were called. I shall look the links you provided. Let's make wiki better together :) Walter Tau (talk) 16:14, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

@Walter Tau: I make heavy use of toolbars to input references using the DOI or URL. But for books I use a google books link, and I would have to manually add the page number. Then later I run citation bot to fix dates and fill some other identifiers. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:00, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Like @Graeme Bartlett, I have also found the toolbar to be sufficient for creating citations. — Mugtheboss (talk) 16:37, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your responses. I my real life outside wiki, I use EndNote to format references in documents. Unfortunately, Clarivate would not accept my request to make an EndNote reference style for wikipedia. However, if Wikipedia Foundation makes such a request (there is no fees involved), Clarivate would honor such request. How do I get Wiki to make such request?

Hello, Walter Tau. and welcome to the Teahouse. I don't know if there is any way to do this, but the place to discuss it is at the village pump - not sure which section of it would be most appropriate. --ColinFine (talk) 17:18, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

I have also found that ChatGPT can convert a reference in text form to a templated wikitext form. However I do not know how reliable it is at that job as I have only done it a few times. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:35, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

Walter Tau I am not sure if reFill is similar to what you are looking for, but I often use it myself to rapidly construct structured references from bare URLs. Hopefully it is of some use to you as well. ~Liance^talk 07:45, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Help for improving article

Draft:Shine Shetty for this article. How can I add good and reliable resources? Arumobileworld (talk) 11:16, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Pinging the declining reviewer, Jamiebuba. Edward-Woodrow :) _[talk] 11:41, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

I'm not the reviewer, but I'll have a go at giving advice. In order for there to be a Wikipedia page about an actor, they need to have passed the WP:NACTOR criteria. However most of your sources are The Times of India, which is generally regarded as an unreliable source for entertainment news articles, see WP:TOI. I would want to see significant coverage of Shine Shetty in reliable, independent (not interviews or press releases) sources. Qcne (talk) 12:16, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

After having a look, 1. I determined that the subject has only played minor roles in most of the movies he has been on. Apart from him winning the Bigg Boss Kannada season 7 there sourcing for the article is poor. He maybe notable but again the sourcing is a problem.

2. The sources used are generally unreliable as cited by another editor above. Jamiebuba (talk) 14:59, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

its ok 181.177.218.120 (talk) 21:03, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Richardo Keens-Douglas

Hello - I would like to submit an article about children's author/playwright Richardo Keens-Douglas. Would you consider him notable enough for Wikipedia? 74.117.87.160 (talk) 00:46, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

I recommend you read WP:NOTABILITY. --Stewpot (TᴳRᴴAᴼIˢNᵀ)-(Cₛ) 00:51, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, IP editor, and welcome to the Teahouse. To clarify Stewpot's answer: I don't think they are suggesting that Keens-Douglas is or isn't notable, rather than it's your job as the person who wants to write the article to determine whether they meet the criteria.

If you read the policy, and think you've found suitable sources, but you're not sure, then I suggest you come back here with your three best sources, and somebody will probably be willing to look at them and tell you if they think they're enough. (Remember that notability, in Wikipedia's sense, is all about sources, not about what the subject is or has done). ColinFine (talk) 08:56, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the time to break it down for me. Much appreciated. 74.117.87.160 (talk) 23:40, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello IP user. I recommend you read WP:SIGCOV and WP:N. From a single Google search, there seems to be 9 results for media coverage, and they seem to be from mostly unreliable sources, thus making coverage of this person ineligible for a WP article. Davest3r08 (talk) 16:51, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you so much! 74.117.87.160 (talk) 23:40, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

No problem. Davest3r08 (talk) 10:58, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

'Semantic Web Tags' and 'Wiki Markup' should I use a combination, or Wiki Markup exclusively?

September 19, 2023

To: Wiki Community TeaHouse: Question about 'Semantic Web Tags' and 'Wiki Markup'

Re: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Th74/sandbox&redirect=no

Titled: Draft: List of Greek New Testament Print Editions (16th century)

I'm in the process of making a Wiki Page and I'm not quite sure how to handle 'Semantic Web Tags' and 'Wiki Mark Up'. I'm making a Bibliographic Index which is, basically, Bibliographic Citation Data, broken up into its components with each part of the citation in individual table cells so a person can search by any component. There is one citation per row. An example would be that a person can search by date, or by publisher etc.

I read that WikiData's web-bots crawl all the content of Wikipedia each night to extract usable data, especially links.

To cooperate with this goal, I took the trouble to add 'Semantic Web Tags' to all the citation components. After this was completed, I discovered that Wikipedia uses an entirely different method: 'Wiki Mark Up'.

My question is: Should I strip out all my Semantic Web Tags, and go with Wiki Markup exclusively, or should I leave the Semantic Web Tags in and use an alternate tag for the prohibited <a> tag?

Additional Facts:

I noticed that in the 'Edit Source' mode, the Wiki Markup, ignores the Semantic Web Tags, except for a few prohibited ones, such as the <a> tag but I could use an alternate tag for <a>.

Here is an example of my 'Editor' Cell with Semantic Web Tags [Oops!, when I copy and pasted it into this box, all my Semantic Web Tags are gone. Click on the 'Source' tab above to see them.]:

de Cisneros, Francisco Jiménez

(1436-1517)

|Wiki-ID

|OCLC-ID

And here is the Wikipedia 'Edit Source' cell content [Oops!, when I copy and pasted it into this box, all my Semantic Web Tags are gone. Click on the 'Source' tab above to see them.]:

|-

| <span property="foaf:person" resource="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francisco_Jim%C3%A9nez_de_Cisneros"><span property="foaf:family_name"><span property="foaf:givenname"><span property="schema:additionalName"><span property="gndo:dateOfBirth"><span property="gndo:dateOfDeath"><span property="schema:editor" resource="https://id.oclc.org/worldcat/entity/E39PBJvHhjFHYjM3PTRHJ6jpyd/">de Cisneros, Francisco Jiménez</span></span></span></span></span></span></span>

(1436-1517)
 [http://Francisco_Jim%C3%A9nez_de_Cisneros Wiki-ID]

 [https://id.oclc.org/worldcat/entity/E39PBJvHhjFHYjM3PTRHJ6jpyd/ OCLC]

And here is the same cell with all the 'Semantic Web Tags' removed:

|-
 | de Cisneros,  Francisco Jiménez (1436-1517)

 [http://Francisco_Jim%C3%A9nez_de_Cisneros Wiki-ID]

 [https://id.oclc.org/worldcat/entity/E39PBJvHhjFHYjM3PTRHJ6jpyd/ OCLC]

As you can see, a lot of detailed information is lost when I remove the Semantic Web Tags. I was thinking that if I can use a combination of Semantic Web Tags and Wiki Markup, then the WikiData bots will be able to harvest a lot more information.

Any advice and guidance you could provide would be appreciated.

sincerely Robert Crawford user: Th74

19 Sept. 2023 Th74 (talk) 02:45, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

 Note: wrapped code onto {{pre}} and nowiki 💜  melecie  talk - 03:12, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Melecie: I haven't read all that. In a Wikipedia article, you should never use <a href="...">. If the link is to another Wikipedia article, you should use a "wikilink", with double square brackets. If it's to a published source elsewhere, you should instead cite the source, see Help:Referencing for beginners.   Maproom (talk) 07:59, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Maproom, Melecie edited the OP's post; they're aren't the OP. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 08:57, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Th74, Basically, you should strip them all out and use wiki markup. For a more nuanced description, please see Help:Wikitext, especially section Help:Wikitext#HTML. Mathglot (talk) 04:18, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Neutral language for decolonization?

It's a sensitive subject.

On some pages I see a colony being "granted" independence. On other pages I see a colony "achieving" independence. Two points of view that subtly shift the focus of agency as being more with the colonial power, or more with the objectives of colonial inhabitants. There is another POV that external pressures play a part in decolonization, which neither "grant" not "achieve" quite cover.

There are a number of causal factors which have been said to have played a part in the process of decolonization:

- changes in British political attitude to empire, leaning more to the granted view

- rise of colonial nationalism, the achieving or demanding view

- state of the British economy after 1945, the external pressure, unable to maintain empire view

- by-product of the rise of American and Soviet powers, another external pressure

My personal opinion is that "grant" can seem a bit patronizing, but as the usage of "grant" is so widespread there's consensus for its use.

Would it be more neutral to be generally describing colonies as "becoming" independent?

If there is evidence/analysis in a particular case that one (or some) of the causal factors was (were) more important for a particular country, then use more specific language.

Or do I think too much about the subtleties of language?

I have also been trying a thought experiment, taking a statement from one page and imagining it being placed on another page, and thinking about how its neutrality might be received. It is also interesting to look at the same article in different languages. Is this the right way to be thinking about neutrality, or is neutrality context sensitive? Corsac Fox Kazakhstan (talk) 16:47, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

@Corsac Fox Kazakhstan One factor to consider is the wording used in the sources for a given article. In general, Wikipedia uses the same language as its sources, which of course may themselves not be neutral. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:07, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

@Corsac Fox Kazakhstan: I somewhat disagree with Michael D. Turnbull above. A reliable source that uses biased language is not a license for us to do the same. We can do better. There are plenty of biased sources that are nevertheless considered reliable by the community (Mother Jones magazine comes to mind). We cite the facts they report, not their bias.

As for wording, "became independent" or perhaps "gained independence" would be more neutral than "granted" or "achieved" independence, but if it's historically more correct to say "achieved" (say, a country actually did achieve independence through a bloody war) then we should use the historically accurate term. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:26, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Mike, Anachronist thank you.

"gained independence" is a good alternative.

So in summary

• use the exact same wording as the source if it's unbiased (like substitution of a formula in mathematics)
• but take only facts from sources that mix fact & biased interpretation or point of view.

In the simple case where the exact same wording as the source seems OK to me, I've seen unnecessary translations into different wording. It irks when the meaning changes slightly. Perhaps there's a concern that wording has to change because of copyright (shouldn't be a problem for a few words/phrases). Or perhaps it's a habit instilled by teachers asking students to put things into their own words (and so display understanding/engagement with the material beyond copy-and-paste).

The substitution of a formula idea is what I have been doing with my thought experiments about whether statements judged to be neutral on one page would be judged to be neutral on another page. Corsac Fox Kazakhstan (talk) 12:55, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Right, if a reliable source uses biased wording, neutralize it. If you are using the same neutral terminology as the source, be careful you aren't plagiarizing whole sentences. ~Anachronist (talk) 14:02, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

If the source is being credited then is it plagiarism? Thinking about the care I should be exercising when using a source's exact words has given me a new appreciation of multiple sourcing as a guard against using one author's words, which might run the risk of infringing copyright. It's also nicely aligned with protection against a single source's bias.

I've quoted long passages from sources on a talk page (now archived) to make a point about none of them supporting something the article was saying. I had not thought about the copyright implications. Should I do something about that? I see these references British_Raj#References have extensive quotations from sources. Corsac Fox Kazakhstan (talk) 12:23, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Article deleted. Had only 13 percent on copy check

hi, article deleted? Eleven table tennis? Why? Acetylcholine (talk) 21:42, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

@Acetylcholine What? This one: Eleven Table Tennis? Could you explain your concerns a little more clearly, please? Nick Moyes (talk) 22:00, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

It is showing, but for some reason the links to this article in my talk page showing as RED, which means deleted.

I was surprised, I put a lot of effort to collect almost everything on Google to compile the information.

I have seen few more articles about VR games and they are less than half of it and still no one touched them. I hope that this eleven table tennis article does not meet any criteria for deletion.

I am not related to this game in any way. I am a Pediatric Surgeon by professsion. I just love this game.

This game can make our children more thin and active, instead of playing on the couch, this game is to be played like a real table tennis game and yet it can be played at home and in a limited space and it's a great fitness and entertainment duo for our next generation. Acetylcholine (talk) 22:12, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Acetylcholine. The link on your talk page is to the non-existent Draft:Eleven Table Tennis: you moved it to Eleven Table Tennis.

I have tagged it for tone and peacock language, but I haven't investigated to see whether or not it meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability.

Note that the existence of other articles is irrelevant: see other stuff exists. Also, the virtues of the game are of zero relevance to Wikipedia, unless they have been written about by an independent reliable source. ColinFine (talk) 22:23, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

@Acetylcholine: You should have waited for an experienced editor to review your draft rather than move it to main space yourself before it was ready. ~Anachronist (talk) 01:23, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

yes, that I admit was not a good thing, "in-experience". I uploaded the logo and the file would not upload unless I give associated article and the upload system would not accept draft version. So I moved it to article with the intention of reversing it to draft after the logo would upload. After upload I tried to revert it to draft status but I failed to do so because I guess my privilege was restricted and I could not do it.... Acetylcholine (talk) 01:44, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

hi @Acetylcholine! generally the guideline is that non-free images are to be used exclusively in fully published articles where they are relevant (not drafts of any kind, and nowhere else in the wiki). so if you want to bring it back to a draft, you have to remove the image until the draft is properly approved. don't worry, the lack of an image won't make it any less likely for the draft to be approved. see the non-free content policy| for more on this. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 02:01, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

@Acetylcholine I've done an initial copy edit of your article, but I'd really recommend you explore a bit more to understand encyclopedic standards and tone before creating another article from scratch- phrasing like "you do this and then you can do that" is not appropriate here, that's more of a blog or manual style of writing. In addition about half of the sentences were fragments rather than sentences, and none of the proper nouns (company names etc) were capitalized. From the discussion above, I understand you didn't mean to move it out of draft right away, so no worries on this stuff- just trying to identify some of the bigger "themes" in the article's style that would've caused problems upon review, and which you'll want to avoid in future articles.

