Jump to content

Wikipedia:Teahouse

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Mr.shaikmeer (talk | contribs) at 05:45, 13 December 2023 (Page Review!: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Skip to top
Skip to bottom


What to do when multiple reliable sources publish misleading information?

In regards to Dave the Diver - Wikipedia this article. An administrator previously threatened to block a user for trying to edit the article to state that the game was not an indie game, when in fact it was. The admin's reasoning was due to reliable sources stating the game was "indie". Even though the incident appears to be resolved it makes me curious about how a similar incident would be solved for posterity 🅶🅰🅼🅾🆆🅴🅱🅱🅴🅳 (talk) 13:08, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Gamowebbed WP:RSN. Doug Weller talk 18:27, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Gamowebbed WP:DR might be of interest. When there's dispute about whether a source is reliable or not for any particular piece of information, and editors politely but persistently disagree, that tends to go to WP:DRN or WP:3O and maybe eventually WP:RFC. If someone is a dick about it or otherwise disrupts that process, that's when admins tend to step in. An admin shouldn't be using the threat of blocks to enforce a content issue like "what do the sources say". -- asilvering (talk) 12:18, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the info @Asilvering, I have decided to submit an ANI to seek administrator counsel. 🅶🅰🅼🅾🆆🅴🅱🅱🅴🅳 (talk) 14:27, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oh dear. -- asilvering (talk) 16:12, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
For posterity. Folly Mox (talk) 03:56, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I mean, it is true that DtD isn't an indie game. Nexon is one of the biggest gaming companies in the world and they are a multi-billion dollar company. Just because it's a small team doesn't mean it's indie, Mintrocket is still just another name for Nexon. There's probably sources that back this up. Nexon/Mintrocket said themselves that the game looks like an indie game but it's not. It's really shady that they pretended to be an indie game studio. WhereverWeAreNow (talk) 17:38, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Page Numbers

How do I add page numbers when citing books? LeónGonsalvesofGoa (talk) 04:01, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! In the {{Cite book}} template, you can specify one page with the |p= parameter, or a range of pages with the |pp= parameter. If you need help using these parameters in the Visual editor or otherwise would like clarification, let me know! Remsense 04:03, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Can I use the template with an auto-generated citation? LeónGonsalvesofGoa (talk) 04:08, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes! When you put in an ISBN or otherwise automatically generate a citation for a book, what it does is create a {{Cite book}} template under the hood. If you are using VisualEditor, do you see where you can specify page numbers? If not, check out Help:VisualEditor#Editing templates.
If you are not using VisualEditor, you should be able to add the parameter with all the others! Don't hesitate to ask me for more help if you still need it. :) Remsense 04:11, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
LeónGonsalvesofGoa, if a book is cited at all, it's typically cited more than once. Rather than having two or more fully written out REF tags, differing only in page numbers, consider using the combination of (A) named references -- <ref name="arbitrary_name">{{Cite book | [lots of bibliographical detail but no page number(s)]}}</ref> just once, <ref name="arbitrary_name" /> every other time -- and (B) Template:Rp. -- Hoary (talk) 07:29, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There's already two good options here, but another alternative is to add the |ref= parameter in your first citation (e.g. <ref>{{cite book |last=Lastname |first=Firstname |title=Apples and Oranges |year=2013 |publisher=Penguin |pages=105–107 |ref=Lastname2013}}</ref>) and then when the citation comes up again, add <ref>[[#Lastname2013|Lastname 2013]], p. 113.</ref> This'll end up looking like this:
Some scientists say apples are oranges.[1] Other scientists say apples are lemons.[2] ~ F4U (talkthey/it) 05:11, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This alternative is a non-standard approach not mentioned in help or info pages, and I wouldn't recommend it, especially not for a new user. Instead, follow what Hoary said above, which reflects the recommended way of reusing references as explained in the Help page at Footnotes: using a source more than once. Mathglot (talk) 10:02, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Refs

  1. ^ Lastname, Firstname (2013). Apples and Oranges. Penguin. pp. 105–107.
  2. ^ Lastname 2013, p. 113.

delete all the

per "i added an image to this article and was then informed that that image might not have actually been the legal way to do it", can image deletion be handled here, as opposed to in commons? cogsan (give me attention) (see my deeds) 19:23, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Cogsan. Welcome to the Teahouse. You can undo the edit yourself by going to the article's 'view history' tab and clicking on the undo button in the latest entry. In the edit history, you can mention it as 'self-revert'. Hope this helps <3 Jeraxmoira (talk) 19:41, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That is how you remove it from the article, but that doesn't delete the actual image file. @Cogsan: If the file is at Commons, you will need to follow Commons procedure, yes. -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 19:58, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict)Ah! I think I misunderstood your question earlier. To address it properly now, I've tagged the image for speedy deletion, following your request. Jeraxmoira (talk) 19:57, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
guess that works lol
thanks cogsan (give me attention) (see my deeds) 20:15, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
incidentally, wouldn't it have been a g11, as opposed to a g7? cogsan (give me attention) (see my deeds) 20:19, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No. You requested the deletion. G11 is promotional; this image was not promotional. It could have been filed as a G12, unambiguous copyvio. --Tagishsimon (talk) 20:23, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Notes in entry on Gilbert Stuart (artist) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilbert_Stuart

I've had a problem with the following note corrections (given in quotes). Would someone please help? I'd be very grateful.

Note 2, change Ireland to "London." At the end of the note, add this explanatory source for the name problem: "Evans, Dorinda, Gilbert Stuart and the Impact of Manic Depression, Ashgate Publishing Ltd., 2013, p. 127."

Note 35: "Quote from Jane Stuart in" Evans, 2013, p. 14.

Note 46: add missing pages at the end of the note: Evans 2013, pp. 18-19, "69-73, 82-84, 148."

Thanks so much for your attention. DEvans2 (talk) 20:09, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@DEvans2: I don't understand what you're asking, but for suggesting changes to an article, start a discussion on the talk page. RudolfRed (talk) 20:21, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Or, better, be WP:BOLD and fix it. RudolfRed (talk) 20:22, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for replying. I've submiotted my request again and tried to make it clearer. These are corrections to my own text. DEvans2 (talk) 21:36, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not seeking a discussion; I'm making corrections to what I wrote earlier in notes. This is self-correction. If you can't do it, please allow someone else to try. What is not clear about it? DEvans2 (talk) 21:14, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@DEvans2, what is not clear is that we don't understand what you're asking us to do.
The page is not protected, you can make any corrections yourself. Valereee (talk) 22:20, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The Editing Source page is almost gibberish. For instance, I want to correct what I already wrote in note 2 but that text now is " ref name = gsm />. It's meaningless without even a note number. How can I improve on what I can't read? I'm asking to make corrections in notes 2, 35, and 46. Or please lead me to where it is not all in code. When I worked on the entry before, the setup was different. I'm a beginner and not sure what I've done wrong. DEvans2 (talk) 01:31, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
DEvans2, if for some reason you cannot make corrections yourself, please describe the hurdle that you face. RudolfRed, Valereee and I can each of us do what you ask us to, but I imagine that they are as reluctant as I am either (A) to work unthinkingly for another editor or (B) to spend time evaluating asked-for changes before carrying them out. -- Hoary (talk) 22:28, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I did change notes 2 and 44 (previously note 46; not sure why instantly changed). Then I accidentally made a "cite error" in ending note 35. It should read: 35. Quote from Jane Stuart in Evans 2013, p. 14. This is under Personal Life, after the "exceedingly pretty" quote. The Help page gives instances of the error. How do I now re-do the note and remove the red citation? Sorry to be such a bother. DEvans2 (talk) 02:39, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Re the 46 to 44 change: as I think I've told you before, the references are numbered automatically (in the order they first appear in the text), so if someone (perhaps yourself, perhaps someone else) has deleted (or moved) a couple of different references from before what was 46, all those after the first deleted reference will drop their number by 1, and all those after the second deletion by a further 1. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.199.215.44 (talk) 15:03, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, this is obvious and I knew that. I didn't knowingly delete something. The problem now is getting rid of the red citation. DEvans2 (talk) 15:13, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@DEvans2 I commented it out. If it is needed, then you can add it back where it's cited and remove the <!-- and --> Mike Turnbull (talk) 21:45, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks so much, Mike. I really appreciate the help several of you have given. It's difficult for a novice, and I probably won't tgry this again. DEvans2 (talk) 22:36, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@DEvans2, I'd hate to see you decide not to contribute. I'm sorry I couldn't help more, I took a look a couple of times to see if I could figure out the problem, but unfortunately the citation style for the particular set of citations you were trying to work with is one I also find it very fiddly and difficult to work with, and therefore a bit daunting. Most articles I work with, I don't have that problem, so don't be reluctant to give it another try in future. Valereee (talk) 00:07, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks so much for your kind reply. DEvans2 (talk) 15:29, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Request feedback about draft article improvement