I left the final section "Reception" unedited, because it seems as though you were directly quoting reviews without actually using quotes. If you're borrowing the direct phrasing from a source, you need to put it into "quotes like this" to make that clear. When you get a chance, please check in that section to see where you've pulled direct language from the sources, and use quotes accordingly. If you'd like me to review that section once you're sure there's no copyright violation, I'm happy to do so! Or, if you want more time to work on it, you can have one of these more experienced editors help you move it back into "draft" status. Chiselinccc (talk) 13:06, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

thanks, i only used a direct sentence from gamesradar and i have placed it in quotes, rest of the reception is my own words. Acetylcholine (talk) 13:59, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi again @Acetylcholine, I think you still have some work to do on understanding what is appropriate to include in Wikipedia articles. I just had to revert your addition of the poorly written text blurb I had already edited for you, which you included in its previous form in the Virtual reality article. It was not only poorly written for an encyclopedia, but you were also taking the language "motivate kids off the couch" VERBATIM from the article, and now I'm starting to suspect that you are the owner of the website you keep linking with that review or something. Pasting that in more than one place looks a lot like link spam: are you affiliated with the site in question? Please pay attention to the quality of the writing you are inserting into the encyclopedia, because the content I just reverted is wildly inappropriate for inclusion. Chiselinccc (talk) 14:10, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Oh! No no. I am an advocate of this new technology. I am a Pediatric Surgeon by professsion. There are journal articles which are based on scientific research which has studied the topic of VR and it's effect on children from obesity and exercise perspective. These journal articles are too complex to link to, so I just googled an easy article and l linked to it.

My intention of writing this VR table tennis wiki is that anyone who is interested can have a general idea of what this is and can have good references to go and read. And people can explore more of it. The main website is too small. The faqs for the site exist but in a completely different place, the bug reporting is present built-in the game and also available in the discord server.

I have a question:

One of discord memebr/player of this game sent me a FAQ for this game:

How to use this in the wiki page?

https://11clubhouse.com/eleven-faq.html Acetylcholine (talk) 15:29, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

i have added a talk page discussion to VR article. I have referenced multiple manuscripts, Please have a look and i suggest that the information should be part of main VR article.

Talk:Virtual reality#new heading in the main section suggested based on new studies: "Benefits for Health and Education" Acetylcholine (talk) 14:07, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Figure tags.

I need to revise the tag of a photograph I submitted to Wikimedia Commons. I need to change the tag to one that records a file (photo of a pre-1923 document) for which I acquired permission to use from the owner. I also learned that the photo has no copyright involved. Which tag is this? Many thanks.Tfhentz (talk) 22:25, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Tfhentz. A document first published before 1923 is in the public domain, as are all things published over 95 years ago. Not knowing the details of whether the document was actually published or just stored for 100 plus years, I suggest that you ask at the Commons Help Desk, providing more details. Cullen328 (talk) 22:36, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Thanks for your kind response. The document is a 1776-dated officer commission for a Revolutionary War soldier that has been in an archive for 100+ years. The archive has just given me permission to use it "as you wish." There are no copyrights involved, and it has never been published. Any ideas on which tag to use? (I just can't find the list of the various tags that I once saw; otherwise I wouldn't bother you.) Thanks! Tfhentz (talk) 22:50, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

@Tfhentz: I think you are looking for c:Template:PD-US-unpublished but asking at c:Commons:Help_desk may be better. RudolfRed (talk) 23:20, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Indeed, the work was created before 1903, so {{PD-US-unpublished}} applies. I am assuming it is a faithful reproduction of the document with no creativity involved, in which case the WMF’s position is that the reproduction process creates no copyright on its own. (I could not find the link to the legal guideline that says it, but it is for instance in the text of {{PD-art}}.) Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 14:48, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi and what do I do next if my edits are reverted?

Hi everyone! I was excited to work on an entry, adding what I thought was significant, useful information, but the work I did reverted. There are a couple possible reasons, but...now what? I don't want to spend a lot of time trying to approach this in different ways, guessing about how I can improve enough to be kept live. Is there a person I can talk to who is reverting the stuff, so I can know how to change it so that it will be included? Thanks! Beverly East (talk) 01:11, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

@Beverly East:. Read Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. Basically, go to the article talk page and start a discussion there to support what you want to add. ~Anachronist (talk) 01:15, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

@Beverly East: You don't seem to be aware that Wikipedia isn't a web directory or collection of links. It's an encyclopedia. All you added was a big list of external links. A web directory has no encyclopedic value. That's why your contribution was removed. ~Anachronist (talk) 01:18, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. I've seen many lists of TV episodes, lists of films, albums, etc. on wikipedia. I thought this would constitute that sort of list. If I have some other way to add with narrative, I'll try to do that in the future. Beverly East (talk) 23:07, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi Beverly East. For future reference, you can check a page's history to see a record of all the edits made to the page. In many cases, users leave edit summaries explaining why they made their edits, and these edit summaries often contain blue links to relevant Wikipedia policy or guideline pages that further explain what the problem was. In this case, the edit was reverted for not being in accordance with WP:NOTDIRECTORY as explained above by Anachronist. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:33, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. There is an existing bulleted list on that page, and I'm guessing that the reason that list is allowed is because each bullet has a sentence or two and not just a link. I've now read WP:NOTDIRECTORY and the definitions of the many kinds of lists that are allowed. Thank you to you both for helping me understand. Beverly East (talk) 23:13, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Beverly East, another factor is that external links do not belong in the body of an article. References belong there instead. Cullen328 (talk) 23:17, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Got it. Thank you! Beverly East (talk) 00:12, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Participants addition page on WikiProject

Hi, I hope you are doing well. I need help adding code to a page on a WikiProject I manage. In simple terms, I want to add a 'Participants self-adding entry box' to Wikipedia:WikiProject Chenab Valley/Members, similar to what many other drives and projects have, as shown in this example. ❯❯❯ Chunky aka Al Kashmiri (✍️) 02:40, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

@TheChunky; Hi, check WP:MMS#Requesting a mailing. --RotciW (TᴳRᴴAᴼIˢNᵀ)-(Cₛ) 03:07, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

@RotciW Thanks for responding, but my request is not about mailing or mass messages! I am talking about the addition of entry box for users who wish to participate in this WikiProject. ❯❯❯ Chunky aka Al Kashmiri (✍️) 03:25, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Opps! Misread it. Sorry! --RotciW (TᴳRᴴAᴼIˢNᵀ)-(Cₛ) 03:28, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Made some changes to the userbox, apparently works. Sorry for the inconveniences! --RotciW (TᴳRᴴAᴼIˢNᵀ)-(Cₛ) 04:06, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

No issues, Thanks for that. Waiting for response from an expert for my request above. ❯❯❯ Chunky aka Al Kashmiri (✍️) 04:39, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

hi @TheChunky! I believe that the above page Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Backlog drives/October 2023/Participants is generated specifically as a mailing list (which the mass mailer bot can easily scan to send mail to everyone) and can't really be made by anyone except those who have the right to make mailing lists (see Help:Extension:MassMessage for more about this). in my opinion I don't think a fancy self-adding entry box is really needed, a simple list of members like most other wikiprojects (such as ones for Computer science, Hong Kong, or the Typo Team) would probably suffice just as well. happy editing 💜  melecie  talk - 07:10, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. If you could check out this WikiProject and make some improvements to what looks odd there, I would appreciate it. Thanks again. ❯❯❯ Chunky aka Al Kashmiri (✍️) 07:16, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

@TheChunky, I have requested a shell move at RM/TR. 𝙳𝚛𝚎𝚊𝚖𝚁𝚒𝚖𝚖𝚎𝚛 ^{𝚍𝚒𝚜𝚌𝚞𝚜𝚜} 08:46, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

@DreamRimmer Thank you. ❯❯❯ Chunky aka Al Kashmiri (✍️) 08:52, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Advert in image attribution

I notice that the image on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iliotibial_band_syndrome contains an advert for a shop by way of “attribution”. Is this allowed ? 2A02:C7C:DE89:3600:ADF8:5299:3B32:1869 (talk) 07:20, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

The attribution requirement is not a problem per se. The problem is that the image has an embedded logo, sometimes called a watermark. That is contrary to policy unless the image is notable itself and the logo is a significant aspect of the notability of the image. That does not seem to be the case here. In my opinion, the image should be cropped to remove the logo, unless there are very good reasons to the contrary. You can do it yourself if you are a moderately skilled image editor. Otherwise, you can ask for help at Wikipedia:Graphics Lab/Photography workshop. Cullen328 (talk) 07:36, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Alternativley, bin it and use this free image. File:Iliotibial band syndrome-en.svg - X201 (talk) 07:49, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

binned. the original image only allows reuse if you re-use the image with the BodyHeal.com.au logo on your website or any online publication as long as the proper creditation is given to BodyHeal.com.au. which probably means it should be deleted? ltbdl (talk) 08:20, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Nominated for deletion c:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Iliotibial Band Syndrome.jpg. MKFI (talk) 08:48, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Mukesh Chhabra

Hello all wikipedians, before some days im extended and added reliable sources in Draft:Mukesh Chhabra and moved to Article space but User:Anachronist remove it back to draft space and User:Jamiebuba asked me that Do You Have Any Paid Connection with Subject? And he added "Undisclosed paid" on draft.I'm a Indian wikipedians and Draft:Mukesh Chhabra is well known Casting Director in India. Thats why I'm working on Draft:Mukesh Chhabra. Please let me know If you have any objection, I will stop working on this Draft:Mukesh Chhabra subject.Rajmama (talk) 09:03, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

I don't see reason to assume paid editing based on the content of the article, which is sourced to numerous secondary sources. The article does not appear overly promotional. It does need some grammar and syntax cleanup, but that appears to be the worst problem. Once that's fixed, I don't see a reason to exclude the draft from article space. Pecopteris (talk) 09:15, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

@Rajmama and @Pecopteris, As cited by @Anachronist the draft was moved by an inexperienced editor after it was was submitted previously and declined in draft. Note that the draft was initially submitted by @Creation07, though the subject maybe notable after edits were done by Rajmama but should still should have been resubmitted through AFC or at least moved by an experienced editor.

@Rajmama Again, do you have any COI with the subject? I had asked this on your talk page and you never responded to the question directly. Jamiebuba (talk) 10:28, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

No i don't have any COI with the subject and im already replied you on my talk page. Again Draft:Mukesh Chhabra is an well know Casting Director in India. Thats why I am extended this draft and added reliable sources and after that moved to Article Space.Rajmama (talk) 10:37, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

@Rajmama I'm an enthusiastic copy editor, let me know if you'd like me to do an edit on the draft for grammar and readability! I checked it out but was not sure if it would be polite to make changes to someone else's article draft. (Please "ping" me using @Chiselinc or post on my talk page to confirm, as I might not see otherwise. Also, the New Page Review comment on the draft's talk page pointed out that all the sources are paid or promotional sites, requesting that you find other sources to add- I don't know much about that side of editing yet, but thought I'd bring it to your attention here in case you had missed it! Cheers, Chiselinccc (talk) 11:57, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

@Chiselinccc thank you for bring your attention here but now i don't want to work on this Draft:Mukesh Chhabra, because i don't want to some one said me that i'm paid contributor. thank you once again. Rajmama (talk) 12:39, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

@Rajmama well, that's your prerogative. Anyone asking about a conflict of interest is protecting the encyclopedia from paid editing, which is a rampant concern. If you take that personally, then you should probably find another website to contribute to, as protecting the encyclopedia is more important than your feeling offended. Good luck! Chiselinccc (talk) 12:55, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

@Chiselinccc I did not say that I will not contribute to Wikipedia, but at the moment I do not want to contribute on this subject Draft:Mukesh Chhabra. Rajmama (talk) 13:03, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

@Rajmama: Every sentence you have written above has incorrect grammar, spelling, or punctuation. Every sentence. The same was true for text you added to the draft. If you write that way in articles, then you'll be creating more work for others because other people will have to spend time cleaning up after you. In talk pages, we can figure out what you're saying. But the prose in articles needs to be more polished and professional. If English isn't your native language, then try running your text through a grammar checker before posting it.

@Chiselinccc: I have no objection to moving it back to article space after it's cleaned up for readability and formatted correctly. An experienced reviewer wouldn't have approved it in the state it was in. ~Anachronist (talk) 14:16, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

@Anachronist: thanks, I'm very new and didn't want to be too BITEy on the Teahouse page, but I was very frustrated by this person's childish response and have no interest in editing their mess after that display of attitude. I took the liberty of checking and indeed, they've already put a lot of incomprehensible text directly into article space; I quietly fixed it all, but is there a way to bring this to someone's attention so that they have to go through AFC and can't just move nonsensical articles directly into the 'pedia?

It's not technically vandalism but with the amount of editing I had to do per line of text, it adds up to the same result. Thanks in advance if you have any advice regarding folks who don't understand they're not contributing effectively! Now that I'm lurking Teahouse, I'm seeing a LOT more of that than I expected, and don't know if there are preventative measures for people who keep creating unsalvageable articles 😭Chiselinccc (talk) 14:31, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

@Chiselinccc: With enough reviewers patrolling new pages, articles like this would be put back into draft space more efficiently, but there's a huge backlog now.

We do want to encourage bold edits, and give people the opportunity to learn from mistakes. In this case Rajmama is editing in good faith but needs to work harder to avoid creating needless work for others to clean up. With regard to that particular draft, I have concerns about the comment left by one reviewer on the talk page, about the sources being sponsored. Those would need to be eliminated. The subject likely passes notability criteria for inclusion, but not with sponsored sources.

New editors who aren't yet confirmed are required to go through AFC to create anything, but once you have 4 days and 10 edits under your belt, anything goes. I think the autoconfirmed status is too low of a bar to allow article creation directly in article space (or moving to article space from draft space). Raising that bar would require community discussion, probably at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy). ~Anachronist (talk) 15:59, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Link created now working, but previous link to same site are working

I created a link in the infobox of this site. Existing links work, one is the body of the article. However, the infobox link directs to a site saying the linked article doesn't exist. The spelling is the same, though: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eva_M._Mack The link for this person Hugh Ellwood MacBeth, Sr. Starlighsky (talk) 10:51, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

 Done Theroadislong (talk) 11:00, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! This is fascinating. How did you fix it?

Is it known why is wasn't working? Starlighsky (talk) 11:56, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

@Starlighsky: Here is the correction that Theroadislong made. Titles of Wikipedia articles are case-sensitive after the first letter. Deor (talk) 12:23, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

I understand now, thanks! Starlighsky (talk) 12:34, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

OK for site's URL to point to Wikipedia article?

An acquaintance has a Wikipedia article that was written about him. He would like for his website's URL to link directly to the Wikipedia article. Is that permitted? He asked me for advice. I found documentation which says that it is, but what I found was someone's essay and not an official policy. Guidance would be appreciated. Thank you. – Kekki1978 ^{(talk ✉ | contribs ✎)} 10:53, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia welcomes incoming links, but that is a strange request as he will have no control over the content and when you say the URL will link directly such a link implies he is using Wikipedia to host his own website, which is not permitted. If he simply includes a link to Wikipedia on his website, that is fine. What is the name of the article? Shantavira|^{feed me} 11:09, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

@Kekki1978 I assume he is linking from his own website hosted elsewhere: that website may even be mentioned in the article here about him. Linking back is fine but note that if he chooses to copy any material to re-use it on his website, he should read WP:REUSE which has a policy about the licensing of Wikipedia content. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:14, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Actually I understood that person would like to redirect his own website address to a Wikipedia page, so that typing www.examplepersondomain.com to a browser will instead take you to Example. Obviously we can't prevent that since the redirect is outside Wikipedia but as Shantavira says it is somewhat risky, since the Wikipedia page could change at anytime.

@Kekki1978: could you clarify what your friend is planning to do, since several of us have a different idea of what your question means? MKFI (talk) 11:23, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Maybe I'm the odd one out here but the original poster's request seemed pretty unambiguous to me. His acquaintance wants some website (say www.acquaintance.com) to either link or redirect to the Wikipedia article about that acquaintance (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/that_acquaintance_of_his). If that's the case, there's nothing wrong with either of these, and there's nothing Wikipedia can do to prevent either of these, either. Whether that's a good idea is a different question which the acquaintance should answer themselves considering the lack of control they would have over their own bio. Podstawko (talk) 11:53, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you all for your responses. My acquaintance does not want Wikipedia to host his own website. He has a website hosted elsewhere and, quoting above, "wants to redirect his own website address to a Wikipedia page, so that typing www.examplepersondomain.com in a browser will instead take you to" [ [ Wikipedia page ] ]. I will let them know that such a thing is permitted. That is a good point that the Wikipedia's article's contents may change at any time. I will bring that risk to their attention. Thank you all for fielding the question. – Kekki1978 ^{(talk ✉ | contribs ✎)} 12:10, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Kekki1978, Podstawko is correct, there's nothing wrong with doing this. Check with the web host provider about how to set up an HTTP 301 permanent redirect. Mathglot (talk) 00:31, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Sources articles film/movies

Hello,

I need a little help. So I would like someone to tell me which of the websites listed below can be considered good sources. To add content to movie articles.

https://www.metacritic.com/

https://collections-search.bfi.org.uk/web/search/simple

https://www.allmovie.com/

https://letterboxd.com/

https://aficatalog.afi.com/

https://www.moviefone.com/

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/

thanks a lot Matirosta (talk) 11:50, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

... and also the reasons why a website is or is not considered a good source, please.

Bernhard.rulla (talk) 12:10, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Some of those are discussed at Wikipedia:Review aggregators. Shantavira|^{feed me} 12:17, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

@Matirosta:, the best place to start is often the WP:Reliable sources noticeboard, and in particular, the table at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources. For example, Metacritic is listed as "generally reliable" at WP:RSP#Metacritic; and Allmovie is evaluated here. You can look for the other ones in the table there. Mathglot (talk) 00:27, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Pictures from Getty Images

Hello,

does anybody have any experience with using pictures from Getty Images? Getty Images

Is this an easier way to obtain a picture of an actress? I am currently working on the draft of an actress and in Getty Images, there are several nice pictures of hers.

Thanks in advance! Bernhard.rulla (talk) 11:55, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

No, I'm afraid you cannot use Getty Images as a source for images. See WP:GETTY. Shantavira|^{feed me} 12:05, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

@Shantavira Thank you! Bernhard.rulla (talk) 13:08, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

One slim chance is that Getty and similar agencies have been known to sell images that are actually in the public domain. You could use those. However, if we're talking about a contemporary actress, it's unlikely that'll be the case. – Joe (talk) 12:55, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

A workaround that I have used (hopefully not violating any WP rules) is simply to put such non-free images, or groups of same from a single source, in under "external links", see my example treatment at Shirburn_Castle#External_links. Of course they will not appear in the page, but persons can then go visit them if of interest. Maybe this helps. Regards Tony Tony 1212 (talk) 19:05, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Redirecting a search to an article

I only need one more thing for my draft: Draft:Steklyannaya Garmonika before I submit it for review. I'd like for someone to be redirected to the article if they search "Glass Harmonica" (the English translation of the title). If any of you know how to do that and are able to help, it would be greatly appreciated. Thank you! Welcome back bro (talk) 12:41, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. It is certainly possible to create such a redirect, but I wouldn't worry about that until the draft is accepted and placed in the encyclopedia, then you can create plausible redirects to it. 331dot (talk) 12:49, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

@Welcome back bro I told you in an earlier thread at the Teahouse that it will be a little more complicated than a redirect, because we already have an article Glass harmonica. You should also consider whether the title of your article should be the same as its Wikidata item, which is in English as "The Glass Harmonica". Then the Russian title would be the redirect here. However, as 331dot wrote, the draft need to be accepted first. Its plot section is still too long and you should not have any external links within the main text: they can be placed in an "External links" section at the very foot of the article. (See WP:ELPOINTS). Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:31, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply, I changed the title of the article to The Glass Harmonica and changed mentions of the title in the text accordingly. I also reduced the length of the plot summary and placed the external links in their own section. Should the redirect work with the original Russian title? Thanks again! Welcome back bro (talk) 16:53, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Yes, the Russian title will redirect correctly, just as the redirect from that draft name does right now (i.e. if you click on the link in the first line of your thread here). Others have commented that the word (film) needs to be in the title, since there is also a novel of that name: see Glass harmonica (disambiguation). One minor point: your external links section should come after the references, in line with our manual of style. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:33, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Title text in reference , beginners help please !

Hello , I am so in over my head here. I got annoyed that something were missing on a categories page and discovered that to add something I had to add a page to refer to. So I decided to do that (create a new page) by copying code from an existing page and and edit that by inserting and replacing with my own text instead (editing existing code using my own text usually works for me here). I think that my 'creation' is sort of OK - ugly with a lot of warts of course - but I simply can not find out how to get the text of the demanded reference links to display left of links !

I am trying this format :

 ref name="My text">url=https://mylink.org/about</ref 

(I removed the starting < and ending > to make code show here )(could not find out either how to place code here and both be visible and at same time not have it parsed)

But "My text" simply does not show in reference section next to "mylink" (which do show !) instead it shows

url=Mylink.org/about

I can easily get the text to display by just filling in :

<! My text : https://mylink.org/about >

(with out the starting <! and ending >)

But then it doesn't show as being part of the reference list How do I get the text to show in the reference section next to the link ? The help pages is of absolutely no help at all (I will not list all help pages not of help here !) TeslaTruck (talk) 12:52, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

The correct format is <ref name="myref">[https://mylink.org/about My text]</ref>, which displays like this. The name="myref" part gives the reference an identifier so it can be re-used again later in the page and is not visible on the page itself. You might consider using the Visual Editor, though, which gives you the ability to format references without using code. – Joe (talk) 13:02, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your very kind assistance which I really appreciate.

I had a really hard time getting to understand the placing of the text after the link and it only being separated by a space character. I even ended up copying your link directly from your post into the editing window and then it still took me some time to understand it. So fair to say that I would most likely not have been able to get it done without your help ! Thank you very much !

By the way , could you please refer me to the help page showing how to put code into posts like yours to show it as comment text like you did with no parsing ?

P.S. , Sorry , for asking , I just found out that user Michael placed the answer to that question below her. Thank you ! TeslaTruck (talk) 13:49, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

References

You are using what are called WP:NAMED references. The name "My text" is not part of the citation but a way of re-using the reference later. We have better ways of citing web sources, using the {{cite web}} template. To show text on Talk Pages that you don't want to be rendered, it can be surrounded by nowiki and /nowiki tags, possibly with code tags as well, so your original example would be <ref name="My text">url=https://mylink.org/about</ref>. (See source code for how I did that) Actually, to create a weblink, you can just place it within a single bracket: like this. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:14, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Ooops , sorry , had not seen that you already placed the reference here !

Thank you so much for all your trouble !  :-) TeslaTruck (talk) 13:51, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

PS. Look at how I did this: <ref name=blah>https://foo.bar</ref> - UtherSRG (talk) 14:09, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you very much ! TeslaTruck (talk) 14:47, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Redirection links

Hello Teahouse,

I was wondering how you set up a redirect link when providing an edit summary. If there's some kind of command that lets you click on the link or something. TheAlienMan2002 (talk) 14:19, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, TheAlienMan2002, and welcome to the Teahouse. I don't understand what you mean about "redirection". You can put a WP:Wikilink in an edit summary just as you can in an article or other page, and it will show up in a history or list of contributions as a link. Does that answer your question? ColinFine (talk) 14:32, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi TheAlienMan2002, do you mean a redirect? Those summaries are provided automatically. Alextejthompson (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 17:10, 21 September 2023 (UTC) ]

Hi TheAlienMan2002, also a bit confused, but if you mean adding a wikilink to your edit summary, so that a term in your summary can be clicked when viewing your edit summary in the history of the page, yes, you can do that. With rare exceptions, you do that the same way as you do when adding a wikilink to an article, that is, you enclose it in double brackets (optionally, piping the link as well). If you look at the edit history of this page, and find my edit summary (look for the phrase, "how to wikilink a term in the edit summary") you will see an example of it in use. Mathglot (talk) 00:15, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Oh I forgot you use the [[ to do a redirect link. Thanks for the speedy response. TheAlienMan2002 (talk) 01:08, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

TheAlienMan2002, For future reference, you should get used to calling that a "wikilink" (or, just plain: "link"), and not a redirect link, as the term "redirect" has a special meaning at Wikipedia, and if you use that term, people are going to get confused, as you can see. Mathglot (talk) 02:20, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Translating foreign film/television titles to English

Hi Teahouse, I've recently encountered an editor who has taken it upon themselves to translate a large number of foreign-named film and television titles. While I've looked at WP:COMMONNAME and the MOS section on titles, in order to ascertain whether or not this is justified or recommended, as most of the titles in question aren't very common, I'm unsure how to proceed, especially as the editor in question has been somewhat reticent on the topic. I'm wondering if I should just leave it, or if this type of mass translation is frowned upon and further action should be taken. Thanks! Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 14:43, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

@Revirvlkodlaku: Are they actually moving the pages to a new title? Or just adding the translation to the lead? – Joe (talk) 14:59, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, I should have been more clear: the editor in question is moving pages to an English title. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 15:03, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Without knowing the specifics, that does sound problematic to me then. Especially if they're doing the translating themselves rather than taking it from sources. If they're not responding to requests to stop (which should be enough to stop making the moves unilaterally, per WP:BOLDMOVE), I'd escalate it to ANI. – Joe (talk) 15:10, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Well, according to them, they are using sourced, or "official" translations, so that particular point doesn't seem problematic. My main area of concern around this issue is that I'm not sure what the protocol is, or if it is recommended to translate all, or most, foreign titles to English (unless the productions are specifically known by their foreign title rather than a translated one). Any thoughts on this? Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 15:55, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

The general rule (not just for films) is that we use the name most commonly used in reliable, English sources. If the foreign term is the one most commonly used in English ("Mein Kampf", not "My Struggle"; "Das Kapital", not "Capital (Marx)") then we use the foreign term. If the English term is most common, then we use that: "The 400 Blows" (not: "Les quatre cents coups "); Seven Samurai (not: "Shichinin no Samurai", or "七人の侍"). Mathglot (talk) 00:01, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Forgot to ping User:Revirvlkodlaku. Mathglot (talk) 00:04, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

I understand that last point; that's what I meant when I wrote "unless the productions are specifically known by their foreign title rather than a translated one". My question is, if the titles are not well known, is it preferable to leave them in their original language, or is the English name preferred? Is there a guiding principle around this? In other words, is it a problem that this user is changing the names of a whole bunch of titles to English? Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 02:31, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

@Joe, @Mathglot, I'm still hoping to get to the bottom of this issue. Do you have any additional thoughts that could help me figure out how to proceed? Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 02:57, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

@Revirvlkodlaku: I don't understand this part of your question: "if the titles are not well known". What do you mean by that: 1) if the English title is not well known; 2) the foreign one; 3) or if the film itself is unknown under any name? The general rule for a topic (film, or not) which exists in a foreign language, is to follow WP:COMMONNAME. One of the examples given in that section is to use: "Sailor Moon (character) (not: Usagi Tsukino)" If there isn't agreement among editors about what constitutes the common name in English sources (which might be English, or not, as we have seen above), then the next step is for editors to discuss the name at the article Talk page, using the five criteria for a title. If there are a lot of articles affected, and it's impractical to start discussions at multiple article Talk pages, you could raise the discussion at a wikiproject talk page, such as at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film. List the articles you are concerned with there (or indicate them somehow, if the list is really long), and ask for |feedback about the retitling there, in order to gain consensus. Another possible venue would be WT:Article titles (pick just one page for the discussion, but you can point to the discussion with a brief, neutral notification at the other one). I'm not sure if this answers your question, because I'm not sure I understood it. Mathglot (talk) 03:29, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

@Mathglot, you're pretty much spot on, actually, and that is good advice. Thanks! Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 03:32, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Are these sources reliable?

Hi! I need your expertise. Can you please verify if these sources are reliable?

• University of Wollongong
• University of Sydney
• Broadsheet

Thank you. Impboi (talk) 15:30, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Impboi (talk) 15:26, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

It would depend on what facts they are intended to be used to verify: many sources can be regarded as Reliable for some matters, but not others, and a City Guide and Cultural magazine (the third) likely has different degrees of reliability in different topic areas to a major University (which doubtless produces everything from scientific papers to student rag-mags), so a blanket affirmation (or denial), is not applicable. You will have to be more specific about what facts, intended for what Article(s) or Draft(s) (presumably), and what particular passages in what publications. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 51.198.107.25 (talk) 15:59, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for responding to my message.

By the way, here are the links. I am hoping I can

use these as references.

• https://www.uow.edu.au/media/2015/arts-graduates-recognised-as-women-of-influencephp
• https://www.uow.edu.au/alumni/outlook
• /2020/artists-as-imagineers.php

https://www.sydney.edu.au/news-opinion/news/2019/04/10/turning-streets-into-art-galleries.html

• https://www.broadsheet.com.au/national/travel/article/curator-kat-roma-greers-favourite-hidden-art-spots-hong-kong

You mentioned previously that it depends on

the content. Do you thinkl can use them? 1'd

be grateful if you could response to this again.