Hello all, I have been working on and off to create my first article Draft:Bhargav Sri Prakash . It started as a class project for school but it has turned in to quite a research project and I am learning a lot! Thank you to the experienced editors for reviewing my submission. I value your suggestions and to those who have contributed with edits. I have been researching more online and found a lot more news articles. However I am not sure I am on the right track with formatting and content. Basically I am looking at other articles and trying to learn by adapting the style. Can you please take a look and give me your advice? Thanking you, KrisJohanssen (talk) 08:21, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @KrisJohanssen, the draft mainly cites primary sources and only a few secondary sources making the subject less notable. I feel like some parts of it are written like a resume. Leoneix (talk) 09:50, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much for your kind and insightful feedback @Leoneix. I will work to make it less resume like. Can you please help me by removing any unfit primary sources? That way it the article can be edited based on the few secondary sources alone. As I am new to article creation I am not very sure about how to determine the difference. From my limited understanding when an article is written by an independent journalist or reporter and it has been published by a reputable newspaper/magazine/journal then it can qualify as an acceptable secondary source. Can you please clarify this for me? As I have tried to leave out any thing which appears as quotes in the articles where Mr Sri-Prakash was interviewed. This draft is mainly based on what the journalist has written in their own words. Thank you KrisJohanssen (talk) 15:39, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The subject comes across as a self-promoting bullshitter. His main claims to fame are that he was a national tennis champion (he wasn't), and that he's invemted a "digital vaccine" (it's not a vaccine). KrisJohanssen, I suggest that you find a more deserving subject for your efforts. Maproom (talk) 13:45, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
it doesn't matter what the persons done, if they're notable, then they could have a page about them. if we only made pages about good people, we wouldn't have pages like Hitler, Andrew Tate, Osama Bin Laden, etc. also, I suggest that you find a more deserving subject for your efforts. I wouldn't tell people on what they should and shouldn't edit. Babysharkboss2 was here!! (Talk to me!) (Goo Goo dolls) 19:56, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, but the salient points for the editor of this article is that they should be *very* critical of the sources they use, and they should seek not to over-promote the subject. The article right now is larded with superlatives, peacock terms, notability by association, overcitation &c. The first four paragraphs of the article say, in essence, the same thing: he's invented some sort of gamified health education platform. It does not require four paragraphs of hyperbole to say this. The style of the article and the denseness of the citations set off all manner of bullshit klaxons for uninvolved experienced editors: it's highly unlikely the article will be promoted unless the editor takes several steps back and thins out both the claims and the citations. --Tagishsimon (talk) 20:11, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I agree Lead far too long, hence repitition with content in body of draft, and I moved tennis to Personal life, as contributes nothing toward establishing notability. Creating editor shold be asked if COI or PAID applies, and work on neutral point of view before resubmitting. David notMD (talk) 20:16, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
started as a class project for school—has the instructor worked with Wikipedia:Education program to ensure that the assignment is actually achievable and will minimize disruption to Wikipedia? Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 23:42, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you @Rotideypoc41352 I am not sure if my instructor has worked with the education program. I can ask her and get back to you. The assignment was to learn about editing wikipedia and trying the editing tools. The assignment coincided with the time I saw the financial times transformation business ceremony where Bhargav Sri Prakash received the award and gave his acceptance speech. The class and assignment were done in the beginning fall term of 2022. KrisJohanssen (talk) 16:58, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you @Tagishsimon I will be much more critical of the sources and ensure I remove any hyperbole. You mentioned over citation and peacock terms. Can you please remove those to help me learn the exact tone which is unacceptable on Wikipedia. KrisJohanssen (talk) 17:01, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! I don't feel that Sri Prakash is anywhere in the same league as Hitler or Bin Laden though KrisJohanssen (talk) 17:03, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate your feedback here @Maproom. I see your point opposing the sentence that he was a national tennis champion. I made the mistake of omitting "junior" in the description of his tennis. Thank you to @David notMD who has accurately edited the article and created a personal life section.
As I replied to your insightful comment on the talk page of the article draft, please see this article in the Hindu Business Line. I understand Hindu Business Line is the business newspaper published by The Hindu. I checked to see the reliability of all these newspapers as I am not familiar with the papers in India. It seems to be regarded as a newspaper of record by Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources
https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/business-tech/how-ai-aided-digital-vaccines-can-be-a-game-changer/article65389614.ece
The article says
"He played professional tennis in his younger days and represented India in international junior tennis events".
"Prakash’s invention is the first vaccine."
Additionally I found peer reviewed acceptance of his work with digital vaccine at what appears to be a reputable medical conference at Stanford School of Medicine in 2018. Kindly see this link to a medical conference presentation at Stanford MedicineX ED 2018 that I came across
https://medicinex.stanford.edu/ed-2018-presentations/#1466453233937-fd1ec662-5558
You will find his abstract among other peer reviewed abstracts accepted for presentation. It is under the PCOR CER tab co authored by Rema Padman and Yi-Chin Lin is titled "An approach to scaling evidence backed Digital Vaccines based on Neuropsychology to impact Global Health"
I am no expert to judge the scientific merit but I am just trying to go by what I found online through my research. First time I read about digital vaccines was on the FTIFC Awards page and I watched his speech on the livestream of Financial Times and International Finance Corporation Transformational Business Awards (recording 42 min 15 sec)
https://transformationalbusiness.live.ft.com/page/2146059/register-for-on-demand
I am inspired by what he said and what I discovered about him and his work in health. I am becoming interested in AI. This I why I chose to work on an article about him because I thought there should be an article after the FTIFC award. I definitely do not see him as a bull shitter and firmly disagree with your dismissive comments about better use of my time. Thank you @Babysharkbos2 I am young and inexperienced as a wikipedia editor but I want to put my effort in to things I believe improve life for the future. This experience actually fuels me to dig deeper to find a rightful place for those who are dedicated to social causes
I agree I am not qualified to edit properly but I seek your help and advice to improve my editing authoring skills and for ways to become a long term contributor. Thank you KrisJohanssen (talk) 16:52, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

base href , to reduce page size

Hi. Does wikipedia offer a way to do <base href="..."> ? I'm trying to reduce the wikipedia page size on a page with many outside links. Thanks! Kweetal nl (talk) 10:00, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Kweetal nl: this isn't an answer to your question as such, but may be relevant nevertheless: other than citations, and a few select links in the end matter, Wikipedia articles shouldn't really have external links. Okay, it's not quite as drastic as that, but that's pretty much the gist of WP:EL. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:18, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Heh. They /are/ citations (i.e., links to BHL pages). (BHL = biodiversity heritage library).
(but perhaps people will not find it interesting) - Kweetal nl (talk) 10:49, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If (?) you mean User:Kweetal nl/sandbox49, then no, they're not citations; they're inline external links. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:11, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ok - I'll remove it (largely). - Kweetal nl (talk) 11:31, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for providing that context. This might be an XY problem. Using the {{BHL author}} or {{BHL page}} templates might be useful. DMacks (talk) 09:51, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The entirity of supported html tags is listed at Help:HTML in wikitext § Elements, <base> is not amongst them. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:42, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I do not understand what type of links are unverifiable in my draft Draft:Smita N. Kinkale. Anonymousartuser (talk) 11:49, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The sources you have provided are largely either user-generated, (Linkedin, which is not acceptable as a source whatsoever) very close to the subject (the galleries their work has been displayed in), or not directly about the subject (a short news blurb about 12 people including the subject). Otherwise, statements made in the article do not seem to be informed by the reliable sources you have provided. See below. Remsense 11:57, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Anonymousartuser The whole "About works" portion of the biography has no sources at all. Who interpreted her art that way? You? Please read Wikipedia's policy about biographies of living people carefully. All significant statements have to be backed up by reliable published sources. You have re-submitted the draft without addressing the issues identified in its previous review. Therefore it is likely to be rapidly declined again. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:07, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
.... as it has been. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:11, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Anonymousartuser Judging by your User rename request you are attempting to write an autobiography. That is strongly discouraged for the reasons given at that link. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:20, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Anonymousartuser You need to cut the "Critic reviews" texts drastically, see MOS:QUOTE. Note that a WP-article about Smita N. Kinkale is supposed to be a summary of WP:RS about but independent of Smita N. Kinkale. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:45, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
just looked at the draft, and yikes. Firstly, as Michael D. Turnbull pointed out, you had a rename request which makes it look like you are writing an autobiography, which isn't really good. Second, you have a lot of external links on there, like on to the schools website, that should either be added in as sources, or removed entirely. Last, there a flimsy unreliable and unrelated sources in the article. Babysharkboss2 was here!! (Talk to me) (Waif Me!) 14:54, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Basically, 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) 01:31, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Adding reliable citations for Radha

Hello, I've been trying to add a new author and book page which has been quite challenging. Based on the limited information available, what do you guys suggest I change so that the pages are reviewed again and accepted? The feedback I received for the book page (Draft:Radha: Wrath of the Maeju) suggests that I add more published sources that are reliable, secondary, in-depth, and independent. But at this stage, is waiting all that I need to do so that the book has more reviews? There aren't many English-language Nepali books in the market or reviewers in English who will make the citation abundant. Please help. Phsssttt (talk) 18:00, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@KylieTastic Phsssttt (talk) 18:01, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Phsssttt note that sources do not have to be in English if some exist is Nepali? See Wikipedia:Notability (books) for what we look for to show nobility of books. As the book is not even published till tomorrow this may be a case of WP:TOOSOON. Regards KylieTastic (talk) 18:15, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Phsssttt, and welcome to the Teahouse.
I wonder, what is your purpose in "adding an author and book page" for a book which is about to be published?
If your answer is in any way about telling the world about this book, then what you are trying to do is promotion, which is forbidden anywhere in Wikipedia.
Once independent, reliable sources have taken note of the book by publishing significant material about it, then it may be possible to write a Wikipedia article summarising what these independent sources say. Until then, writing an acceptable article is impossible, and attempting to do so is probably contrary to the purposes of Wikipedia ColinFine (talk) 01:41, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can we get a disambiguation page for One Water?

HI One Water (Management) is a notable management approach, endorsed by the United Nations, World Health Organization, U.S. Water Alliance, and more. I have created a page for this, but would like to disambiguate it from One Water, the film. How do we support this? I do see the guidance at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Disambiguation but I am not sure if I am allowed to create that disambiguation page? Thank you.LoveElectronicLiterature (talk) 00:33, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes.
--Tagishsimon (talk) 00:43, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much! What do I need to do now? Should I be creating a page? Is it right to ask here for that disambiguation page? The guidance isn't quite clear. LoveElectronicLiterature (talk) 16:02, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@LoveElectronicLiterature: It has already been created: One Water. --Tagishsimon (talk) 16:16, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Help!!

Hi, I'm a long term Wikipedia style and clarity editor, but I don't know the ropes of higher level editing. I need a mentor, that I can message from time to time. My latest problem, is somebody from the nuclear power industry is reverting my edits to an article on a scientist, to whitewash her scientific contribution to epidemiological studies documenting harm from radiation releases from Chernobyl etc.

I just don't know how to deal with edit warring. They threatened to have me banned as an editor. I don't know how to deal with that. They are obviously someone employed by the nuclear industry, who has sanitised the article I happened to come across and work on.

I intend to work on the clearcutting article, which I have deep expertise in. I'm anticipating the same kind of flack from the logging industry, so if I could find a mentor on this article, it might come in handy for later.

Usually I just do minor clarity edits, on random articles. Every once in a while though, I want to be able to get involved on important topics. So, please, help me! I don't know how to contact other editors. Maybe leave a message on my talk page? Thanks Billyshiverstick (talk) 01:19, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

For starters, don't accuse an administrator of being a "stooge" when they remove material you copied from Amazon RudolfRed (talk) 01:24, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Billyshiverstick: Read WP:NPA. RudolfRed (talk) 01:26, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please also read WP:MINOR. A minor edit is something like fixing a typo. RudolfRed (talk) 01:29, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Billyshiverstick you seem to have mistaken a routine reversion for copyvio, for some sort of nuclear industry conspiracy. It's not a conspiracy. It's a routine reversion because you introduced copyrighted text into the article. The solution is, not to add copyrighted text into articles. The honourable thing to do would be to apologise to the editor involved. --Tagishsimon (talk) 01:32, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Billyshiverstick, and welcome to the Teahouse.
It sounds as if you have got caught up in a pattern which quite often besets new editors, especially if they are passionate about some cause (which it sounds as if you may be). They see something which they are sure is wrong (or missing, or …), and they go in and change it.
Which is fine as long as they understand and follow Wikipedia's core policies. But new editors often do not understand these policies, and make mistakes: most often in copyright, verifiability, or neutral point of view, and their edits are then quite appropriately reverted (see WP:BRD).
But when the subject is something that they care deeply about, and believe that they are correcting an important error or falsehood, they sometimes leap to the conclusion that the reversion was in bad faith, by somebody determined to hide The Truth.
This can happen, of course. But it is overwhelmingly more likely that what's going on is somebody enforcing Wikipedia's rules.
Note that Wikipedia isn't for righting great wrongs: its job is to summarise what the reliable sources say. If the sources differ, and there is no consensus, the article should say that, giving weight to each view according to its degree of support across the sources. If a view is in nearly all the sources, and an opposing view in only one source, of dubious reliability, that opposing view should get little or no mention. (I'm not saying that that description applies to the present case: I haven't looked into it at all. I'm giving an example of how it works) ColinFine (talk) 02:09, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My Awards page wikipedia entry keeps on getting declined, HELP!!