Thank you. Impboi (talk) 16:42, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Ask a question

I've WP:COI with one Proposed to delete article, created long back. Creator is unknown to me. I want to give reliable citations in that page. Should I? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramakrishna_Mission_Boys%27_Home_High_School,_Rahara Supriyomj16022008 (talk) 16:00, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Supriyomj16022008! A high school will significant history like this will generally be notable, so if you have sources, feel free to add them and contest the deletion by removing the tag. I wouldn't consider being a student or alum of the school too much of a COI (if you're an employee of the school, that's moreso). Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 16:17, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Ok fine but I'm not a student, not a alumnus. This school is under one organisation. I am the member of that org but in noway directly involved with that school. Supriyomj16022008 (talk) 16:22, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

You do have COI if you represent the org. I would advise that you use the edit request wizard by clicking here to request for the changes/updates that you would like to make on the relevant article. Jeraxmoira (talk) 16:39, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you very much. When I got first reply, immediately I started. I already edited declare WP:COI. But if you want to see my article page that is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Ramakrishna_Mission_Brahmananda_College_of_Education If you want you can do. It is my heartiest request. Thank you. Supriyomj16022008 (talk) 17:23, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Confusing, because there is an AfD for the high school article and an unsubmitted draft (without references) for a college - both identified as Ramakrishna Mission. David notMD (talk) 18:03, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

The article was previously PRODed. I reverted to the PROD tag, and the editor who added it just opened an AfD. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 18:13, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Making an article

Hello, I am interested in making an article. I wrote one and published it right after, following all Wikipedia guidelines. But they still took it down, on suspicion that it had ties to another article that was taken down years ago. After talking to the person who deleted it, they just told me I should redraft it. Is there anything I missed before that led to my article being deleted? The person who deleted it never gave a concrete reason why it was deleted Aescamilla45 (talk) 17:10, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi Aescamilla45, it looks like the article was deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joanne Kwong. Are you sure you spoke to the same person who deleted it? That sounds like odd advice to make on their part. Alextejthompson (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 17:14, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

The criteria for Speedy deletion was G4, meaning that your draft was identical or near-identical to the article that had been deleted in 2021, recreated in August 2023 and deleted again. Thus, a suspicion that you had a connection to the old versions (both deleted). David notMD (talk) 17:29, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello Aescamilla45. Deb did not "tell you I should redraft it": she said I can see a case for re-drafting it, which is not the same.

I cannot see your deleted version, but it was deleted on two grounds: (A7: No credible indication of importance (individuals, animals, organizations, web content, events): G4: Recreation of a page that was deleted per a deletion discussion). This is not "because it has ties to" a previously deleted article, but because it is substantially the same as that deleted article, and also because it does not appear to address the fundamental, inescapable reason for the first deletion: that sources did not exist to establish that Kwong meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability.

If you want to try again, you should read your first article, and follow (and not circumvent) WP:AFC. In any case, you should start by finding at least three rock-solid sources each of which meets all the criteria in golden rule - they are reliably published, wholly independent of Kwong (not written, published, or commissioned by her or her associates, and not based on interviews or press releases), and contain substantial coverage of her.

If you cannot find three such sources, then you will know that there is no point in spending any more time on this, and you should turn to something else. If you can, then you should write your draft based entirely on what those sources say, not on what Kwong says or what you know. ColinFine (talk) 17:40, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Note: @ColinFine: probbably meant to link to WP:SIGCOV, WP:substantial coverage is a red link Victor Schmidt (talk) 20:00, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for the response, this was actually very helpful. It made me look at my article to see if I actually followed these rules, like the golden rule for example. And yes, I have more than 3 rock-solid sources following the golden rule. All independent of her, reliably published and discussing her in detail instead of just briefly mentioning her in some old record for example. I understand that because it has been deleted its difficult to decide whether what I wrote was in fact following this rule. But looking back I also took note of the sources and the date they were published. I understand that this old Wikipedia article written about her was published in 2021. But most of my sources were published after 2021. That's why I'm having trouble understanding what the reasons were, In one of these articles she is named "100 Asian and Pacific Islander's (API) with the most impact in their industries. This alone should show that there is credible importance to her. Yes, It was published in 2021, but being put in a list with names such as Kamala Harris and Anderson Paak is a huge accomplishment and deserves to be mentioned.

Again, since you couldn't find my article its understandable that you would think there must be some degree of bias towards her or that I wrote this with someone telling me what to write. The only reason I'm insistent on this is because it seems unjust on why it was taken down. I feel like just with what I've written here should give an idea of my article being not only very credible and following this golden rule, but that it was unfairly taken down just because there was another biographical article written years ago. If anything it's motivating me more to make sure it gets published.

I know I can re-draft it, but is there any way I can show it to other volunteers here in Wikipedia so that they can double check it? Just so that I don't have to go through this again? I think there was a suggestion I saw before publishing the article where I can pay others to check, but i prefer not doing that. Thank you again for the response this really was insightful. Aescamilla45 (talk) 22:13, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

User:Aescamilla45, there's no method whereby you can pay Wikipedia volunteers to check your draft. Any place you saw making such a suggestion is attempting to scam you.

Rather than rewrite your draft right away, you could always post your three best sources for a quick source review. Experienced editors can then verify that they do indeed establish the notability of your subject. Folly Mox (talk) 23:01, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

How do I ask for an article to be restricted?

There are some articles, like this one or this one where its obvious the article was created by the company as an advertisement. I’m not saying we should delete them, because knowledge is knowledge, and I’ve done by best to make them un bias, but I think that there might just be another IP address coming in and saying that they’re the best in the world. On some pages, I’ve seen edit restrictions for only admins or only accounts. How can I do this or ask for this to be done? Janlopi (talk) 17:37, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi Janlopi, pages are protected so only admins (full protection) or users with over a certain number of edits (semi-protected), but only as a last resort. See Wikipedia:Protection policy. I will quickly look at these articles you linked now. Alextejthompson (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 17:49, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi Janlopi, I have requested a complete rewrite of BridgeClimb Sydney and removed a bunch of promotional content from Richard Vaughan Badminton Academy also. Alextejthompson (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 17:55, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you so much man! You have been endlessly useful for me! 👍 👍 👍 Janlopi (talk) 19:25, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi no worries Janlopi, I appreciate that. Alextejthompson (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 13:31, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

How to avoid strange formatting of reference to external page.

I wanted to link to an external page and did that at first with the following source:

But this is rendered in a strange way with square brackets enclosing a meaningless number. It links to the right page, but looks weird. How do I avoid this?

Dsiedler (talk) 18:00, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Dsiedler, welcome to the Teahouse. I assume you want the second [1] to be something more informative - is that correct? If you type: <ref>"The Beaver People” [https://www.nfb.ca/film/beaver_people/ Link to film]</ref>

You will get:

References

Is that what you want? 57.140.16.29 (talk) 18:28, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Got it, thanks! Actually the icon signifying an external link would in itself suffice - no additional text needed. I found I can get what I want by entering an empty string as the text:

Dsiedler (talk) 19:48, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Another option is to simply link the whole phrase, like so: (see below for result), but it's more a question of aesthetics at this point. What you should really do, @Dsiedler, is look into the use of citation templates - they're much preferred over using what we call "bare URLs", for various reasons. They're fairly easy to generate if you follow the instructions at Help:Referencing for beginners#RefToolbar. 57.140.16.29 (talk) 20:16, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Many thanks for the great help! I agree with the advantages of using citation templates. I didn't do so because this is my first contribution to an article and I didn't want to rock the boat too much. The references in the article are a sort of dog's breakfast. If I do more with the article I will overhaul all the references. Dsiedler (talk) 08:33, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

References

Help on A draft that got rejected declined.

I meant declined, not rejected.

The declined draft is Draft:Krew (Youtube group).

The reason given was:

"This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources."

I do not know if they mean I don't have enough sources to prove notability, if there is information that needs to be sourced but isn't, if some of my sources aren't reliable, or something else. The phrasing is a bit ambiguous to me.

Also, the link given before is for the current version. I added a few new sources in a "Further Reading" section, made a few small edits, and added another reference. EDIT: moved one of the sources out of the "Further reading" section to use as an actual refference.

Link to the rejected version

If this was a case of not having enough references to prove notability, this may have fixed the issue, but not for the other cases.

Noticed another draft, not mine, had the following in addition to what I had on my draft:

"This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia."

Now I can tell this isn't a notability issue, but I still don't know if they mean I have unsourced information, or if some of my sources are unreliable, or both. AKFkrewfamKF1 (talk) edited 18:01, 21 September 2023 (UTC) edited 01:09, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Your draft was declined NOT rejected, rejected would mean that it would not be considered again. Theroadislong (talk) 18:03, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Am I allowed to change the title to say "declined" or would that mess things up? AKFkrewfamKF1 (talk) 18:07, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Changing the draft title to reflect that it was declined (i.e. moving it) is definitely not recommended. The title of an article, draft, etc., acts as a unique identifier for that page, and moving it will just result in more cleanup if it gets accepted or rejected. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 19:03, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

I don't mean the draft. I mean this post in the teahouse. AKFkrewfamKF1 (talk) 19:06, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

AKFkrewfamKF1, yes, you can do that. I've done it for you, according to the principles of WP:REDACT, which was probably overkill but allowed me to link and share that guideline for you, which may help in the future. Mathglot (talk) 23:48, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

list order of the list

in lists of people or works like the one in the disambiguation page for that guy from ultrakill, should the subjects be ordered in alphabetic, chronologic or whatever order an editor feels like using?

from what i saw, it seems it's in a different order in nearly every other article, when there's an order in the first place, so it's probably not a big deal anyway cogsan • (give me attention) • (see my deeds) 19:11, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi Cog-san, I feel this page covers guidelines for disambiguations well: Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Organizing_disambiguation_pages_by_subject_area. Cheers, Alextejthompson (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 19:27, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

and that says "do it in alphabetic order lol"

thanks cogsan • (give me attention) • (see my deeds) 19:42, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia/Wikimedia web server IP addresses

I've been using a VPN for the past few months but constantly have the problem of having to add a new IP address to the exclusion list for split tunnelling in my VPN app each time I want to make an edit. A few times I have ended up turning off the VPN or even just giving up with it when it hasn't worked. Where can I find the full list of IP addresses used by Wikipedia and its sister projects? Thanks UaMaol (talk) 19:32, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

The closest I've found with a quick search is wikitech:IP and AS allocations#Public IPs, listing several partially rather large IP ranges. I am not aware of how many thereof are used for web traffic. Victor Schmidt (talk) 20:17, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

@Victor Schmidt: I had a feeling that there might be a lot but I entered the listed public IPv4 addresses including CIDR notation and it seems to be working now. Thanks for your help! :) UaMaol (talk) 23:02, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

An article I created was declined, and I don't really know why.

All I have seen is "Stuff you should have in an article". I'm new at this, so I probably shouldn't have tried making a completely new article, but I would still like feedback on what my article needs. I was making an article on the book Obsidio by Amie Kaufman. MonoDev (talk) 19:50, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello MonoDev and welcome to the Teahouse.

The draft has no independent references about the book. To show a book's notability, you need more than a pointer to the book or its publisher. This role is often served by independent, professional reviews of the book. There's probably more about this at WP:NBOOK. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:18, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Ah, I see. Well, I'll just stay out of the professional ways, and I think I'll just settle for copyediting for now. I don't think I would be good for much more anyways lol MonoDev (talk) 20:21, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, MonoDev, and welcome to the Teahouse, and to Wikipedia. I'm afraid that you have made one of the classic beginner's mistakes, by writing^{missing words added in edit} Draft:Obsidio (Book) BACKWARDS.

A Wikipedia article should be based almost entirely on what independent reliable sources have published about the subject: for a book, that usually means serious, in-depth reviews, published by major newspapers or journals.

I always advise new editors to spend a few weeks or months learning how Wikipedia works by making (small at first) improvements to existing articles, before they read your first article and try their hand at a new article. ColinFine (talk) 20:19, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll do that. Rushing and making an entirely new article was definitely not the smartest move. I'm going to try to be much more active as a Wikipedia member, so I hope there will be a day when I am competent enough. So I'll take your advice and just make small improvements to articles. Cheers! MonoDev (talk) 20:24, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello MonoDev. I’m sorry your draft got declined. As ColinFine advised reading Help:Your first article is a good way to learn guidelines. If a draft is not worked on for six months it will be deleted, so you may want to cut and paste your draft into an offline word file. Over time you could do more research, see if you can find a good source that states the book won an award, and perhaps find one or more reliable book reviews. Reliable means something from a magazine or website that has an editor overseeing what is being published, as apposed to sites that allows people to add data without using any references to show where the info came from.

If you find some good references you will have your original draft saved, which will be a good place to start to improve your article. Best wishes on future Wikipedia projects. Karenthewriter (talk) 22:29, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

What should we do about vandals?

General question here, not asking about any page in particular. 67.198.0.18 (talk) 19:52, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

This is detailed out at Wikipedia:Vandalism § How to respond to vandalism, however, the basic workflow is that you undo the vandalism, place a warning on the offender's talkpage and report them to WP:AIV if repeated warnings don't cause them to stop. Victor Schmidt (talk) 20:07, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of GiFi

I had proposed this article for deletion a few days ago and the creator dePRODed it without discussion on the project's talk page or on the creator's talk page. What do I do? Excellenc1 (talk) 20:01, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

You can nominate it for deletion. Ruslik_Zero 20:05, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Excellenc1, and welcome to the Teahouse! Proposed deletion tags are allowed to be removed without discussion, even by the creator of an article - typically they should only be used for uncontroversial deletions where you believe nobody at all would object. You can open a discussion at articles for deletion - after 7 days, if a consensus has formed to delete the article, it will be deleted. Tollens (talk) 20:07, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

@Excellenc1 Have you checked out the sources used at French Wikipedia about this chain? It's a much bigger article (see here?) Maybe they might help you do a WP:BEFORE, prior to recommending a deletion discussion. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:42, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

I'll add the 'Expand French' and 'More citations needed' templates to the article, given the scope of the article in French Wikipedia. Thank you! Excellenc1 (talk) 03:17, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Roblox Rooms

Can you add A Roblox Rooms page? TroopGlitch29 (talk) 20:06, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

This is not the place to ask. Please follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Requested articles. Shantavira|^{feed me} 20:13, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Paraphrasing the sentence

If I put information from a book using Google Books do I need to paraphrase the sentence because of potential copyright issues? Or can I just copy and paste the sentence? Aredoros87 (talk) 20:19, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Aredoros87, and welcome to the Teahouse! It really depends on what you're doing - if the exact wording is important, you can quote the book, placing the short snippet you need in quotation marks. Typically this is only used for controversial statements from a person, or when the exact wording is critical for a reader's understanding (which is not the case most of the time). In all other cases, yes, you should paraphrase. Tollens (talk) 20:25, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation! Aredoros87 (talk) 20:29, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Aredoros87. In general you need to paraphrase. Unless the book is very old, it is almost certainly in copyright, and you may not copy it except as a quotation (see the next paragraph). Even if it is public domain or freely licensed, so you may legally copy it, it is usually a better idea to paraphrase it.