My name is Inyi, and I'm new to creating entries on Wikipedia.

I'm currently working on an article page for an awards-giving body in the Philippines called the "VP Choice Awards." However, the entry keeps getting declined by reviewers with the comment: "This submission appears to read more like an advertisement."

I've been following the guidance provided by one of the reviewers (Qcne) to address this issue, yet the entry continues to be declined by other reviewers. I've added references in line with the article, rewritten the content in a neutral manner, and included references from independent media sources not affiliated or related to the VP Choice Awards, but it still gets declined.

I would greatly appreciate it if you could review my entry here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:VP_Choice_Awards and provide guidance on what needs to be fixed on the page.

Thank you so much in advance Inyiyruma (talk) 04:15, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome! Thanks for taking the time to create new articles, and it's great that you took care to cite independent sources. There's still some wording that sounds more like what you'd find on a company website, like listing the various categories. Referring to the event as an "award ceremony" rather than an "award-giving body" might help put the event itself more in focus than the body in charge, and distance it from the "advertisement" look.
Also, YouTube videos are generally not recommended to use as sources, and having less material sourced from Village Pipol itself could help too. No need to "over-do it" and have every single award winner, which can be a bit overwhelming - are there key awards that the reader might be interested in, or would there be a way to summarize these tables? Good luck editing, ChaotıċEnby(t · c) 01:42, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Inyiyruma, and welcome to the Teahouse.
The question you need to ask yourself (in fact, the question you needed to ask yourself before you started this draft) is: Where have some people with no connection to the awards or their parent company, chosen to write at some length about the thing called "The VP Choice Awards" (I'm not sure if that is an event or an organisation)? Not about the nth VPC Awards; still less about who happened to win the nth VPC Awards: that is trivial information that might go in a data table once there is an encyclopedia article to add it to, but is not a core part of the article.
Without in-depth independent writing about the awards as an entity, your draft will not establish notability, and the article cannot be accepted. ColinFine (talk) 02:29, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Does (Date missing) mean the date is unknown?

i have seen language pages that show the extinction date as (date missing), does it mean the date is unknown? 2001:448A:400C:1F9B:5D9E:5574:1A55:7DE9 (talk) 05:00, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Probably. There are many such languages. You may find the language listed here as date unknown. Shantavira|feed me 11:19, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

AFD'ing multiple articles in a single discussion

I might have come across it before, but I'm not entirely certain. However, is there a way to AfD multiple articles in a single discussion? I am looking at Muangchang United F.C., PPS.Phetchabun City F.C., Lookphorkhun United F.C., Look E San F.C.,Nonthaburi United F.C., Sing Ubon F.C., etc. Most of them fail WP:GNG. Jeraxmoira (talk) 05:36, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Jeraxmoira: There is – see WP:MULTIAFD for the details. Tollens (talk) 13:40, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry

I didn't mean to vandalize Wikipedia again. I was actually editing for good usage. Before coming on here, someone left me 7 talk page messages, which I didn't read, inviting me to this teahouse, very helpful I know. I accidentally edited Wikipedia before I read that message and I'm sorry and apologize deeply. I mean it. Jamiemuscatoverified (talk) 06:49, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot for coming here! No one knows how all of Wikipedia works in a single day, and it is always good to see new editors join in good faith and wanting to help! If you have any questions, feel free to ask them here! ChaotıċEnby(t · c) 01:31, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It can be frightening to have that many messages on your talk page in a single day - being flooded by alerts and not really understanding what you've did wrong. No worries, it's best to take your time, and you can ask volunteers like me if you want to edit anything, to be sure to not do anything wrong. You can find me here or on my talk page! ChaotıċEnby(t · c) 01:34, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
N.B. Querent has been indef'd. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 21:27, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

template map not working

'"`UNIQ--mapframe-00000024-QINU`"'
{{Maplink|frame=yes|zoom=5|frame-align=right|text=Airports in Gujarat<noinclude><ref name>{{Cite web |title=Gujarat {{!}} Gujarat State Aviation Infrastructure Company Limited |url=https://gujsail.gujarat.gov.in/gujarat.htm |access-date=2019-05-21 |website=gujsail.gujarat.gov.in |archive-date=2019-05-21 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190521063246/https://gujsail.gujarat.gov.in/gujarat.htm |url-status=dead }}</ref>
</noinclude>|frame-lat=22.719 |frame-long=71.224
|type=point|id=Q401700|marker=airport |marker-size=medium |title=[[Ahmedabad Airport|Ahmedabad]]
|type2=point|id2=Q511349|marker2=airport |marker-size2=medium |title2=[[Bhavnagar Airport|Bhavnagar]]
|type3=point|id3=Q619716|marker3=airport |marker-size3=medium |title3=[[Bhuj Airport|Bhuj]]
|type4=point|id4=Q1656942|marker4=airport |marker-size4=small |title4=[[Deesa Airport|Deesa]]
|type5=point|id5=1595059|marker5=airport |marker-size5=small |title5=[[Jamnagar Airport|Jamnagar]]
|type6=point|id6=Q2722850|marker6=airport |marker-size6=small |title6=[[Keshod Airport|Keshod]]
|type7=point|id7=Q48730693|marker7=airport |marker-size7=small |title7=[[Mundra Airport|Mundra]]
|type8=point|id8=Q1931349|marker8=airport |marker-size8=small |title8=[[Porbandar Airport|Porbandar]]
|type9=point|id9=Q48730693|marker9=airport |marker-size9=small |title9=[[Mundra Airport|Mundra]]
|type10=point|id10=Q42377088|marker10=airport |marker-size10=small |title10=[[Rajkot International Airport|Rajkot New]]
|type11=point|id11=Q7286282|marker11=airport |marker-size11=small |title11=[[Rajkot Airport|Rajkot]]
|type12=point|id12=Q2775871|marker12=airport |marker-size12=small |title12=[[Surat International Airport|Surat]]
|type13=point|id13=Q3274467|marker13=airport |marker-size13=small |title13=[[Vadodara Airport|Vadodara]]
}}

DSP2092 (👤, 🗨️) 07:21, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Done problem fixed. Some wikidata didn't have coordinates. DSP2092 (👤, 🗨️) 07:39, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Preview warnings for unexpected parameters

When I preview an edit for ​ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Monty_Hall_problem , ​ I see

'Preview warning: Page using Template:WikiProject Mathematics with unexpected parameter "frequentlyviewed"

Preview warning: Page using Template:WikiProject Mathematics with unexpected parameter "field"'

in the WikiProjects section. ​ ​ ​ Do those warnings indicate an issue that should be fixed?

JumpDiscont (talk) 07:30, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

User:JumpDiscont, it looks like support for those template parameters was removed in 2020, but evidently they haven't all been cleaned up. You can delete the parameters from the instance of {{WikiProject Mathematics}} on Talk:Monty Hall problem if you'd like; seeing the template warning messages on edit and membership in the maintenance category Category:Pages using WikiProject Mathematics with unknown parameters (0) are the only issues this causes. Folly Mox (talk) 09:33, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Helping new Wikipedia volunteers

Hi,

We are a group of 7 people, and have a project to create and edit content on Wikipedia.

We know nothing about editing in Wikipedia or very very little (that's me).

Reading help pages is useful but not everyone's cup of tea, so I'm looking for other methods.

Are there any online sessions for beginners or Wikipedia for Dummies? We'll watch relevant youtube videos, but my thinking was like a cohort working live with a mentor or something like that.

Thank you Samisawtak (talk) 09:27, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Samisawtak, and welcome! :)
A lot of the 'getting started' type help content is gathered together at this page, by miraculous coincidence (!) titled "Getting started". There you'll find plenty of links to tutorials, guided learning journeys, and further help. There are probably other ways of getting started also, but that would be my go-to resource.
As you mention that there are several of you involved in this, please note that Wikipedia user accounts are for use by a single individual only, so you should all set up your own user accounts if you haven't already done so.
Happy editing! -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:05, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks, lots of helpful links Samisawtak (talk) 16:09, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Samisawtak: Also, Wikipedia:Introduction, and also the links in the "Welcome" message I just left you on your Talk page. If you leave a message here with the userids of the other six members, I will leave them welcome messages, too (unless someone beats me to it!).Mathglot (talk) 10:10, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks Samisawtak (talk) 16:08, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Supportive suggestions for wikipedia fundraisers

I was not sure where to put this so I thought I would ask/suggest here. let me know the right place and I will bring up these supportive fundraising ideas there.

Anytime a person looks up a company name, where that company is on a list of companies with charity matching grants, they see a "Donate from this company and get a matching donation from the company" message during the fundraising period. Also There could be menu box/autocomplete textarea with "type your employers name to find out if they will match your donation". Bing Chat Copilot says, "about 22.3% of workers with a bachelor’s degree or higher worked for very large employers in 2020 ". That suggests that about 7 million employees with college degrees work for companies with some likeliness of charity matching. I'm making the weird, but likely assumption that people look up the companies they work for on wikipedia.

What is the right area at wikipedia to bring this suggestion and other suggestions for fundraising up?

Thanks! Treonsverdery (talk) 10:03, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! @Treonsverdery I suggest you to visit https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fundraising for more details. I have no knowledge on how fundraising works here, you may find some help in the meta fundraising page. Leoneix (talk) 10:52, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Treonsverdery, people can find out of their employers will match donations to the WMF at https://www.matchinggifts.com/wikimedia_iframe Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 13:02, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

confusion about the picture "pale blue dot "

where are the other planet in the picture 'pale blue dot' by voyager 1

113.21.229.37 (talk) 10:18, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, this is probably best asked at the article talk page, Talk:Pale Blue Dot. 331dot (talk) 10:21, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
As explained in the article, you will find them at Family Portrait (Voyager). Shantavira|feed me 11:33, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Does it have to be in it? Could they be out of frame? Try the reference desk (WP:RD/S) Usedtobecool ☎️ 12:09, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
All the other planets in our solar system are indeed out of frame. Space is really big – even at the scale where Earth is less than a pixel across, the image isn't nearly big enough to cover the rest of the planets. As linked above, Family Portrait, which was created by combining several images together, does cover a wide enough field to capture the rest of the planets. Tollens (talk) 13:29, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I need review and help on a draft, how to get some ?