A limited amount of direct quotation is allowed: you must make it clear that it is a quotation and where from, and have a good rationale for quoting. ColinFine (talk) 20:26, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for an answer!

How do we classify the book as "very old"? I remember I read somewhere that the limit is 70 years. But It was about the pictures. Aredoros87 (talk) 20:31, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

It's more complicated than it should be, really. The easiest thing to do is assume any work published in 1928 or later is still under copyright. For a guide on the full rules related to when copyright on a work lapses, you could have a look through WP:Public domain. Tollens (talk) 20:44, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for explanation Aredoros87 (talk) 20:45, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Note that the details of copyright vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. ColinFine (talk) 21:24, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Place marking an edit in progress

I started editing a page, but had to stop part way through because of other time comitments. How do I return to the that page and the place I left off? Telerana (talk) 21:42, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. If you are referring to Catholic University of the Most Holy Conception, you need only to revisit the page and edit it as you did the first time. 331dot (talk) 21:50, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

@Telerana, kindly let me know if I got this right or not. I am interpreting what you said as in "you start to type things in the visual editor / source code, but had to stop part way through, and you wonder if your editing progress in the editor can be saved".

If that is the case, I suggest that you make small-stepped edits in your sandbox. Hit "save" / "publish" every time you do it. When you think you've accumulated a cohesive paragraph / sentence, copy-paste it to the article.

Cheers, -- TheLonelyPather (talk) 02:24, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm new at this and didn't think of using the sandbox. Telerana (talk) 03:04, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

No worries! Welcome to the community. -- TheLonelyPather (talk) 15:54, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Review/Advising

Is there any way to receive critique or advice in terms of the revisions that we make so that we may improve as editors? I have made a few minor edits thus far and am worried about making larger ones without receiving critiques on the edits I have previously made. GranolaCube (talk) 22:41, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

GranolaCube, don't worry, just go ahead and edit without fear. BE BOLD is a key feature of Wikipedia, and you won't break anything by trying. At worst, some other editor will undo what you did, but that is very much part of the way things work around here. That said, if you want advice about a specific topic, like, say, Red Sea, then you should ask at its "Talk page", namely, Talk:Red Sea. If you want general help with stuff, like how to make links to another article, or when to use italics, and stuff like that, then this is the perfect place for that kind of question. Good luck! Mathglot (talk) 23:33, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

how to post a photo that is open for use that I don't own and use of twitter as an external link

Hi, need advice on using a photo that the owner says is open for use, but I don't feel right saying it is mine, that I own it. It is of Timothy Snyder and Olena Zalenska> and it was posted on the website for the Yalta European Strategy Conference. I could not figure out the instructions for uploading it so some other place on Wikipedia or elsewhere, but do know how to upload it from my own environment to Wikipedia, if I say I "own" it, which I do not, but I have permission. Please advise. https://yes-ukraine.org/en/photo-and-video/video/yes-war-room-maybutnye-virishuyetsya-v-ukrayini-den-2/ztsilyuyemo-ukrayinu-reabilitatsiya-ta-psihichne-zdorovya-olena-zelenska-timoti-snayder ALSO: I believe this proposed text meets the exceptional standards for allowing an X "tweet" as an external link. Please advise Olena Zelenska, First Lady of Ukraine, expressed her pleasure at a second meeting with Snyder in September of 2023 to discuss the mental health of Ukrainians, mutual understanding and happiness of people around the world.Olena Zelenska on X, September 10, 2023 LBDon (talk) 00:08, 22 September 2023 (UTC) LBDon (talk) 00:34, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

@lbdon:

for your first question.

usually, all photos and videos are under copyright, and it also seems to be the case here.

copying from the website: © 2006–2023 Yalta European Strategy. this most likely means that you cannot upload the file.

know that copyrighted works can be uploaded, but only under very strict criteria. see Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria § Policy.

your second question:

ok, looking at the tweet you linked on your talk page, it's useless as an external link. if you want to cite it, we have {{cite tweet}}.

understand that external links should contain neutral and accurate material relevant to an encyclopedic understanding of the subject and cannot be integrated into the Wikipedia article. ltbdl (talk) 01:08, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

I'm going to add to the above that just because you yourself have permission to use the image doesn't mean you can upload it to Wikipedia, unless you also hold the copyright of the image, as uploading images to Wikipedia usually requires that image to be licensed under a free license (with the exception being images under fair use, which as stated above has very strict criteria). happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 01:42, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Why Moved article space to draft space?

Ravensfire moved Baanadariyalli (2023 film) to Draft:Baanadariyalli (2023 film). This film is releasing on 28 September 2023.filming is completed, but they moved to draf space. What about Baanadariyalli article? Arumobileworld (talk) 02:22, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Arumobileworld – whoopsies! Looks like you have created a duplicate article (the draft you have created duplicates an existing article). In this case the title is a plausible redirect to the main article you have mentioned, Baanadariyalli, and so I will redirect that to the main film instead. Happy editing! — 3PPYB6 ^{(T / C / L)} — 03:47, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

For your information, if you have anything to expand on that subject, you can always go to Baanadariyalli and make some improvements to that article. Happy editing! — 3PPYB6 ^{(T / C / L)} — 03:51, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

I created that article before the Baanadariyalli article. When my article moved to draft space then Baanadariyalli article created by someone. Arumobileworld (talk) 04:02, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

@Arumobileworld – I see. In that case the standard protocol would have actually been to merge the articles together but seeing as the content in the pages were basically the same I would just leave that as a redirect. However, your draft did cite The Hindu—which is India's newspaper of record and is regarded as a more reliable source (see WP:THEHINDU). I would recommend citing the claim in the main article that is pertinent to the article from The Hindu. Thanks for letting me know! — 3PPYB6 ^{(T / C / L)} — 04:13, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank You 3PPYB6 Arumobileworld (talk) 05:00, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

@Arumobileworld, The film did not meet the WP:NFF criteria for unreleased films. There isn't enough in the article to show that the film production itself is notable. Generally articles like that are moved to draft space until they are released. I'm not going to bother pushing on this one, but please read and follow how it should be done. Ravensfire (talk) 03:57, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Arumobileworld, and welcome to the Teahouse. It looks as if you think that "This film is releasing on 28 September 2023.filming is completed" had some relevance to Wikipedia: it doesn't. An article is moved to Draft space because the mover believes that it is not at present suitable for the main encyclopaedia, but could be made so. This has nothing to do with dates, but about the quality of the sources, or the writing (or both) in the draft. ColinFine (talk) 11:37, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

WP:JWB fixing curly quotes—in references?

Hello, Teahouse hosts (even though I apparently listed myself as one)…
I was working with WP:JWB and found out that when I fixed curly quotes it was extending its reach into the references. Are curly quotes generally allowed in references because they must be titled/styled "as-is" or does MOS:CURLY generally extend into references? Thanks.
Postscript: for example, JWB was attempting to fix a curly apostrophe within a reference and I just allowed it to pass (see Special:Diff/1176502468). — 3PPYB6 ^{(T / C / L)} — 03:55, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, 3PPYB6. As the Manual of Style says, the only place for curly quotes on the English Wikipedia is in direct foreign language quotations. Otherwise, they should be removed, including from references. Cullen328 (talk) 05:08, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

@Cullen328 – Thanks for letting me know! — 3PPYB6 ^{(T / C / L)} — 13:03, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Seeing previous interactions

Hello! This is a bit of an odd/niche request (and I also hope it doesn't sound creepy??) but sometimes someone will respond me on a talk page and I feel I have seen their username before, and there's an odd "have I talked to this person before?" especially if they are very kind to me and I feel endeared. Is there anyway to see past interactions between two editors? -- NotCharizard ^🗨 05:08, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

@Notcharizard: There is - see Wikipedia:Interaction Timeline for the tool. Tollens (talk) 05:11, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

This one does the same thing, and also allows for filtering of the namespace you want to search. Tollens (talk) 05:18, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you so much! Wikipedia really does have a script for everything :P And thank you for such a fast response too. -- NotCharizard ^🗨 05:20, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Logical Quotation period clarification

Hi there, got a question about logical quotation, specifically about when to put a period before an end quotation mark instead of after. I understand it happens when A) there is a period in the original quote and B) when the quote is a complete sentence. However, I'm seeing a hodge-podge of periods being before and after the end quotation mark specifically in quotations that start mid-sentence. Is the complete sentence piece the deciding factor, or is it ok to do it with incomplete sentences because there is, obviously, a period at the end of the sentence in the original quote? It seems like complete sentence is the deciding factor, but want to make sure before I do any more editing. Thanks! Pac12dan (talk) 05:24, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

@Pac12dan: Yes, being a complete sentence is the deciding factor. The period should only go only inside the quotation marks if the quote is a full sentence, otherwise it should remain outside. The relevant section of the style guide is MOS:LOGICAL, if you want to have a look. Tollens (talk) 05:37, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Extended confirmed edit protected request

There is an extended confirmed protected edit request here which nobody is responding to. Please do the needful.-2406:7400:98:1D35:AEC3:3AFF:FE2C:9622 (talk) 06:22, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Edit requests are performed by volunteers, doing what they can, when they can. Please be patient. 331dot (talk) 06:31, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

A number of people seem to be discussing that edit request, and the discussion is ongoing. That you are dissatisfied with the situation is clear, but it's also clear that the change will not be made until a consensus for it is reached. Deor (talk) 14:26, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

WP:REALITYSINGER

Does WP:REALITYSINGER apply to bands as well? Pottyantós WC (talk) 11:53, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

@Pottyantós WC: Welcome to the Teahouse! I suggest asking your question at the associated talk page: Wikipedia talk:Notability (music). Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 13:04, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Adding pdfs as references - copyright issue

Hi Teahouse Hosts, I am currently drafting a page on Shot Peen Forming and want to include references to published articles from a journal. The articles are freely available for downloads as pdfs but I'm not sure whether this makes it ok to upload them to Wikipedia / Wiki Commons. My alternative is to just give links to the relevant articles in the journal. However, this only gives very brief info - not really enough to function as a reference in terms of content. Would appreciate advice on how to proceed. CSK45Kays (talk) 11:55, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi CSK45Kays, welcome to the Teahouse. Copyright would usually not allow republishing of a journal article. Please give an example link to an article and describe how you got the pdf. It the link is like https://www.shotpeener.com/library/detail.php?anc=1970011&keyword=baughman%2C and you merely clicked "DOWNLOAD PDF" then interested Wikipedia readers can just do that on their own. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:34, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

That helps a lot. Thank you! CSK45Kays (talk) 14:28, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, CSK45Kays, and welcome to the Teahouse. Off-line sources are fine, as long as they have been reliably published. The important parts of a citation are the title, author, date, publication, publisher: a link to an online copy is a convenience, not a necessary part of the citation.

If there happens to be an online copy that respects copyright, it is helpful to readers and reviewers to link to it; but Wikipedia should never link to a copyright violation in any circumstances.

If a journal makes its articles available as downloadable PDFs, it is fine to link to those downloads; but if a random person has scanned and uploaded them, then they are probably copyright violations and should not be linked to. (They are also an unreliable copy of the source, as there is a possibility that they could have been altered). ColinFine (talk) 13:46, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! CSK45Kays (talk) 14:29, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Writing articles on living people

I'm new here and getting the hang of things. If I were to create an article on a living person in a certain field I'm knowledgeable about, such as content marketing or holistic health, how popular should they be? What I mean is that if I can't find articles for reputable newspapers or journals on their work, are they still considered notable if their contributions to their community are recognized on other platforms? I'm trying to learn how to do research and not start writing on a topic that has no viable chances of being published here. Introvertedwriter1995 (talk) 12:29, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. A living person merits an article if they receive significant coverage in independent reliable sources showing how they meet the definition of a notable person(or one of the narrower subsets like a notable politician). Sources do not specifically need to be a newspaper/media, but they do need to have a reputation of fact checking and editorial control(i.e. they don't just post anything they want, they check for accuracy). This disqualifies most blogs(though not all). 331dot (talk) 12:39, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Do not confuse popularity with notability. A person can be popular but not notable, and notable but not popular. 331dot (talk) 12:41, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, introvertedwriter1995, and welcome. It is perhaps unfortunate that Wikipedia has chosen the word "notable", because it doesn't mean quite the same as the normal meaning of the word. I suggest thinking of it as a shorthand for "there is enough independent reliable material published about the subject for it to be possible to base an article on it" - remembering that 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) 13:50, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Notability

Can you direct me to specific criteria for notability.