Hi there ! I'm totally new and wikipedia but working since a couple of month on an article about Soundpainting (a sign-language used for live-composition) and I submitted it twice, and it has been twice decline. I've changed a lot of things, added a lot of other sources, but I don't see how I can improve it more... Could anyone give me some help to make it more read like an encyclopedic article and less like an essay ? Thanks a lot !!

Here is the draft : Draft:Soundpainting

Looking forward to hear/read from you --AnnePernas (talk) 11:35, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@AnnePernas Wikidata shows that there are already nine other-language articles on soundpainting, including in French, German, Italian and Spanish. These won't be perfect but may give you some ideas. Currently, you have a table of ensembles which I don't think helps the draft, since they are unsourced, and as you say "This list is absolutely non-exhaustive." which is, indeed, essay-speak. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:53, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Michael D. Turnbull, it's translated from the French version according to fr:Discussion utilisateur:Binabik#Question de Anne (16 novembre 2023 à 18h54) and HTML comments within the draft itself like auto-translated by Module:CS1 translator -->, hence the translation attribution template at Draft talk:Soundpainting. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 12:56, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I also wrote this french-english draft. Because I'm french, I thought I could use the french version of wikipedia to create an article in english. So that's why I created it twice. The list however is not a translation, and I think for now, I'll just erase it. I first gave links to websites of every ensemble I was talking about, but it appears that it's forbidden on wikipedia, because it sounds too much like an ad, which I completely understand! So for now, I'll erase it, and maybe one day I'll re-work on it with someone else! Thanks a lot for the tip! AnnePernas (talk) 20:16, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
AnnePernas: as far as I can understand Draft:Soundpainting, it's about a sign language used by an extemporising conductor to convey their intentions to the performers. it's unclear whether it's about a particular such language, or about any such language. Either way, it would improved by a few examples of gestures and their meanings. Maproom (talk) 09:09, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes it's exactly that : a specific sign language used by a soundpainter (conductor) to ask specific material (sound, movements...) to the performers. Thanks for the recommandation to add examples of gestures and meanings ! AnnePernas (talk) 20:13, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Revert war

There is an editor on the "Shungite" page that reverts my edits as soon as I put them up. There are now three reverts. On his last one, he wrote, "please discuss changes on the talk page before editing" - yet he has no comments on the talk page and gives no explanation as to why my edits needed to be reverted.

If you look at the "talk" page, you will see that I explained every change, and cited every source before the last revision. I am reverting it back, as he gave no input or reason for completely deleting my changes. I believe his is the original author and may feel ownership of this topic. I reverted it back - with an explanation as I is my practice. I anticipate that he will revert it again without explanation, and this becomes his fourth revision. MelroseReporter (talk) 13:04, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This has all happened today, I am not sure why there is such a rush. It is generally not considered apropos to be asked to discuss a change, and then reestablish that change before an understanding has been reached. I would recommend actually discussing the issues with this person on the talk page before doing anything else on the page itself or beyond it. As far as I can tell, while you and the other editor disagree, they have not assumed bad faith from you, and you should return the courtesy. Assuming another person feels like they have ownership of an article is often the quickest way to acting possessively yourself.
The point of a talk page discussion is to have a discussion—there's usually no hard rules as to what order actions need to take place in, it shouldn't be taken as a slight that you're asked to discuss things on the talk page and haven't been explicitly preempted in doing so. People have different communication styles, and that's why assuming good faith is important. Remsense 13:17, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's not normally a rush. Usually I make an edit and he reverts within moments. I did revert it as his reason for wiping out hours of work without explaining why. In the same fashion, he could discuss on talk page before wiping out my changes. Is there a time limit I should wait before submitting a revision? Thank you! MelroseReporter (talk) 13:29, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
MelroseReporter, don't worry about time limits, worry about assuming good faith from your fellow editor, please. There is no reason for anyone to assume bad faith or not treat each other's concerns as reasonable so far. A part of the reason Wikipedia works is your work has not been wiped out—it is in the edit history of the article and can be found and reintegrated into the article in whatever form is deemed appropriate.
As you know, a third editor has brought up some concerns with your additions, these shouldn't be disregarded just because they did not come from the original editor—since neither you nor the original editor own the article, it's just as necessary to engage with their concerns regardless of who did what in what order. Put another way—reverting again would seem to value a very narrow view of decorum over the variously stated concerns of two people, and I would consider that to be wholly inappropriate. Everyone just cares about the article's quality. Remsense 13:39, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@MelroseReporter: I note you have already been blocked once for abusive editing. And yet here you are on thin ice, engaging in a revert war on Shungite and largely ignoring the suggestions & requests that you discuss edits before making them. You want to wipe out the suggestion that Shungite is antibacterial because of its heavy metal content, because you misread or misapply a paper which talks about two diffeent sorts of Shungite, one of which lacks heavy metals. You want to insist that Shungite is made of fullerines, when the same paper you rely on talks of it having only traces of fullerines.
So here's what I'm going to do. I'm going to revert the article to the position before you started your revert war, before you started editing it. I'm going to INSIST that changes are discussed on the talk page before they are made. And if you persist in edit warring, I'm going to wheel you over to WP:ANI for them to deal with you. --Tagishsimon (talk) 13:53, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is a recently accepted article. I've merged the duplicate refs and it is a bit scant on them. If someone would take a look, that'd be great. My bigger concern is the unpublished manuscript used. This isn't valid for use, correct? - UtherSRG (talk) 15:22, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ref has now been removed as not legitimate. - UtherSRG (talk) 16:29, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category formatting?

Hi all, I recently created the article Heart Play: Unfinished Dialogue, and attempted to add categories, but the category formatting looks wrong. I've skimmed through WP:Categorization, but can't figure it out. Please help! Thanks! Of the universe (talk) 15:33, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Of the universe, including the colon before the 'Category:' prefix means it is just a link to the category. I have fixed it by removing that colon, [[:Category:John Lennon albums]] -> [[Category:John Lennon albums]]. You can do the same with templates, interlanguage links, etc. Sungodtemple (talkcontribs) 15:41, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Of the universe (talk) 15:44, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome from WillKomen

User:WillKomen.Thanks for th very friandly welcome! excited to start using Wikpedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by MouseArtichoke! (talkcontribs) 17:19, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome, MouseArtichoke! I believe the welcome you received is automatically generated as part of The Wikipedia Adventure. If you have questions on editing Wikipedia articles, please feel free to drop by again. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 21:16, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Microsoft version of Unix GREP ("Global Regular Expression Processer")

GREP searches inside files for lines containing a particular search string in DOC, XLS and Outlook files.

GREP would be useful when you have a lot of files, but do not remember the filename. ___MountVic127 (talk) 23:05, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@MountVic127: Welcome to the Teahouse! This is a place for help with using and editing Wikipedia, not for all questions. I've found that using the search functionality in Windows' File Explorer will search inside files. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 23:53, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Incidentally, "grep" does not stand for "Global Regular Expression Processer" (or even "Processor"). See our article for the actual derivation. CodeTalker (talk) 02:04, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@GoingBatty I found File Explorer, thanks, but how does one actually use it?
I wish to find the string "Nepal" in *.docx files. This is easy in a command line program like Unix while windows had mountains of buttons and boxes to choose between. File Explorer should have a command line box that converts Grep-like commands into Windows speak. ----MountVic127 (talk) 03:12, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@MountVic127: How you use the search feature in File Explorer depends on what version of Windows you're running. You could use a quick Google search to find many web pages on this topic. You could send your suggestions on how to improve File Explorer to Microsoft. GoingBatty (talk) 04:16, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction and progress

I'd like to use the space here to thanks for the input by users to the contributions I started. I'm working on tasks simultaneously but mainly tips for speed the interface can be cumbersome even to cp. Finally, welcome to new antecedents from me. I'm eager for it to show in a feed talk subst:welccome... Nesshunter (talk) 00:00, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nesshunter, welcome! It is not clear what you are trying to ask here, could you rephrase your question? Remsense 06:33, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
How can productivity be improved? Nesshunter (talk) 10:58, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think I understand! You may want to consider looking at the WP:keyboard shortcuts that can be used in the editor, as well as the various gadgets and tools that can automate repetitive tasks. If you're solely talking about the performance of the visual editor, I would recommend trying out the older 2010 editor instead, which can be switched to on your preferences page. If you need more help, let me know! Remsense 11:01, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

I've done edits on my great grandfather wiki page but it says that it's still pending, it's already been more than a week and it has not been approved yet, how long does it take usually and is there a way to make the process faster KarimQ (talk) 01:05, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@KarimQ: what is the name of the page? Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 01:20, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
https://ar.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D9%85%D8%AD%D9%85%D8%AF_%D8%B3%D9%84%D9%8A%D9%85_%D8%B3%D8%B9%D8%AF_%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AF%D9%8A%D9%86_%D9%83%D8%B1%D9%8A%D8%AF%D9%8A%D9%87 KarimQ (talk) 01:22, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
KarimQ, the Teahouse provides assistance about editing the English Wikipedia. You will have to ask at the Arabic Wikipedia for assistance with this matter. Each Wikipedia language version is an entirely separate project. Cullen328 (talk) 01:27, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! The edits you made were on Arabic Wikipedia, which is a separate entity from English Wikipedia. Most volunteers don't work in both, and you'll have more chances to have answers on the Arabic Wikipedia's equivalent of the Teahouse, although you might get a knowledgeable volunteer here to answer you! ChaotıċEnby(t · c) 01:29, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Correct position of new entry to a list of numbers

I'm updating some information on the list of tallest of people. When multiple people share the exact same height, what order should they be in/which position should my new entry take? Blackdogcity (talk) 04:17, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Blackdogcity, that will be determined at the article level. Are there any ties currently on the page? And have you tried the article's talk page? Rjjiii (ii) (talk) 04:23, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the reply! There are multiple ties on the list and I haven't tried the talk page yet (I incorrectly assumed there was a globally consistent style guide answer to this question). I can't find anything in the articles talk archives asking about ordering so I suppose I'll ask there.
Is it better to wait for a response before moving the entry at all or to move it now to show the correct data and modify the ties into the specific order if/when I get an answer? Blackdogcity (talk) 04:39, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Blackdogcity: In my opinion, the important thing is to get the correct information cited to a reliable source. The Wikipedia:Verifiability policy outweighs style guides. It will be fairly easy to cut & paste the table's rows where they need to go. Rjjiii (ii) (talk) 05:17, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Blackdogcity: Hi there! Now that you've asked at Talk:List of tallest people, I suggest waiting a few days before boldly changing the order. However, you could add your suggestion for ordering ties on the talk page. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 05:18, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Is there a way to see every search term that redirects to a certain article? Bzik2324 (talk) 05:43, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Bzik2324: There's a 'What links here' link on each article; not sure where it's hidden in the new user interface; under Tools, maybe. For an article such as Hamer Stansfeld it takes you to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:WhatLinksHere?target=Hamer+Stansfeld&namespace= ... if you tick both the 'hide transclusions' and 'hide links' tickboxes, and hit 'go' you'll be left with the redirects to the page - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:WhatLinksHere?target=Hamer+Stansfeld&namespace=&hidetrans=1&hidelinks=1 --Tagishsimon (talk) 06:09, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

misfit display in Android

Viewing for the first time the page Tea House, I am astonished that the first section title

(== What to do when multiple reliable sources publish misleading information? ...)

is displayed in about 2 dozens of lines, each only about 2 letter short. Like:

W

ha

tt

od

ow

...

Above: archive numbers list ends with "... 1207, 1208"

Underneath: following section title lines fit the display width

I use a Samsung Galaxy A40 Smartphone (from ca. 2019) with updated Android. 5.9" display (upright = portrait mode).

Browser Chrome, updated.

Helium4 (talk) 10:27, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

User:Helium4, yep, the mobile skin will compress section headers, deeply indented comments, and table columns down to complete illegibility before it will increase the width of the view window and force us to do a sidey swipe. It sure would be nice if elements could be balanced better to avoid that, rather than archive boxes having a fixed width and demanding to share horizontal space rather than squishing themselves a lil bit or just clearing the space to their left. I believe this is also one reason that side bars and navboxes don't display on mobile.
You might be able to leave feedback for the team who is able to make changes to the mobile web interface at mw:Talk:Reading/Web? I just kinda shrug like "welp never reading that I guess". Folly Mox (talk) 14:06, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Contributions not publishing

I have uploaded 20 books with details but I did not access publicly. Can you please help me to show my contributions for publicly. خالد محمود خان (talk) 10:34, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@خالد محمود خان: While I am not certain what you mean, you may be looking for your contributions at Wikimedia Commons, which include your image uploads. Tollens (talk) 10:38, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
At Commons, all 20 images (of book covers?) have been nominated for deletion. David notMD (talk) 14:43, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Article creation of my company

Hello @Teahouse, I have a question regarding creating an article. I recently drafted an article for my company, but it got deleted within 24 hours. I really need the article for my company. How can I go about recovering or preserving it? RonakJK (talk) 11:40, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RonakJK Hello. I see you declared a COI, as you work for the company, the Terms of Use require you to make the stricter paid editing disclosure.
Your draft was highly promotional and will not be restored. Wikipedia is not a place for companies to tell the world about themselves. Wikipedia articles are typically written by independent editors wholly unconnected with the topic, and summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage choose to say about (in this case) a company, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. Not every company merits an article.
You should have submitted a draft via the Article Wizard, not gamed the system to create it yourself, the system exists for a reason.
Please read WP:BOSS and have your superiors read it too. 331dot (talk) 11:48, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
not to mention that every system-gaming newcomer task to "improve grammar" made the respective article somewhat to considerably worse. i've had to revert them all. Remsense 12:16, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reporting an issue on WP:ANI

I just opened on a new topic on WP:ANI regarding that editor who restored his additions of Tamil scripts into several Malaysa-related articles. Not only there is no consensus on such edits, but Tamil has no official or legal status in Malaysia and adding that language into articles about local governments and infrastructure is just dubious at best.

Is there anything else I could do within my rights about that editor? hundenvonPG (talk) 12:53, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

HundenvonPenang, if you've reported it to ANI, that is sufficient. The issue seems clear-cut enough, and generally you shouldn't have to do anything that resembles forum shopping to get your issue addressed. cheers! Remsense 12:55, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Noted with thanks Remsense hundenvonPG (talk) 12:57, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bob Fowke application for new article

I am working on an article for entry on Wikipedia on Bob Fowke who is a living person. In the 1970s/early 80s he was a successful, and well known in the science fantasy world, science fantasy artist. He is listed in the ISFDB, but not in Wikipedia itself. He worked in mainly oils and gouace, producing his illustrations as paintings, not electronically, and essentially stopped producing his work when computer-assisted or generated illustration came in. This means that the internet only features limited references to his work. However, he remains known, arguably well-known in the science fantasy world, who do refer to him online. He subsequently became a writer, primarily of children's information books, which I have listed There are two aspects to my problem with getting an entry accepted, and although the first appears to be the major one, I think it might be solved if I can sort the second.

1) Notability - I accept this was fair criticism on my first draft, I had not put in enough detail. I have now added more information. 2) Finding referencing sources online, and not using blogs. I accept that taken overall blogs are not indicative of facts, but it does appear there is not an overall ban on referring to them, I want to be able to use them illustratively, of continuing recognition and referral to Fowke in the SF world.

My draft is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:PinneyFowke/sandbox

I really would welcome any help and assistance, as I don't seem to be making any real progress.

Thanks

Pinney PinneyFowke (talk) 14:33, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

PinneyFowke your main goal is to prove that Fowke is notable; essentially, there needs to be 2-3 sources that are independent, reliable, and in-depth about him. Blogs are not reliable and do not count; in fact, they are usually unreliable and should not be cited at all. What are the three sources that best follow the above criteria? Sungodtemple (talkcontribs) 15:06, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@PinneyFowke: you have also asked this at the AfC HD. Please don't ask in several places, as answering the same query multiple times wastes volunteer effort. Thanks, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:15, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Really sorry, didn't mean to cause problems, it's because I'm a 'learner', the page I was viewing had suggestions about where to go for assistance with links, so I was trying them out in order to find out which were the right, and helpful ones to go to. PinneyFowke (talk) 15:36, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Writing Support to Publish a Company Page.

Hello, I am a new editor trying to gain some insight and support on how I can improve my article to be an acceptable standard for Wikipedia. Is there anyone that is willing to help me improve this article so that I can get it approved by the Wiki-Admins. I am new to this and I need help. Please Steph at Unipet (talk) 15:03, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

To be blunt, I recommend that you give up. Nothing has shown that Unipet is notable. Your volunteer time is better spent elsewhere, such as copyediting, and your work time is better spent doing whatever your job is. Sungodtemple (talkcontribs) 15:09, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Steph at Unipet There are many millions of companies, so Wikipedia has to limit those it covers to the ones that are wikinotable (see link for details). This means we need coverage in sources that meet these criteria. I don't see such sources in your draft and I'm afraid your company just looks WP:RUNOFTHEMILL. Incidentally, it is not administrators who review articles but editors who are experienced in doing so: the decline notice gives their reasons. You may like to read this essay and this one. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:13, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
None of the refs support the notability of the company. At best, it is WP:TOOSOON for this modest-sized company. I recommend either adandoning the draft, in which case it will be deleted in six months, or tagging it for deletion now. David notMD (talk) 16:23, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Steph at Unipet: See also the essay at WP:BOSS. GoingBatty (talk) 17:10, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Generating a list based on a data-field in the info box of certain pages

I want to be able to view a list page of video games using the Unreal Engine 5 game engine. This data, when available, is listed in the video game Infobox template under "engine". (Example: Tekken 8.) I'm not sure how to go about this or if it is allowed. It seems like the wikimedia api can be used to create the list. But I'm not sure if this is the standard way to do it. It would be a page called "List of video games using the unreal engine 5 game engine" 24.38.201.80 (talk) 18:51, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You could get this sort of list based on wikidata, rather than WP infoboxes - https://w.wiki/8Szr - should that help. WD may not have the same coverage as WP. --Tagishsimon (talk) 19:04, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Are you aware of any efforts to combine wikidata and and wikipedia infobox data? And the question of creating a static list like eg. Category:PlayStation 5 games? Is there another page better suited for this discussion like eg. Wikipedia:Help_desk? Wikidata indeed does seem not to have the same coverage. At least, 81 entries seems too few to me. 24.38.201.80 (talk) 19:13, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Many infoboxes have the capability to import data from wikidata; see, for instance, Category:Infobox templates using Wikidata. But the WP community, in its Luddite wisdom, has afaik rejected the idea of allowing dynamic tables based on wikidata in WP articlespace. Meanwhile whether WP or WD has better coverage of the use of UE5 in games remains to be determined. --Tagishsimon (talk) 19:25, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dates for single releases

Hi, if I’m adding a singles list to an album’s infobox, and there is a single which was released in multiple countries on different dates, which date should I list? The earliest release date, the release date in the artist’s native country, or something else? In some cases there’s so many different release dates that to list them all would be impractical.

The example that pushed me to ask this in particular is Joni Mitchell's "Coyote". In the UK it was released in March of 1977, in Canada (her home country) it was released in June of that year, and in the US it was released earliest, in January. So which date should be used? Thanks! Elephantranges (talk) 19:44, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The infobox seems to be wanting just the earliest release date. " Generally, later releases or in secondary markets, reissues, on compilations, etc., should only be included in the body of the article." at Template:Infobox song#released. --Tagishsimon (talk) 19:50, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Elephantranges (talk) 20:30, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dovevo fare una pagina?

Come trovare un posto per fare un articolo? Snipercobra (talk) 20:38, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Snipercobra: The first thing to decide is whether you want to write in Italian at the Italian Wikipedia or in English here at the English Wikipedia. Then consider that creating a new Wikipedia article can be quite challenging, especially if you do not have a lot of experience editing existing Wikipedia articles. To learn how to edit, I suggest you start at Help:Introduction. I suggest spending a significant amount of time editing existing articles to hone your skills. Once you're ready to create an article, you would gather multiple independent reliable sources that have provided significant coverage of the subject, and determine whether it meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, called "notability". If so, you could follow the instructions at Help:Your first article and summarize what the sources have published, and be prepared for a process that may include waiting for review, declines, and rewrites before an article is accepted. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 20:46, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
hey, pal, this is the english wikipedia, if you want to edit something in Italian, check out the italian wikipedia.
ehi amico, questa è la Wikipedia inglese, se vuoi modificare qualcosa in italiano, controlla la Wikipedia italiana. Babysharkboss2 was here!! (Talk to me!) (Goo Goo dolls) 16:08, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

etiquette regarding banned users

Hi, I'm doing some cleanup after an editor who was recently banned permanently for a pattern of POV-pushing. I want to explain on the relevant talk pages why I am removing such large chunks from articles beyond the short explanations I put in my edit descriptions. I've noticed, however, that other editors tend to be very circumspect in similar circumstances. Are there guidelines about this? While I am relieved this editor is off the encyclopedia, I certainly take no pleasure in the fact and wish it had not come to that.

Thanks for any advice you might offer.