I particular, I'd like to contest a rating of "not notable" with an article I submitted about a Lord-Lieutenant. This is a national position, appointed by HM The King (UK). Can you suggest why this would not meet notability criteria, as it has in the past? LWSimpson (talk) 12:33, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

This appears to be about Draft:Christopher Andrew Crawford Simpson, which has been tagged for Speedy deletion for copyright infringement. David notMD (talk) 12:38, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

The criteria for the notability of individuals can be found at WP:NPEOPLE. Shantavira|^{feed me} 13:32, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, LWSimpson. I haven't looked at the particular case, but I can certainly suggest why this would not meet notability criteria, as it has in the past: if the person has been appointed that recently, there simply might not be enough material published about him yet - simply a matter of WP:TOOSOON. Even if there are announcements of the appointment, if none of them contain any substantial biographical information, then there are not the sources to establish notability in Wikipedia's sense. ColinFine (talk) 13:58, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Film infobox title

I had to move my draft Draft:The Glass Harmonica (film) and re-title the infobox in it. The title of the infobox is now in red letters and says "template" on it, which it didn't do before. Is this something I need to fix or will it resolve itself when the page is no longer a draft? Thanks! Welcome back bro (talk) 12:43, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

@Welcome back bro: Welcome to the Teahouse! To resolve your issue, I removed the unnecessary braces in the |name= field of the infobox. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 12:59, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Photo copyright issues

I uploaded two photos for my draft Draft:The Glass Harmonica (film) which are screenshots of the film itself. As far as I can tell, they are not protected by fair use, and there are steps I need to take to ensure they are allowed. I recently got a message saying "This media file is a derivative work incorporating another work or works. While the source of this file has been identified, essential source and copyright information for all work incorporated in this file is missing. The author and source of all incorporated works must be given so that the copyright status can be verified. Edit the file description page to add source information" for each of the photos. What specifically do I need to do and where and how do I do it? Thank you! Welcome back bro (talk) 12:55, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

@Welcome back bro: It appears you uploaded the photos to Wikimedia Commons, not the English Wikipedia. Therefore, your question is best asked at Commons. I suggest you start by visiting commons:Help:Contents. In the future, you might enjoy using Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard, which provides prompts for all the information needed when uploading files. Good luck! GoingBatty (talk) 13:02, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

I see you have described File:Steklyannaya Garmonika.jpg as "own work". Unless you hold the copyright to the film from which it was taken, this is not acceptable. You may have made the screenshot, but the copyright in the original subsists. ColinFine (talk) 14:02, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Reporting paid article

Hi how I can report an upcoming paid article? The last time I reported a page by email to paid wikipedia but no one took any action. Is there anyone who can add the page in their watchlist and take action when created? I have evidence and all. 113.193.45.46 (talk) 14:29, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello. No one can do anything about an article that has not been created yet. 331dot (talk) 14:31, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

331dot, thank you for replying. I was wondering if someone can add the page in their watchlist and take action as soon as it's created because it's coming from upwork. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 113.193.45.46 (talk) 14:34, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

You will need to tell us what it is called first. Theroadislong (talk) 14:36, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

@Theroadislong: Thank you. Can you join wikipedia-en at Wikipedia:IRC so I can share it privately because the screenshot might include private information? 113.193.45.46 (talk) 14:51, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

We don't need a screenshot just the article's likely title. Theroadislong (talk) 14:54, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

It could be under this or this. 113.193.45.46 (talk) 15:08, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

I'll keep the article in mind and check at some point NotAGenious (talk) 17:12, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

We have no article by either of those names. Same for this likely variant. DS (talk) 23:49, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Inserting a short auto/bio in Wikipedia

How should I proceed to open the following page featuring a short bio/autobio? Thanks a lot for the support!

Prof. Dr. Enkelejda Miho is an Italian scientist working on artificial intelligence for personalized therapeutics and diagnostics.

She is a full Professor of Digital Life Sciences at the University of Applied Sciences and Arts Northwestern Switzerland, where she established the Master of Science in Medical Informatics. She is head of the Laboratory of Artificial Intelligence in Health since 2018 and a group leader at the Swiss Bioinformatics Institute since 2019.

Research. Her research focus is investigating personalized adaptive immunity and applying machine learning to discover antibody therapeutics and support personalized diagnostics through the development of clinical decision software based on integrated clinical, laboratory and multi-omics large-scale data.

Education. She did her master studies at University of Bologna, conducted research at Penn State University, completed her advanced studies at the University of Basel and her doctorate at ETH Zurich. Italdech (talk) 16:30, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

This Draft:Dr. Enkelejda Miho has been deleted twice as blatant promotion. Theroadislong (talk) 16:34, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Dear @Theroadislong

Actually, deleted twice for:

15:58, 22 September 2023 UtherSRG talk contribs deleted page Draft:Dr. Enkelejda Miho (G3: Vandalism) (thank)

15:24, 22 September 2023 Jimfbleak talk contribs deleted page Draft:Dr. Enkelejda Miho (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion: self written vanity page, see WP:COI, WP:RS, WP:Notability (people), name is wrong in title) (thank)

Can anyone advice on someone that can publish and edit the content properly? Italdech (talk) 16:38, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Italdech. The answer is all in WP:YFA. But to summarise:

• First, find several places where people who have no connection with Miho or any of the universities you mention, or that institute, have chosen to write in some depth about her.
• If you cannot find any examples of this, then give up, as she does not currently meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability.
• If you can find several such sources, then forget everything you know about her, and write an article based only on what those sources say, citing them as appropriate.

If you write a draft in that way, then it is likely to be accepted, and you can add further (referenced, neutrally described) material.

If you are associated with Miho, then you should declare this fact on your user page. ColinFine (talk) 16:52, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, @Theroadislong sent the link that explained how to do this. The COI is now declared in my user page. Italdech (talk) 18:09, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Some to look over my draft before I submit?

Hi Teahousers!

I wonder if I could get someone to look over a draft before I push the publish button. I am scared to push the button because I have lost all of my citations each time I tried. Thank you, in advance!

Best, Wabbity

Wabbitty (talk) 16:35, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Do you mean this Draft:Sarah Boxer you have already published the draft but have not submitted it for review, if you do it would immediately declined because indeed there are zero sources. Theroadislong (talk) 16:45, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

That is indeed the article. The trouble is that the draft you are seeing is not the draft I am seeing. My draft shows 45 citations/sources, correctly formatted, but somehow they disappear every time I try to submit. Is there a way I can share my draft page so you can see all the citations? Can I share it without submitting it? Wabbitty (talk) 17:08, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Can I send you a screenshot or a cut-and-pasted version of what my Drafts page, with all the sources footnoted properly, looks like? I saved it as a file on my computer, so as not to lose all my citations. My Drafts page for this article is not the Drafts page you're looking at! Wabbitty (talk) 17:36, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Oof, it looks like you only have inline references like [1] and [2]. Did you write the draft using a text editor like Microsoft Word, and added the citations there? If you did, you'll have to take a look at WP:REFB, like read in the decline message. Especially see WP:INTREF3. Otherwise, you need to go and find reliable sources for your article. NotAGenious (talk) 17:08, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Can I send you a screenshot or a cut-and-pasted version of what my Drafts page, with all the sources footnoted properly, looks like? I saved it as a file on my computer, so as not to lose all my citations. My Drafts page for this article is not the Drafts page you're looking at! Wabbitty (talk) 17:37, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

The problem is - if you wrote the page and added the citations on your computer, you're gonna need to convert them to the code Wikipeda uses, in order for the inline citations to work. WP:REFVISUAL tells you how to give the computer a link, and the citation will be generated. But sure, you can send a screenshot and I'll see what I can do. NotAGenious (talk) 17:43, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

It's not submitting the draft (by clicking a "Submit" button in Wikipedia) that makes the sources disappear. It's whatever you do to get the document from Word, or whatever you're using, into Wikipedia. Maproom (talk) 18:13, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you! I actually wrote the article in Wikipedia and put the citations in there. I only put a copy into my Chromebook when I realized that the citations (as composed in my Wikipedia Draft page) were disappearing. Here is the copy (which I put into my Chromebook as a safety measure) of what appears on my Drafts page. Is there a way that you can place this safely wherever it needs to go to get properly submitted?

Sarah Boxer

is a writer, cartoonist, and critic born in

Denver

, Colorado. Her critical essays and reviews have appeared in

The Atlantic

,

The New York Review of Books

,

The Comics Journal

,

The New Yorker

,

Slate

,

Artforum

,

Bookforum,

and

The New York Times Book Review

. At the

New York Times

(1989-2006), she was an editor for

The Book Review

and the Week in Review, a photography critic, a theater critic, a critic of arts and culture on the Web, and a culture reporter covering visual culture, philosophy, literature, psychoanalysis, and sex. She is the author and illustrator of four

graphic novels

.

== Education ==

Boxer went to high school at Colorado Academy. At Harvard College she earned an AB degree with honors in philosophy. Her thesis, on Aristotle's theory of time, was advised by Martha Nussbaum. After college, when Boxer moved to New York City to become a journalist, she studied drawing and illustration at Parsons, the Art Students League, and the New York Studio School.

== Career ==

=== Journalism ===

Boxer began her career in journalism as a science writer and editor, first at The Sciences, the magazine of the New York Academy of Sciences, then at Discover magazine. In the late 1980s she was a writer for Sports Illustrated and Sports Illustrated for Kids. In 1989, she became an editor at The New York Times Book Review, where she assigned and edited reviews of books on psychology, science, and nature. She also wrote a few essays for The Book Review, including "The Limp, Silent Type," about the bog man in literature, and "Flogging Freud," about the Freud Wars. In 1997 she became a reporter on the Arts & Ideas page of The New York Times, where she covered the visual arts, philosophy, sex, and psychoanalysis.

At The New York Times, Boxer practiced her own brand of participatory journalism. She took the Mensa test in order to document the experience, for instance, and she once crawled inside the orgone box belonging to the cartoonist William Steig while interviewing him for his obituary. On the 75th anniversary of The New Yorker she penned a piece from the point of view of the magazine's famous pronoun, We.

Boxer was particularly known for making complex ideas comprehensible, such as opticality in Renaissance painting, the nomenclature of military operations, and Freud's Seduction Hypothesis. Following the attacks of September 11, 2001 she focused on the photography and videos of that day and was one of the many reporters who composed short profiles of the victims, the Portraits of Grief. Her work for that year was nominated for a Pulitzer. While at the Times, Boxer also wrote some notable obituaries, including on the philosopher G.E.M. Anscombe, on the director of the Sigmund Freud Archives, Kurt Eissler,and on the cartoonists Saul Steinberg, William Steig,and Charles Schulz.

=== Criticism ===

Boxer's career as a critic began on the editorial board of The Harvard Crimson, where she reviewed the movie The Europeans and "The Exhibit of Perfect" by the conceptual artist James Lee Byars. Her earliest book reviews were for The New York Times Book Review and The Village Voice. Beginning in 1995, she was The New York Times's photography critic for nearly a decade and interviewed Robert Frank, Vito Acconci, and Helen Levitt. From 2000 to 2001 Boxer was also a theater critic at The New York Times. She began contributing to Artforum in 2001. Her pieces included an examination of the visual remains of September 11, a book review of Deirdre Bair's Saul Steinberg biography, an essay on Lewis Carroll's photography, and a consideration of "The Masters of American Comics"show, an all-male revue, from a feminist perspective.

From 2004 to 2006 she served as the New York Times's first and last critic of arts and culture on the Web, bringing readers a digital version of Christo's "Gates," the confessional website PostSecret, a site devoted to onomatopoeia, Bzzzpeek, the topic of politically motivated online vandalism, especially on Wikipedia, the song mashups following Hurricane Katrina, and a new online religion devoted to the Flying Spaghetti Monster. After leaving the Times, Boxer edited the anthology Ultimate Blogs: Masterworks from the Wild Web (Vintage Books, 2008) and started writing critical essays and reviews for The New York Review of Books, The Atlantic, Slate, The Comics Journal, The New Yorker, The Los Angeles Review of Books, The Wall Street Journal, and Bookforum.

=== Essays ===

Boxer's essays often have a personal, quirky edge. At The Atlantic she detailed the experience of reading all of Marcel Proust's "In Search of Lost Time" on her cellphone. Her catalogue essay, "Ripped From the Headlines," which she wrote for "Shock of the News," a National Gallery of Art exhibition about the use of newspapers in art, homed in on the violence and envy often displayed in this art. In a piece for The New Yorker about Georgia O'Keeffe's and Robert Adams's photography of the West Boxer wove in her experiences of trying to capture the West with her Kodak Instamatic as a teenager.

A number of Boxer's writings have been anthologized. Her New York Review of Books piece on the creator of Krazy Kat, George Herriman, "His Inner Cat," appeared in Best American Comics Criticism as "The Cat In the Hat." Her Atlantic essay "Why Are All the Cartoon Mothers Dead," which analyzed why kids' animated films so often kill off the mother figures at the beginning of the movie, was chosen for the textbook Rereading America: Cultural Contexts for Critical Thinking and Writing. Her New York Times piece on the healing powers of New Yorkistan, a humorous New York map drawn by Maira Kalman and Rick Meyerowitz after September 11, was adapted for the book You Are Here: NYC: Mapping the Soul of the City. Her essay "The Exemplary Narcissism of Snoopy" which was called "stunningly good" on Bryan Garner's LawProse blog, was subsequently anthologized in The Peanuts Papers.

=== Comics ===

At age eleven, Boxer published her first drawing in The Englewood Herald in Colorado. Beginning in the 1990s, she drew occasional spot drawings for the Op-Ed page and the Week in Review of The New York Times.

Boxer's first book-length comic, In The Floyd Archives: A Psycho-Bestiary (Pantheon, 2001), which is based on Sigmund Freud's case histories and stars a cast of neurotic animals, was described as "part academe and part whimsy, a wildly clever collection" by The New York Times. In a review titled "Floydian Funnies," The Comics Journal noted that "Boxer belongs to the line of erudite, intellectual cartooning exemplified by Jules Feiffer, David Levine and Edward Gorey."

Mother May I?: A Post-Floydian Folly (IP Books, 2019), Boxer's second psychoanalytic comic, which Alison Bechdel described as "hilarious and terrifying ... so edifying and so absurd," was based on the life and work of Melanie Klein and Donald Winnicott. The Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association said that that Boxer "does nothing short of embodying -- in fact, giving animal bodies to -- a pantheon of iconic psychoanalytic characters and the love-hate relationships they bring to life."

In Boxer's first Shakespearean Tragic-Comic, Hamlet: Prince of Pigs, Hamlet is played by a little piglet, Hamlet's uncle Claudius, the murderer, "the bloat king," is played by a big fat hog, and Hamlet's mother, Gertrude, is played by a pig with lipstick. Boxer followed up with Anchovius Caesar: The Decomposition of a Romaine Salad, a comic in which Caesar is played by an anchovy, Mark Antony is a mock anchovy (a sprat), the Romans are leaves of romaine lettuce, and the Countrymen are crouton men. In an interview in Print, Steve Heller described Boxer's Tragic-Comics as "exposing the great William Shakespeare to the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune."