Cheers, Patrick J. Welsh (talk) 21:44, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

While the impulse for transparency is noble, there is also the consideration of prioritizing displaying the most relevant information to the most likely audience for it. I wouldn't worry too much about disclosing to every talk page. People who care to know can usually find out what has happened trivially, so a mention of a link to the relevant discussion or keywords in the edit summary if often more than sufficient. Remsense 21:54, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, thanks. I won't mention it unless I need to in order to justify my edits in response to a challenge. People who have been actively following the articles know what is going on. My concern is just that those who haven't would be understandably alarmed to see multiple paragraphs of sourced material completely deleted. But I'm fine just leaving it to be addressed later, just in the event the issue should arise.
Cheers, Patrick J. Welsh (talk) 22:03, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
best of luck, cheers! Remsense 23:07, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
{{re|Patrick J. Welsh, as Remsense said, you can just add a brief edit summary like "Removing sourced content added by indeffed POV-pusher; see [[Talk:ArticleName#Discussion|this discussion]] for details." Mathglot (talk) 06:01, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

image for a BLP

I have asked this before, but i do not remember the exact requirements for finding a fair use and uploading a non-free content image for a BLP. I know the rules for book covers and film posters, but BLP's are a tad extra sensitive and I'd like some help please. I am looking in this case specifically for Dan Senor, but don't do it for me. teach me to fish, and i will be less likely to come back again to this teahouse for this. Iljhgtn (talk) 23:40, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

clear bullet point steps would be most helpful. Iljhgtn (talk) 23:41, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Iljhgtn: The policy is at WP:NFCCP. For a BLP, you immediately fail 1. No free equivalent. Non-free content is used only where no free equivalent is available, or could be created, that would serve the same encyclopedic purpose. and so there's no possibility of a fair use image ... the possibility must exist that a living person could be photographed. --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:43, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
right, but i just forget how we search for those images when it comes to a BLP. I get where to go for a brand, company, logo, book, film, etc. but not for a BLP. Like sure i can google stuff, but i want to know the best way to go about this. in a bullet list ideally for me to save in my "tool box" of my user page. Iljhgtn (talk) 23:45, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Iljhgtn: So the point is, you do not get to search for a fair use image, b/c a fair use image cannot be used. You can search for a public domain or CC0 image; with google that seems to be, in image search, the 'usage rights' dropdown and 'Creative Commons licenses' selected; or else looking carefully at all result for instances where you can determine manually that the image is public domain. --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:54, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
i keep screwing up the wording i use, thank you for correcting me. So same question, but replace it with "public domain or CC0" image. Iljhgtn (talk) 23:57, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
i have a dell computer and use microsoft for search if that helps you to help me, or anytone else on here. Iljhgtn (talk) 23:57, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Presuming you're using Bing, its image search seems to have a filter option on its results, beneath which is a licence option, within which the option "free to share and use commercially" is probably the best bet. Even then, you would still have to ascertain exactly what the licence on the image was, and choose the appropriate licence tag when uploading it to, presumably, commons. I can't pretend it is easy because there are very many licence variants. The Commons Licencing page has a useful table of the most common licences, which might help. --Tagishsimon (talk) 00:10, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
i just tried this, that seemed to be helpful. here is an image of Dan Senor found at this link.
the image is listed on some strange wiki-type site, and says it is "Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike." Iljhgtn (talk) 00:16, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Iljhgtn. I have been an editor for over 14 years and an administrator for over six years. I am not personally aware of a single case where a non-free image is used in a biography of a living person. The relevant policy language can be found at Wikipedia:Non-free content#Images, which says Non-free images that reasonably could be replaced by free content images are not suitable for Wikipedia. Later, the policy mentions Pictures of people still alive as an excluded type of image. There is a narrow carve out for elderly people whose appearance has changed significantly, but I am not aware of that happening in practice. Senor is just 52 and was most prominent 10 to 15 years ago, that does not seem to apply, since it is possible that someone (you perhaps) could take a photo of Senor or ask him to freely license a selfie. The classic case is Kim Jong Un who came to power in 2012. Many editors argued vigorously for years, without success, that it was not possible to obtain a free image of Kim, but then he met with Donald Trump in 2018 and instantly, there were many public domain photos taken by White House photographers. Cullen328 (talk) 00:15, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

that is a good story. thank you. i am just trying to upload an image for dan senor, i did not want it to be an ordeal, but was just thinking of the best and correct way to do it and learn from it for future cases when i see a blp without an image. i used the wrong language maybe in asking for waht i am trying to accomplish. Iljhgtn (talk) 00:18, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Iljhgtn, and welcome to the Teahouse. Thank you for wanting to help improve Wikipedia. Unfortunately, the fact is that many BLPs have no photos because nobody's managed to find a free one ColinFine (talk) 00:25, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
ok, well i think i may have found one for Dan Senor, so if this works and i did my due diligence and followed the instructions correctly, then i could apply this in other cases too. if you could look at what i found here and let me know if that is usable on his page in the infobox. Iljhgtn (talk) 00:27, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Iljhgtn: No, that won't work. It says it is a non-commercial license. For Wikipedia, it must be licensed in a way that allows reuse for any purpose. RudolfRed (talk) 00:33, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
ok. well then looks like nothing might exist then. Iljhgtn (talk) 00:40, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Iljhgtn, that is casually labeled "White House photo". If you can find the original and verify that it was taken on the job by an employee of the US government, then it is in the public domain and OK to use. We can't trust that wiki. Cullen328 (talk) 00:48, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Iljhgtn: You could crop his image from this: https://catalog.archives.gov/id/6644075 or this: https://catalog.archives.gov/id/6664353 --Tagishsimon (talk) 00:54, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ok so i cropped it, but then went to the file upload wizard and i tried to upload as non-free content, but none of the options seemed appropriate to me. is this free content actually? Iljhgtn (talk) 01:00, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Iljhgtn: yes, this is free; public domain. Works of the US federal goverment are PD. --Tagishsimon (talk) 01:03, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Iljhgtn, that image isn't "non-free". As a work of a US government photographer, it is in the public domain, which is the opposite of non-free. Cullen328 (talk) 01:06, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
understood now. i thought non-free was like if i take the picture, but then that really would limit the number of non-free pictures hahaha. Iljhgtn (talk) 01:10, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
or free i meant to say................. Iljhgtn (talk) 01:10, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Iljhgtn, if you take a photo, it is non-free at that moment. If you choose to freely license it for re-use, then it is no longer non-free. Cullen328 (talk) 01:13, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
ok i did it. can someone please check my work to ensure that i did not mess it up. Iljhgtn (talk) 01:14, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Dan Senor Iljhgtn (talk) 01:14, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Iljhgtn: It's all good. I changed the licence on the commons image to PD-USGov, b/c that's the appropriate one; it's not a cc-by-sa-4.0, but, easy mistake to make :) --Tagishsimon (talk) 01:31, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
would that have been a mistake that got the image deleted? or would someone else normally just change that if they noticed the error? Iljhgtn (talk) 01:33, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Iljhgtn: 99 times out of 100 it would just have been changed; 1 in 100 times someone might send it for deletion, but even then it's most likely to have been picked up by someone who understood what was going on; vanishingly unlikely to lead to a deletion. Maybe would get a note of advice on your talk page. It's not uncommon for images to be loaded with a cc-by-sa-4.0 and to have that modified to a more appropriate licence later. --Tagishsimon (talk) 01:55, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect category

Hi, I noticed that Paradecolya inexspectata was in Category:Endemic flora of Réunion, but it's actually an insect. I decided to be bold and remove it, but I was wondering if I should have added it to some other category. 65.128.48.151 (talk) 00:17, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Good catch, 48.151, thank you. You're under no obligation to add it to another category, but Category:Endemic fauna of Réunion was probably where it was meant to be; I've added that. --Tagishsimon (talk) 00:39, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia editing dispute

I vaguly remember something about an editing dispute regarding some specification of (I think it was) a wristwatch with regard to the reliability of the secondary source and that people went great lengths to have this corrected on Wikipedia because editors kept reverting it. Does anyone know what this refers to? PhotographyEdits (talk) 00:35, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, PhotographyEdits. You are probably referring to a discussion at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 240, spefically number 10 - The Watch Quote. Cullen328 (talk) 03:58, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"says who"

I think that I have seen an annotation in an Article next to an unsupported claim that is something like [says who]. Have I remembered correctly. How do I put it into an Article> BlueWren0123 (talk) 01:07, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, BlueWren0123. I think that you are looking for Template:According to whom. Cullen328 (talk) 01:10, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes that is it.Thank you BlueWren0123 (talk) 01:26, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Is there a list of these assorted Templates somewhere? BlueWren0123 (talk) 01:35, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@BlueWren0123, I'm guessing this? Category:Inline citation and verifiability dispute templates. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁=☁=✈) 01:42, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you BlueWren0123 (talk) 01:44, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
BlueWren0123, yes, it's here:
Mathglot (talk) 06:24, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
you mean this?[according to whom?]
it's {{{According to whom}}} Babysharkboss2 was here!! (Talk to me!) (Goo Goo dolls) 19:38, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Help category new article

Hi, I made a big blunder by creating a page Telugu Desam Party breakaway groups instead of creating a category that I was going to. Please help resolve this. 456legend (talk) 05:45, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there. If you do not want that page you've created, you can request a deletion request under the G7 criteria. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁=☁=✈) 05:54, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yea thank you. I just did that. 456legend (talk) 06:09, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thumbs up icon 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁=☁=✈) 08:03, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I Need Your Help for my Issue

Article:Jishnu Raghavan was tagged for Speedy deletion so please help me to rectify that. So only I had created with Page:Jishnu (Malayalam actor) but why do you again moved to page:Jishnu Raghavan I think that's why the another user tagged for G5. So please help me. This article should not get deleted Jeevan shree (talk) 06:13, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Done per https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jishnu_Raghavan&diff=prev&oldid=1189341442 Leoneix (talk) 07:37, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
OP is now blocked indefinitely as a sockpuppet. Shantavira|feed me 17:36, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ideenschmied & Erfinder

Ich möchte von Beginn an Berichten, wie der Ideenschmied & Erfinder, entstanden ist, und warum. Darf ich das tun ?

Herzliche Grüße und eine besinnliche Weihnachtszeit. Ideenschmied & Erfinder (talk) 07:46, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ideenschmied & Erfinder. This is the English Wikipedia. Please ask at the German Wikipedia. Cullen328 (talk) 07:59, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Happy holiday season yourself, Ideenschmied & Erfinder. If you can find reliable material about some subject, material that's published and disinterested, you are free to write a draft about it in English for English-language Wikipedia. If you want to do it in German, you'd better ask at German-language Wikipedia. (Each Wikipedia is independent of the others.) But since you, with this username, have so far made a total of one edit (above) to this Wikipedia and none to any other, you'd be wise to practise making constructive additions to existing articles before embarking on a new article. -- Hoary (talk) 08:03, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
(translating Cullen328's message into German, for OP's ease of reading)
Hallo, Ideenschmied & Erfinder. Dies ist die englische Wikipedia. Bitte fragen Sie bei der
deutschen Wikipedia nach. ContributeToTheWiki (talkcontribs) 13:30, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

2023 Betelgeuse occultation

As you may know the star Betelgeuse will be occulted in a rare event on December 12 after 01:00 UTC. It has been covered in the star article and also 319 Leona. Can we also have a separate article for it? Aminabzz (talk) 09:22, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The visual dimming of Betelgeuse because the asteroid will pass between the star and earth is well-covered in both the star and asteroid articles. Personally, I see no merit in the creation of a separate article for this brief, one-time event. David notMD (talk) 09:46, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Captcha

Whenever I want to publish my edits, I have to do a captcha, does this stop when I'm verified?