== References ==

Thank you so much for your help! Wabbitty (talk) 18:28, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

 Done though has some minor formatting issues with the copy paste - I'll take a look. NotAGenious (talk) 18:40, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Wabbitty and @NotAGenious, sorry, I think we edit conflicted it. I also re-added the refs at the same time! Qcne (talk) 18:43, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Ah, you're faster than light. I think its OK now. NotAGenious (talk) 18:47, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

So, how do I submit it properly or can you do it for me? I am super button-shy after losing all my footnotes twice! Wabbitty (talk) 19:22, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

@Wabbitty: To resubmit the draft, click the Resubmit button in the big pink template at the top of your draft. Note that the articles written by Boxer do not help with Wikipedia's notability criteria. GoingBatty (talk) 19:26, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

I have added in a lot of non-Boxer authored citations. Should I remove all citations that are Boxer-authored or let an editor decide which ones to remove? Wabbitty (talk) 21:34, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

@Wabbitty The only ones worth keeping are those which other reliable sources have commented on. In general, notability is conferred by what others unconnected with Boxer have said about her writing, not by listing what she has written, however extensive that is. Mike Turnbull (talk) 21:43, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

I took out most of the Boxer-authored references and I hit the re-submit button but I don't think it went through. This is what I submitted. Could you please try to submit it for me?

Sarah Boxer

is a writer, cartoonist, and critic born in

Denver

, Colorado. Her critical essays and reviews have appeared in

The Atlantic

,

The New York Review of Books

,

The Comics Journal

,

The New Yorker

,

Slate

,

Artforum

,

Bookforum,

and

The New York Times Book Review

. At the

New York Times

(1989-2006), she was an editor for

The Book Review

and the Week in Review, a photography critic, a theater critic, a critic of arts and culture on the Web, and a culture reporter covering visual culture, philosophy, literature, psychoanalysis, sex, and animals. She is the author and illustrator of four

graphic novels

.

== Education ==

Boxer went to high school at Colorado Academy. At Harvard College she earned an AB degree with honors in philosophy. Her thesis, on Aristotle's theory of time, was advised by Martha Nussbaum. After college, when Boxer moved to New York City to become a journalist, she studied drawing and illustration at Parsons, the Art Students League, and the New York Studio School.

== Career ==

=== Journalism ===

Boxer began her career in journalism as a science writer and editor, first at The Sciences, the magazine of the New York Academy of Sciences, then at Discover magazine. In the late 1980s she was a writer for Sports Illustrated and Sports Illustrated for Kids. In 1989, she became an editor at The New York Times Book Review, where she assigned and edited reviews of books on psychology, science, and nature. In 1997 she became a reporter on the Arts & Ideas page of The New York Times, where she covered the visual arts, philosophy, sex, and psychoanalysis.

At The New York Times, Boxer practiced her own brand of participatory journalism. She took the Mensa test in order to document the experience, for instance, and she once crawled inside the orgone box belonging to the cartoonist William Steig while interviewing him for his obituary. On the 75th anniversary of The New Yorker she penned a piece from the point of view of the magazine's famous pronoun, We.

Boxer was known for making complex ideas comprehensible, such as opticality in Renaissance painting, the nomenclature of military operations, and Freud's Seduction Hypothesis. Following the attacks of September 11, 2001 she focused on the photography and videos of that day and was one of the many reporters who composed short profiles of the victims, the Portraits of Grief. Her work for that year was nominated for a Pulitzer. She also wrote some notable obituaries for The New York Times, including on the philosopher G.E.M. Anscombe, on the director of the Sigmund Freud Archives, Kurt Eissler, and on the cartoonists Saul Steinberg, William Steig, and Charles Schulz.

=== Criticism ===

Boxer's career as a critic began on the editorial board of The Harvard Crimson, where she reviewed the movie The Europeans and "The Exhibit of Perfect" by the conceptual artist James Lee Byars. Her earliest book reviews were for The New York Times Book Review and The Village Voice. Beginning in 1995, she was The New York Times's photography critic for nearly a decade and interviewed Robert Frank, Vito Acconci, and Helen Levitt. From 2000 to 2001 Boxer was also a theater critic at The New York Times.

She began contributing to Artforum in 2001. Her pieces included an examination of the visual remains of September 11, a book review of Deirdre Bair's Saul Steinberg biography, and a consideration of "The Masters of American Comics" show, an all-male exhibition, from a feminist perspective. An essay she wrote on an essay on Lewis Carroll's photography for Artforum, including his pictures of Alice Liddell, the model and muse for Alice's Adventures in Wonderland, led Boxer to an examination of the curious, otherworldly nature of Alices through modern history, including Alice B. Toklas, Alice James, Alice Roosevelt Longworth, Alice Neel, and Alice Coltrane, which she lectured about at the Lewis Carroll Society of North America.

From 2004 to 2006 Boxer served as the New York Times's first and last critic of arts and culture on the Web, bringing readers a digital version of Christo's "Gates," the confessional website known as PostSecret, an audio site devoted to onomatopoeia, Bzzzpeek, the topic of politically motivated online vandalism, especially on Wikipedia; and a new online religion devoted to the Flying Spaghetti Monster. In a critic's notebook headlined "Art of the Internet: A Protest Song, Reloaded," about the musical mashups following Hurricane Katrina, Boxer explored how the meaning of Green Day's "Wake Me Up When September Ends," was forever altered. After leaving the Times, Boxer edited the anthology Ultimate Blogs: Masterworks from the Wild Web (Vintage Books, 2008) and started writing critical essays and reviews for The New York Review of Books, The Atlantic, Slate, The Comics Journal, The New Yorker, The Los Angeles Review of Books, The Wall Street Journal, and Bookforum.

=== Essays ===

Boxer's essays tend to have a quirky edge. At The Atlantic she detailed the experience of reading all of Marcel Proust's "In Search of Lost Time" on her cellphone.Her catalogue essay, "Ripped From the Headlines," which she wrote for "Shock of the News," a National Gallery of Art exhibition about the use of newspapers in art, homed in on the violence and envy often displayed in this art. In "Flogging Freud," an essay she wrote for The New York Times Book Review about the Freud Wars, she analyzed the many contradictory ways that "Freud has proved to be a great whipping boy for our time."

A number of Boxer's writings have been anthologized. Her New York Review of Books piece on the creator of Krazy Kat, George Herriman, "His Inner Cat," appeared in Best American Comics Criticism as "The Cat In the Hat." Her Atlantic essay "Why Are All the Cartoon Mothers Dead," which analyzed why kids' animated films so often kill off the mother figures at the beginning of the movie, was chosen for the textbook Rereading America: Cultural Contexts for Critical Thinking and Writing. Her New York Times piece on the healing powers of New Yorkistan, a humorous New York map drawn by Maira Kalman and Rick Meyerowitz after September 11, was adapted for the book You Are Here: NYC: Mapping the Soul of the City. Her essay "The Exemplary Narcissism of Snoopy,"which was called "stunningly good" and held up as prose to emulate on Bryan Garner's LawProse blog, was subsequently anthologized in The Peanuts Papers.

=== Comics ===

At age eleven, Boxer published her first drawing in The Englewood Herald in Colorado. Beginning in the 1990s, she drew occasional spot drawings for the Op-Ed page and the Week in Review of The New York Times.

Boxer's first graphic novel, In The Floyd Archives: A Psycho-Bestiary (Pantheon, 2001) , which The New York Times Book Review described as "a smart, droll, original series of interconnected cartoons" based on Sigmund Freud's case histories (the Rat Man, the Wolf Man, Little Hans, and Dora), stars a cast of neurotic animals in therapy. The playwright Jenny Lyn Bader called the comic "part academe and part whimsy, a wildly clever collection" In a review titled "Floydian Funnies," The Comics Journal noted that "Boxer belongs to the line of erudite, intellectual cartooning exemplified by Jules Feiffer, David Levine and Edward Gorey."

Mother May I?: A Post-Floydian Folly (IP Books, 2019), Boxer's second psychoanalytic comic, which Alison Bechdel described as "hilarious and terrifying ... so edifying and so absurd," was based on the life and work of Melanie Klein and Donald Winnicott. The Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association said that Boxer "does nothing short of embodying -- in fact, giving animal bodies to -- a pantheon of iconic psychoanalytic characters and the love-hate relationships they bring to life." Tablet magazine noted of Boxer's Mother May I? and In the Floyd Archives, "Her psychoanalytic comix are ingeniously playful reminders of how much we carry around, no matter how far we think we’ve moved on from the Freudian fantasyland."

In 2019 Boxer drew her first Shakespearean Tragic-Comic, Hamlet: Prince of Pigs. In this work, Hamlet is played by a little piglet, Hamlet's uncle Claudius, the murderer, "the bloat king," is played by a big fat hog, and Hamlet's mother, Gertrude, is played by a pig with lipstick. Boxer followed up with Anchovius Caesar: The Decomposition of a Romaine Salad, a comic in which Caesar is played by an anchovy, Mark Antony is a mock anchovy (a sprat), the Romans are leaves of romaine lettuce, and the Countrymen are crouton men. In an online interview for Print, Steve Heller described Boxer's Tragic-Comics as "exposing the great William Shakespeare to the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune."

== References ==

Wabbitty (talk) 22:53, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

When I hit the re-submit button I see a floating white box that says: Template

Generated from: AFC submission

There's an option to Edit this, but I'm afraid to do that... Wabbitty (talk) 23:06, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Draft Decline

This article https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Dekunle_Okunrinboye got rejected after I have corrected the first adviced a reviewer highlighted but I feel it notable for inclusion, He has enough Good sources from reliable sources. Will kindly request for another editor to look and advice at it.Fmnoble (talk) 18:19, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

It was declined NOT rejected. Theroadislong (talk) 18:20, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Ok, Thank you for the correction, but the article has the necessary citations for inclusion. Should I provide sources or what do you advise.Fmnoble (talk) 18:29, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

@Fmnoble: Welcome to the Teahouse! I suggest you start a discussion on Draft talk:Dekunle Okunrinboye and ask the reviewer for specifics on why they declined the article. I wonder how many of the citations are not independent (e.g. interviews). GoingBatty (talk) 19:16, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

GoingBatty, He has about 5 good independent sources (Secondary). I can provide sources here to prove my point.Fmnoble (talk) 19:23, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Fmnoble, which three of the sources cited in Draft:Dekunle Okunrinboye, in your opinion, provide the best support for the claim of notability? Maproom (talk) 07:30, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Maproom kindly see [[2]][[3]][[4]]Fmnoble (talk) 10:31, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

How do I make a bot?

I want to make a bot that will manage draft categories. How can I make such a bot? I have programming experience but little other knowledge about how wikipedia bots work. Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (talk to the cutest Wikipedian) 18:42, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Immanuelle. Start by studying Wikipedia:Bot policy. Cullen328 (talk) 18:50, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

@Immanuelle: Hi there! I'm curious - what would you want the bot to do when it is managing draft categories? GoingBatty (talk) 19:11, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

@GoingBatty It will do a few different things to enable easy draft category editing.

• Apply the Template:Draft categories template to any drafts with categories. This means that if text such as [[Category:Example category]] is present in the code (as a single category) then it will be replaced with {{draft categories|[[Category:Example category]]}}
• It will move disorganized categories into one draft categories template
• It will change legacy category disabling such as [[:Category:Example category]] or <nowiki>[[Category:Example category]]</nowiki> to ones using the draft category template
• (more controversial addition) it will find any empty draft category templates and introduct a dummy category to them to make hotcat work with it. It will also remove such a category in the event that another category is added.

This will allow for people to use hotcat more intuitively with draft articles Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (talk to the cutest Wikipedian) 19:33, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

This is all relatively easy to do in code. I could write it in C# in an hour, I just don't know what languages are acceptable for bots and how to host them. Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (talk to the cutest Wikipedian) 21:14, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Immanuelle, please read Help:Creating a bot. Cullen328 (talk) 22:33, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

@Immanuelle: I already have a bot that does #1. The hard part is efficiently identifying which drafts have article categories. GoingBatty (talk) 22:52, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

@GoingBatty oh are there draft categories that ought to be applied solely to drafts without going into articlespace? Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (talk to the cutest Wikipedian) 22:57, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

@Immanuelle: There are over 2,000 draft categories, most of which should be applied via templates. GoingBatty (talk) 23:43, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

User:Immanuelle, you may wish to encode some patience into your bot, letting unsubmitted drafts sit with their category problems for 24 hours since the most recent edit before the bot edits them. Newer editors often leave the editing interface open for long periods of time while working on an edit, and don't expect edit conflicts or understand how to resolve them. Folly Mox (talk) 01:57, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Editing New Submission

I am a first time contributor to Wikipedia. My submission has been rejected and I am going to need to make substantial changes. I cannot figure out how to make changes and save them to the draft without having to publish and resubmit the article before it is ready. Any help you can give me would be appreciated. Thanks. MrMull (talk) 18:44, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:H. Wayne Rudmose Industrial Insect (talk) 18:49, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi @MrMull, "Publish" in the Wikipedia sense means on the Editor means "Save". You won't actually be publishing for re-review, but you will be saving the changes to the draft. When you're ready to re-submit, click the blue Resubmit button. Qcne (talk) 18:50, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you very much! MrMull (talk) 19:05, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Creating a new category

Everytime I insert {{Wikidata Infobox it does not come. I am creating a category for prince of hailing, xiao zhaowen and his wikidata infobox is not appearing. What am I supposed to do? The same name for wikidata. #bodyContent aFlag Creator { background-color: #ffa500; color: #ggggggg; font-weight: monoscope; } 19:16, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

@Flag Creator: Template:Wikidata_Infobox was deleted in January, so it is no longer available for use. I am not familiar with Wikidata usage, hopefully another editor can help you with that part. RudolfRed (talk) 21:08, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

IN or ON

Is there a concise explanation of "in" or "on" when it comes to grammar between British and American English? The explanations I used to use are no longer available to me and i tried the internet explanations. Thank you.2603:8000:D300:3650:4416:2712:8134:A62B (talk) 21:33, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Is it a Wikipedia article that you used to use but is no longer available? The closest I can find is this, but possibly you are referring to a resource outside of Wikipedia? Podstawko (talk) 06:10, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello. Does Comparison of American and British English help? I fear that a concise explanation of "in" or "on" when it comes to grammar between British and American English is something that does not and cannot exist. While I'm sure there are places where BrE and AmE differ in their use of these two prepositions, I doubt that there is a systematic difference, as opposed to a list of phrases and constructions where they differ. ColinFine (talk) 11:00, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

New editor needing help

Ya'll are such a friendly bunch, I'm hoping you can take over where I've left off with this new editor who needs your brand of patience. I tend not to edit on the weekends, and think maybe another helping hand is needed.Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:37, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Is it possible (and allowed) to reference an in-person event?