Thank you

Cyprus76 Cyprus76 (talk) 14:19, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Cyprus76 non-autoconfirmed users have to complete a captcha when introducing a new external link to an article. So yes, this will go away once your account is 4 days and 10 edits old. Sungodtemple (talkcontribs) 14:26, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! Cyprus76 (talk) 14:28, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Advice on better sources please

I've had a non-contentious AfC rejected several times now on the basis that the references are not reliable enough. I also note when reading the internal help pages that some of Britain's National Newspapers are not considered reliable sources. The organisation in question is a 50-year-old trade organisation. Admittedly it does not have huge membership because it works in the niche field of equestrian sport, but nobody questions its existence except article reviewers here! I use five references in my article. One is a national directory of photographers. One is the British trade body for Sports Journalists, the SJA. Another is a World-famous magazine which has been featured in several films. I realise that these are not the New York Times (but some would question its impartiality on many issues) but the organisation is not the subject of lots of news articles. It's a professional organisation. Not "notable" in the sense of it being exciting, but definitely still worthy of note. Arguable more than some of the random articles which do get approved here e.g. computer games which don't yet exist. On a separate note my copy was deleted because it was similar to the contents of the About page on the organisation's website, which I co-wrote! How does one licence one's own work? Indie (talk) 14:30, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Indomitable, to answer your first question, the definition of notability is defined by the general notability guideline and the notability guideline for organizations, not the subjective 'notability' described in your comment. Essentially, you need three sources, which need not be online, which are independent, in-depth, and reliable. What are those best three sources?
To answer your second question, see WP:DCP. Sungodtemple (talkcontribs) 14:38, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Indomitable: you may wish to review the concept of notability, which is a core requirement for inclusion in Wikipedia. In most cases, that simply means that the subject has been covered by multiple independent and reliable media (preferably secondary), of their own volition, and in significant extent and detail. This excludes primary sources, sources close to the subject, and any source which cannot be regarded as reliable. How old the organisation is, how many members it has, etc. has nothing to do with notability. I note that on your own talk page you say "We are trying to educate the broader media that a fifty-year-old trade body has changed its name in order to reflect changes in the way media works. My brief as a member of the committee is to update the BEWA website as BEMA and to do things such as create a Wikipedia page to spread the word." Unfortunately, this is of no interest to Wikipedia, and you should not attempt to use this website as your organisation's communication tool. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:38, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Indomitable, no one is questioning the existence of the organization. That's a red herring. What is being questioned is the group's notability, as Wikipedia editors define that term. There are millions of organizations in the world, and the vast majority are not notable for a Wikipedia article. It is your obligation to demonstate that this particular organization is notable by providing references to significant coverage of the group in reliable sources that are entirely independent of the group. That means no press releases and no prompting by representatives of the organization. If you can show that your organization is truly notable as defined by Wikipedia, then of course, we want to mention its recent name change. But if not, then the name change is irrelevant to Wikipedia. By no means do the references need to be to publications as well-known as the New York Times. There are many thousands of newspapers, magazines, websites and journals that are perfectly acceptable. And then there are books. Cullen328 (talk) 20:29, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Badly editing

I wanted to edit life of pi book cover image for a better one though I didn't manage to do it and it didn't work and so you didn't accept it. Could it be possible to replace the image by a better one : The one of The canons editions because it is prettier and more descriptive.

Thank you TherealJojo08 (talk) 14:54, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

TherealJojo08, to introduce a new image to an article, you need to first upload it. Since the book cover of The Life of Pi is copyrighted, you will need to upload a non-free image under fair use. See WP:Upload wizard to get started. You should also make sure that the other book cover is more descriptive (being prettier doesn't count). Sungodtemple (talkcontribs) 14:57, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) @TherealJojo08: Welcome to the Teahouse! To discuss this with others interested in the Life of Pi article, I suggest asking at Talk:Life of Pi while providing a URL of the image you prefer. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 15:06, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You gotta upload a non-free version of an image for it to be used. Babysharkboss2 was here!! (Talk to me!) (Goo Goo dolls) 16:01, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
TherealJojo08, the current image is of the World's First Edition of the book, which is usually the one preferred (since it relates to the bibliographic details immediately below), and it is of good quality. Why do you want to replace it, and why should one other particular cover of the many that exist (twelve or more can be seen at ISFDB, for example) replace it, other than your personal preference?
Incidentally, by "The canons edition" you presumably mean Canongate Books: of the covers in my external link above, four entirely different ones from Canongate are included – do you mean one of these, or yet another? {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.199.215.44 (talk) 17:06, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Is this book an acceptable reference for an article related to pipe organs?

'Registration (organ)' has a template message requesting addiitonal citatins, and indeed the multi-paragraph article currently has only one. The article has had little editing activity. I came across this source unrelated to an intent to edit the page, [1]https://www.scottbrothersduo.com/how-to-play-the-pipe-organ.htm then looked up the topic in wikipedia. Before I buy the book I'd like to know whether it is sufficiently authoritative to cite in Wikipedia. It has no ISBN nor, to the best of my knowledge, any publicly archived paper copy.

Thank you very much. Rosie Willis (talk) 15:55, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Rosie Willis: It's a self-published PDF. It is unlikely to be in wikipedia terms a reliable source, per WP:RSSELF, although if there is evidence that the author has been published by reliable, independent publications, it may be acceptable. In this case, it's probably quite a harsh judgement; I think the author does know exactly what he's talking about :( --Tagishsimon (talk) 16:14, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. That's in line with what I expected, but since I agree with your last comment I wanted to check. Rosie Willis (talk) 17:36, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How to deal with excessive detail

On the page firefighting there are sections with excessive detail that would only interest some people (like me) I am wondering if I should 1. make it more simple and to the point 2.just get rid of some of it or 3. put it in a different page 50tr5 (talk) 16:14, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@50tr5: Any of those are options, and there's also option 4) leave it alone. I suggest WP:BRD is your friend. --Tagishsimon (talk) 16:20, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello 50tr5. You may want to make a comment on the article's Talk page, stating you are considering removing excess detail, and possibility making a new article for the removed information. Ask if others have objections to that, and if they have other options. Wait a week or two for replies before making major changes. That way those who may be watching the article will have a heads up and can discuss the matter if they have strong opinions. Karenthewriter (talk) 18:02, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
thanks to both of you I will do that 50tr5 (talk) 20:22, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How to create a page for a famous person's wife that is now notable?

How to create a page for a famous person's wife that is now notable? She is listed on her husband's wikipedia page, so now how can a page be created that will link to her own page? Knight0071 (talk) 16:31, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Knight0071: Probably, read WP:YFA. If an article is successfully created, it can be linked to from her husband's page. --Tagishsimon (talk) 16:34, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, thank you for such a fast response! I read somewhere that you can post for this article to be written, is that true? If so, where can I post? Knight0071 (talk) 16:37, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Knight0071: There's Wikipedia:Requested articles, but I doubt that it works. If you want an article, you're best off rolling up your sleeves and diving in. --Tagishsimon (talk) 16:45, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Knight0071 You can make suggestions at WP:RA but as that page says Most requested articles will not be written.. In this particular case, you may be better off making the suggestion at the Talk Page of the husband[who?] as editors who have the page on their watchlist are most likely to be the ones interested. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:45, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Awesome, Thank you! I'll give that a try :) Knight0071 (talk) 16:47, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Right margin is broken

Can anyone tell me why the right margin is broken at the start of the 2023–24 Northeast Conference men's basketball season#Postseason section? How do I restore or reset the right margin? Taxman1913 (talk) 18:36, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Looks broken on my end too Lewcm Talk to me! 19:41, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Taxman1913. Fixed by [2]. If a section preview looks OK but not a full page view then there is usually something unterminated earlier in the page. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:26, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, PrimeHunter! I searched and search but couldn't find the problem. Taxman1913 (talk) 14:16, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Book has Editors not Authors

Is there a accepted way to identify the named 2 people as Editors. When I try to put (Editor) after their names I get a Template warning about the names being Generic. The Template has the option for many Authors but only one Editor BlueWren0123 (talk) 19:59, 11 December 2023 (UTC) oops "an accepted..." — Preceding unsigned comment added by BlueWren0123 (talkcontribs) 20:19, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, BlueWren0123, and welcome to the Teahouse. You need to go into the source editor and directly edit the {{Cite web}} template. ContributeToTheWiki (talkcontribs) 21:11, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Will give that a go. BlueWren0123 (talk) 21:29, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I want to put out my family

I want to publish a document about my family describing it Amo117 (talk) 20:53, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really understand you. Do you mean you want to publish a page about your family? If so, it's highly discouraged. Babysharkboss2 was here!! (Talk to me!) (Goo Goo dolls) 20:58, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Its not really my family but I have heard of it and asked thats why i am asking if I could post in in Wiki the family has risen from rubbish to wealth in the last 50 years so yeah Amo117 (talk) 21:00, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well, going over your only edit, it's vandalism of the Family page. But, you can make any page as long as it follows the wiki rules and has good sources. the All seeing omni-potent wikipedia article wizard could help Babysharkboss2 was here!! (Talk to me!) (Goo Goo dolls) 21:03, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
you now someone that can help me make it better because I am doing it in german Amo117 (talk) 21:25, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
and also thank you very much for your help Amo117 (talk) 21:26, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Amo117 (edit conflict) Well, for starters your edit to Family was in German. If you want to contribute in German, you'll have to do that over at the German Wikipedia, though - here at the english Wikipedia we can only accept English contributions. That being said, As written the post wouldn't be appropriate for either Wikipedia (even if one translates it to english) as it is entirely unsourced, something which is not permitted both here and there and contains non-neutral terms such as malerischen Stadt Bogovinje, bemerkenswerten Erfolg and herausragenden Leistungen, which is also not permitted both here and there. I'll drop a welcome message with more info on your talkpage. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 21:32, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My request got declined but I don't know the reason. I couldn't find the reason yet ,what to edit. please help

"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."

what does this mean? Editohub (talk) 21:32, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Editohub. You are using your userpage for a fake encyclopedia article. This is not permitted. Your usepage is to tell other Wikipedia editors (not the world) about your interests, plans and accomplishments as a Wikipedia editor. If you are writing about yourself, then please read WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY, as this is strongly discouraged. If you are trying to develop an encyclopedia article, then this should be done in draft space. Currently, the content is entirely unreferenced and is therefore not appropriate for the encyclopedia. Cullen328 (talk) 21:51, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Cullen328 I believe this is about their declined draft, Draft:Asif Iqbal Jewel.
@Editohub The english Wikipedia only accepts articles about subjects which meet our inclusion criteria, called notability (in this case, WP:DIRECTOR) and almost always boils down to multiple independent reliable sources devoting significant coverage to the subject.
Since the subject is still living, Wikipedia's policy on biographies of living people applies, with more stringent rules, including but not limited to that we require inline citations.
I am afraid that I had to tag most of the images you uploaded to Commons for speedy deletion under c:COM:PCP as it's unlikely a production company would put movie posters under a CC-0-License. In the case that they did, or if you are authorised to do so, please see WP:DCM.
I see now that you asked about this both here and at the AFC help desk, please only ask in one place at a time to avoid wasted volunteer effort. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 22:07, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The userpage content and the draft content appear to be identical. Cullen328 (talk) 22:17, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Userpage content now removed. David notMD (talk) 07:09, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Content for Biographies of Living People? Halp!