I need a reference for the "Awards and nominations" section of Draft:Krew (Youtube group) to Roblox Innovation Awards 2022 (and now, 2023). These were in-person events, and the only other sources I could find were listicles.

No longer needed. I just found an unlisted video of the 2022 event on Roblox's official YouTube channel through a link from their blog. Still, feel free to answer this question, as someone may find the answer useful. Edited 22:42, 22 September 2023 (UTC) AKFkrewfamKF1 (talk) 22:33, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

@AKFkrewfamKF1: Welcome to the Teahouse! The citation needs to be a published source for verifiability purposes, such as a video or newspaper article or conference proceedings. It can't just be what someone thinks they heard. GoingBatty (talk) 22:55, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Good thing I found the video then. Thanks AKFkrewfamKF1 (talk) 22:59, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

There's also the question: if an award has not been noticed or commented on by any independent sources, why is it significant enough to be mentioned in an encyclopaedia article? Many awards are little more than self-congratulary marketing puff passed around within an industry sector. ColinFine (talk) 11:05, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

now that you mention it, it is a very Roblox-specific event, but I am only mentioning the subject's nominations and winnings. I may remove the references if the draft is declined again. AKFkrewfamKF1 (talk) 14:05, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Interviews considered primary sources?

Hi all! Fairly new editor here with a question -- I've had a page that I feel is exceptionally well suited for publication declined, and the reason cited was that there are too many primary sources and not secondary. The note also mentioned that interviews are primary sources, which I find confusing. Can someone provide some insight?

For more context, this page is for a filmmaker, whose films already have wiki pages, and 13 sources were provided along with some internal links as well.

Thank you all in advance for your help navigating this tricky wiki stuff! Lydiajk (talk) 23:22, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Lydiajk, and welcome to the Teahouse! You might find it useful to read WP:PST, which explains the differences between a primary, secondary, and tertiary source - an interview is a primary source because it contains no analysis or synthesis, and is instead an unfiltered perspective from the person themselves. Tollens (talk) 23:28, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:David O'Donnell. GoingBatty (talk) 23:35, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

thank you for the quick reply! And if the interview is integrated into a greater article, that does include some analysis/synthesis (ie reflections from the journalist) does that constitute as secondary? 2603:8000:A703:FC9F:C51D:E0DE:2948:3E89 (talk) 23:44, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Yes, but only the analysis - the interview itself will always be primary. Tollens (talk) 23:51, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Got it! Thank you Lydiajk (talk) 00:03, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! Edit made. Lydiajk (talk) 23:50, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Filtering for flagged articles

Hello, I'm not an editor, but I would like to be able to see a view-only list of articles currently flagged for grammar, organization, misleading, etc. I'm doing research for a library class. Thanks, Eric Lib-veritas (talk) 23:57, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

@Lib-veritas: Template:Category tracker#Cleanup has a list of categories that may be useful to you, such as Category:All articles needing rewrite or Category:All pages needing factual verification. Tollens (talk) 00:04, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Fantastic! Super helpful, and just what I was looking for. Thanks so much! Lib-veritas (talk) 00:36, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

@Lib-veritas There is a very comprehensive listing of articles that have been marked for some sort of cleanup which you can reach and download at this URL. That would allow you to focus on articles by topic area. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:42, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Infobox photo

I recently uploaded a photo to the infobox of my draft Draft:The Glass Harmonica (film) - Wikipedia The photo isn't centered and is in its own border, which isn't how its supposed to be. Help:Infobox/picture - Wikipedia says that I need to remove the |thumb| part of the image file. I tried to do that different ways, but it either made the image way too big or deleted it entirely. Does anyone here know how to get it right? Thanks! Welcome back bro (talk) 00:19, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

I've edited it here. Feel free to revert or change my edit if it's not what you want. CodeTalker (talk) 00:48, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

I've disabled the image displaying for now as the page is not yet in article space - non-free images are only allowed in article pages per WP:NFCP. Feel free to add it back when the page gets published. I notice the image is currently on Wikimedia Commons, which doesn't allow non-free images at all, so the image will likely soon be deleted there. You can, however, host the image directly on Wikipedia; you can upload it using the file upload wizard once the page is published. Tollens (talk) 06:58, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Would I click on "This is a copyrighted, non-free work, but I believe it is Fair Use" and then "This is some other kind of non-free work that I believe is legitimate Fair Use"? Or would I upload them a different way? Thanks! Welcome back bro (talk) 12:26, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

weird day review

Hi, I'm a fairly new student editor, however I have good support from my teacher and peer reviewer and so far have felt quite welcomed on Wikipedia from all of you who have communicated with me. I have tasks of general editing, creating pages, improving pages, and bringing pages to good standing. I chose to focus on women in STEAM and advocacy.

Today I edited two pages and had two things happen that I would like to ask for help and support from more experienced editors. Would you please help me with this?

1) I started to edit Grimes and before I could even finish, a flurry of activity happened on that article and talk page including editor fighting and reverting (not with me, but amongst others) and at some point through that my good faith edits were erased. I really don't think they should have been. Will an experienced editor take a look at that page and give me your feedback, and also advise if I should even try to go back there and edit any more? If my edits should stand, would you please revert them back?

2) There was a template tag on Amy Karle, I read about it and followed the information to improve the page and remove the tag. I did significant editing, re-writing a large part of the article. Nonetheless the tag was quickly reverted without much feedback. (It seems they may not have thoroughly reviewed my work before re-adding the tag?) I engaged a dialogue on the talk page about it. Will a more experienced editor please review that article and make edits to remove the tags? Both my teacher and peer reviewer think the tags seem better suited for the talk page than the main page at this point. What do you think? If you think I made the appropriate changes please remove the tag. If not, would you please give your feedback and advice?

Thank you LWu22 (talk) 02:26, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

@LWu22: Please be patient and wait for the responses on the article talk pages. It's not necessary to also post the same questions on your talk page and here. GoingBatty (talk) 03:36, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

At Amy Karle it appears at View history that you removed all tags on 9/23 and those have not been restored. David notMD (talk) 11:32, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Editing Citations

I was working in Citation Hunt, and I came across this:

In page Kabul:

" In 1826, the kingdom was claimed by Dost Mohammad Khan, but in 1839 Shujah Shah Durrani was re-installed with the help of the British Empire during the First Anglo-Afghan War. In 1841 a local uprising resulted in the killing of the British resident and loss of mission in Kabul and the 1842 retreat from Kabul to Jalalabad. In 1842 the British returned to Kabul, demolishing the city's main bazaar in revenge before returning to British India (now Pakistan). Akbar Khan took to the throne from 1842 to 1845 and was followed by Dost Mohammad Khan.[citation needed]

I went to the page, and it actually shows a citation there [55](?). I visited the source, and I couldn't find anything that talked about Akbar Khan, much less their taking the throne. The citation says it was retrieved 20 June, and in the page's history on that date, the edit note says "Added citations", as in more than one. I don't want to use the undo button so as not to undo any other citations, so I clicked on the Edit button to see if it were possible to delete just that specific citation, and therein it shows the citation as [51](!). So now I'm thoroughly confused. :) Any help/guidance you can provide to an utter newbie would be much appreciated, thank you. Cthulos (talk) 02:38, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Wikipedia:Citation Hunt (I learn something new all the time.) GoingBatty (talk) 03:33, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

(deleting my previous response as it was inaccurate). Podstawko (talk) 05:50, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Where do you see 51? I can see citation 55 for that fragment. And if it is incorrect, indeed you can remove it and change to "citation needed". Podstawko (talk) 05:50, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

@Cthulos: I believe this is caused by having inline citations contained in the infobox. I'm not sure why it causes a shift in the inline citation numbers from before and after hitting the edit button. So I would also be interested in an explanation. The inline citation appears to go to [5] when editing the citation. TipsyElephant (talk) 12:05, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Justus von Dohnányi

Is there a easier way to create table/ convert template content to tables w.r.t filmography? Without manually adding one by one. Jeraxmoira (talk) 06:38, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

If you have a CSV or other tabular format to convert from, here is a nice tool: Convert CSV to MediaWiki Table Podstawko (talk) 06:46, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank! Will try it out. <3 Jeraxmoira (talk) 07:25, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Templates

Hey, I would like to create a new template, but not sure how to go about it. Could someone link me to a page where it is explained? Thanks. Professor Penguino (talk) 06:49, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Hey Professor Penguino, This may help you Help:A quick guide to templates. Jeraxmoira (talk) 06:59, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! Professor Penguino (talk) 07:02, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Help:A quick guide to templates, also Help:Template under 'Writing templates' NotAGenious (talk) 06:59, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Definitely will be helpful! Much thanks! Professor Penguino (talk) 07:03, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

No worries. Good luck! NotAGenious (talk) 07:08, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Btw, is it possible to move a template into user space? Professor Penguino (talk) 07:35, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Yes - same way you would normally move any other page. Tollens (talk) 08:01, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. Professor Penguino (talk) 08:25, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

And you can even transclude a template from user space. The only significance of Template: space is that it is the default namespace for transclusion. ColinFine (talk) 11:10, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Randy Davison

I'm tempted to push this through, but would like further opinions. I'm not getting exact reasons for why this doesn't pass WP:NACTOR. I can guess not having notable awards is one reason. But they appear to have enough significant credits to justify inclusion with their filmography or stage credits. Some sources aren't as significant or independent as others, so that perhaps could be the issue too. I've included some of the better refs on the talk page. Filmforme (talk) 06:58, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

I think the article is very well written for a draft, apart from a few minor typos. I think the trouble is that those who have reviewed it don’t think it has sufficient coverage from reliable sources to warrant it becoming an article. (P.S. I actually think you have proven that the subject has significant coverage, but I don’t have the power to turn drafts into articles). Professor Penguino (talk) 07:05, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Both criteria for actors (significant roles in multiple films + prolific contributions) are met, and as @Professor Penguino wrote, the article is well researched and written. If I had the power to do that, I'd approve this draft. Podstawko (talk) 07:11, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

It also seems to me on a quick look over your WP:THREE sources that the draft passes WP:NBASIC even if not WP:NACTOR. I'll ping Timtrent, the most recent reviewer - would you mind explaining your rationale for declining the draft a bit further? Tollens (talk) 07:19, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

@Professor Penguino @Podstawko @Tollens Thanks for your opinions. I've cited some more material and with your thoughts, I'll move it to article space now. I appreciate the insight. –Filmforme (talk) 08:25, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia pools

Why are wikipedia "pools" there, just for fun? are any of them even "serious"? 88.110.38.249 (talk) 07:23, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Wikipedia:Pools

Could you elaborate on your question a bit? I’m not sure I understand. Professor Penguino (talk) 07:54, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Per that page, they are places in which people make guesses about various future milestones for Wikipedia. That's it. It's neither fun nor serious. Shantavira|^{feed me} 07:57, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

I know, but I don't see any reasom for them to be there. 88.110.38.249 (talk) 10:09, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

I mean, it’s pretty self-explanatory. They are there so people can make predictions and have fun. Professor Penguino (talk) 10:24, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

EDIT A NAME

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad ADD P.B.U.H IN FONT OF MUHAMMAD NAME 2400:ADCC:16E:D00:9956:7A5E:4B7D:85E (talk) 08:38, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

This is generally not done unless contained in a quotation, per the manual of style. Tollens (talk) 08:40, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

We do not use honorifics, (PBUH, SAW, SWT etc.) as is explained at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Islam-related articles - Arjayay (talk) 10:30, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Translating an existing article into another language

Hey there!

I'm new to editing Wikipedia but I'd love to translate some existing articles from English to my native language Slovenian. Is there any specific way I should go about it or do I just translate what's written and format it to make proper sense? AmFennyFox (talk) 08:42, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

@AmFennyFox Some guidance at Wikipedia:Translate us. Perhaps you'd like to consider this one I started? Christoph Steidl Porenta. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:50, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you very much! AmFennyFox (talk) 09:37, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello @AmFennyFox, and welcome to the Teahouse.

Please check out WP:TRANSLATE and WP:TRANSLATEUS. Happy editing! 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁＝☁＝✈) 08:51, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you very much! Those links are very helpful! AmFennyFox (talk) 09:37, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Btw, Wikipedia:WikiProject Slovenia may be of interest. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:53, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Language hurting religious sentiments.

I wanted to ask if changes to a page's language can be made if it hurts religious sentiment. Context of it is: in page on celebrations of birth of a Hindu God, Hindu gods are mentioned as statue, whereas in local and Hindi language we call it "Murti". Which is Sanskrit word for representing physical non-living form of God. Interesting thing here is when I searched for other religion's idol worship, I found that they don't consider idols as Gods at all. May be this issue is bigger and arisen because of insensitivity. I don't want to go there, just answer in this page's context, i hope wiki org will get to bottom of it sometime in future. Ankraj giri (talk) 15:03, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

PS: I have edited the page because I was in middle of editing when I asked question here. Ankraj giri (talk) 15:08, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

@ankraj giri: we will not have articles pander to religions. ltbdl (talk) 15:10, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

I understand what you are saying. But then why don't we call God Non-existent beings or existence not verified in articles on Gods. Articles pandering to religion is not equal to articles respecting Gods. Here I am asking for language that respects them. Question would rise why should lots article be modified to respect gods. My answer is simple respect all of them or don't respect any of them. Ankraj giri (talk) 15:20, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

@Ltbdl This isn't a question of "pandering" and I am aghast to see this phrasing here in this context. -- asilvering (talk) 15:21, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Ankraj giri, as this is the English-language Wikipedia, it would (in my opinion) be inappropriate to use routinely a Hindi word unknown to the large majority of English speakers, though of course it can be added and defined/linked where appropriate, as you have done. Your definition of the word "Murti" above is in perfect accordance with the English word 'statue', which is not disrespectful and is routinely used for such representations in and by many religions, including Christianity (although Wikipedia is religiously neutral and does (or should) not favour the point of view of any religion – Disclosure: I am an Eclectic Wiccan).

The word "idol" is not a perfect synonym for "statue". It often does imply a degree of disrespect and a particular religious point of view ("Our representations of God(s) are statues or icons, yours are idols."), so should only be used in particular applications or when accurately quoting sources (which may date from an earlier era when such bias was routine).

I'm sure other will want to contribute their views on this matter. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 51.198.107.25 (talk) 15:57, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zsolt Süle

Could anyone comment on this Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zsolt Süle Pottyantós WC (talk) 17:32, 23 September 2023 (UTC)