Ok. So.....I've been trying to be active in helping edit biographies of living people. However, almost ALL of them contain copious amounts of information that is unverifiable or irrelevant -- like "so and so was in a Shakespeare play in high school."

In reviewing the WIKIpedia rules, i found -- "No original research" (NOR) is one of three core content policies that, along with Neutral point of view and Verifiability, determines the type and quality of material acceptable in articles.

So, does one just delete irrelevant and unverifiable info? Or? Slacker13 (talk) 00:20, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Slacker13, you should ensure that the citations placed after a claim within the same paragraph do not verify claims—presupposing you have, and the claims are spurious, unverifiable, or could possibly be contested (in the case of BLP), you are indeed encouraged to remove the unsourced claims. Remsense 00:27, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In general, if you wish to improve BLPs in this respect, you'd either seek references for claims, or you'd remove the claim. Equally, starting from a hyperbolic premise of "almost ALL of them contain copious amounts of information that is unverifiable or irrelevant" is itself problematic; it is unlikely that almost all of them of them contain copious amounts of information that is unverifiable; and the question of irrelevancy is surely a value judgement and an issue distinct from verifibility? If you're on a crusade, the possibility is that you'll do more harm than good. --Tagishsimon (talk) 00:30, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Granted, I haven't reviewed ALL the BLP's, but the ones I have seen -- ALL read like marketing fodder (original research, non-neutral POV and non verifiable), rather than factual biographies. Not that I'm on a crusade, but man, if these people are paying for their bios to be written it can't be any more obvious. Does the general public really need to know what high school play you were in? Slacker13 (talk) 00:54, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Slacker13: For the specific example you raise, I think context is important. If the subject of the BLP is, say, an astronaut, then perhaps it is not important. If the subject is an actor, then it is absolutely arguable that it is relevant to discuss the first production he played in. Because it is a subscription website I cannot read the source from which that claim seems to eminate on the John de Lancie article. I do come away with the impression that your assertion of the unimportance of this information in this biograhy is questionable and leaves something to be desired; and also come away with concern that the information may well be cited, contrary to the premise in your original post. It leaves me wondering what all this is about. --Tagishsimon (talk) 01:11, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
really? This was the cruxt of my original question. How to determine relevant information when it doesn't match Wikipedia guidelines. In the case of John de Lancie -- you really believe that being in a highschool play is relevant to his career? I would then posit then that all the actors should list their highschool plays -- but only if it is non original research and varifiable -- which seems silly. Most children in gradeschool in the US are in some sort of production -- should all actors list them? I would imagine, yes, to list it if it was unusual in some way -- like he was given an award for it, he was written up for it. etc. Otherwise sounds like Marketing text to fill up and page and make the amount of work seem more relevant. Slacker13 (talk) 01:22, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You are potentially conflating the distinct concepts of due weight and verifiability, they are sometimes related, but should usually be evaluated separately. One should not be used to directly imply the other. Remsense 01:27, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! I'll review and keep in mind. Slacker13 (talk) 01:44, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Tagishsimon Oh you can read it, using my loophole of how to get around paywalls [3] Danstarr69 (talk) 01:22, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
TagishsimonSlacker13 John de Lancie What made you decide to pursue a career as an actor? "I was not a good student, and the reason I was not a good student is that I didn’t know how to read. … I was dyslexic, but at the time that was not really a word that was used. What was used was “mildly retarded” or “slow.” I ended up flunking out of a couple of schools. The last school I went to, they said “Oh, no, no, we think he’s dyslexic,” but nobody really knew what to do with that. I probably was 14 by that time.
My teacher, who was really quite a wonderful teacher … we would do projects. One year, we would do Handel’s “Messiah.” Another year, we did “Marriage of Figaro,” and then this particular time of the year, it was in the springtime, he said, “We’re going to do ‘Henry V’ and de Lancie, you’re going to play ‘Hal’ [King Henry V].” I could barely read it, but I learned it, and I did it, and a gentleman who had come … took my father aside and he said, “If your son has an interest in this, you should encourage him because he has a flair for it.”
And so it came to me mostly as a life preserver, quite frankly." Danstarr69 (talk) 01:27, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This is interesting context. I didn't see where this was added as a source for the high school play. What number is it? Slacker13 (talk) 01:42, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Slacker13 Number 4. It was added at the end of the long paragraph. It's now added in two sections of that paragraph, and might be useful for other sections of that paragraph, or elsewhere in the article. Danstarr69 (talk) 01:49, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
thanks! Slacker13 (talk) 01:53, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Slacker13 It depends. For example something like "Jane Doe starred in Shakespeare play at high school with John Doe. They later went on to work on a Shakespeare TV show together," would be fun trivia.
I can think of many examples like that related to my city, one of which are a married couple I based by example on, as they met on a TV set in my city where they played the two lead characters, then went on to work on another TV series together, which was also filmed in my city.
Whereas something like "Jane Doe starred in a Shakespeare play" by itself, is just useless information. Danstarr69 (talk) 01:16, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I agree. If it's interesting, absolutely. But in the case above, i don't think it met that criteria. Just my opinion. Slacker13 (talk) 01:27, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Your opinions are worthwhile! But luckily for everyone who may have them, as I noted above this discussion falls under the distinct, but helpful concept of due versus undue weight. Remsense 01:30, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'll spend some more time reading through the link you gave. It actually is very helpful. Slacker13 (talk) 01:45, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Danstarr69. @Slacker13:, as I noted, if the subject is an actor, then it is absolutely arguable that it is relevant to discuss the first production he played in. You'll forgive me if I say that I find your tone & argument somewhat deranged. Why would you not want to know when and how an actor got into acting? Why exactly would you think such information is Marketing text to fill up and page and make the amount of work seem more relevant. Of course, you are entitled to your view and entitled to write about your view. But for me you're singularly unpersuasive and your particular animus for what seems like pertinent and what is now confirmed to be sourced information seems more likely to be a risk of harm to the encyclopedia than a good. --Tagishsimon (talk) 01:33, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't make the change. I asked a question. I'm concerned that you've flagged my activity in asking questions, explaining my thinking, voicing an opinion, and contributing to active discussion -- as deranged and a risk of harm to the encyclopedia. Is this what i should expect if I ask a relevant question? I find your comments NOT kind, respectful, nor conducive to open discussion. Slacker13 (talk) 01:41, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It is what you should expect if you are economical with the truth - that the context was an actor - if you mislead about the premise - the information was sourced - and if your tone is one of scorn - really? - when measured arguments are put to you. --Tagishsimon (talk) 01:45, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
not scorn. disbelief. active debate allows for that, I would hope. Slacker13 (talk) 01:49, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Disbelief that it is relevant to specify when an actor got into acting? as you put it, really?. --Tagishsimon (talk) 01:57, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
no. disbelief that it would have been important to cite a high school play WITHOUT the context of it being the reason he got into acting -- as Danstarr69 mentioned below. Slacker13 (talk) 02:00, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Notwithstanding Danstarr69's contribution, the sentence is He began to act around the age of 14, performing in a high school production of William Shakespeare's Henry V. It explains how & when an actor got into acting. Again: why would that not be relevant to the biography of an actor? --Tagishsimon (talk) 02:09, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This is my question, truly. If it had not had special weight given to it because it helped him with dyslexia, etc. I, personally find it irrelevant simply because I would imagine a vast majority of people can point to something similar in whatever career they end up choosing. So where to draw the line? Yes, some facts are fun bits that add context, but I don't think all of them are. So, it really is my question -- how to draw the line? Slacker13 (talk) 02:14, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Additionally, yes, the factoid had a citation attached to it that provided context -- but for other BLP where there isn't a citation or context, how do you make sure it passes the "no original research" test? Slacker13 (talk) 02:16, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well, as guidance, I beg to suggest that information on 'when & how did you get into your career' is highly relevant to a biography, fullstop. "When did you become an actor" is exactly one of those questions that an encyclopedia should be able to answer on the biography of an actor. It's not a 'fun fact'. The subject is notable as an actor. Information on when they became an actor is material to that which they are notable for. 'How to draw the line' is a difficult question to answer, but here I suggest that for each claim the author needs to ask 'does this information reasonably add to our understanding of the subject?'. For an actor biography, 'When did you become an actor': yes. 'What sort of car do you drive': no. Meanwhile if there is no citation and it is a claim which is worthwhile challenging, it can be removed. But you do need to check. In this instance, inter alia, you made the assertion that the information was not cited, but we now know that it was cited. --Tagishsimon (talk) 02:52, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Slacker13 Basically...
1 - John de Lancie - "Starred in a Shakespeare play" = Irrelevant.
2 - John de Lancie - "Starred in a Shakespeare play, because it helped him to read, and made him want to become an actor" = Relevant.
Just like how the singer Gareth Gates helped to cure his speech problems by singing as a kid. Danstarr69 (talk) 01:47, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I fully agree. But I did see the link to the article listing context for it. Which is why it originally raised questions for me. Slacker13 (talk) 01:50, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • did not see the article
Slacker13 (talk) 01:50, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It actually is quite an interesting topic. Thank you all for your answers. I really am looking for guidance and I also really do have opinions. Always willing to discuss. Slacker13 (talk) 02:05, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Could I use a picture avatar of an artist when I am not affiliated with the artist?

I'm creating an article on an artist named Inabakumori, and I'm wondering if I am allowed to use his picture avatar without explicit permission from them. If not, I can try to find someone to request permission. (talk) 04:21, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Vanillyn: You are not allowed to. You would need to get the artist to release the image under a permissive licence before it could be used on WP. --Tagishsimon (talk) 04:43, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Alright! I can attempt to send the artist an email asking him to release the image under a permissive license. I've checked the WIkimedia Commons guidelines, which doesn't seem to contain any information on profile pictures and the like.
How would I know the image is licensed correctly? Would he have to upload it to somewhere like Flickr? (talk) 05:17, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You can have the artist send a confirmation email to WP:VRT that the he published the artwork in a free license. Ca talk to me! 05:29, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You can use their pfp, if it's in public domain. so, If they have something like a winnie-the-pooh profile pic of YouTube (idk, it's the first PD thing I thought of), we could use it on their page without permission, since Winne--the-pooh is public domain. but if they have something else, that's copyrighted (like a James Bond pic or something), we'd need permisson. we only upload/use non-free pics. Babysharkboss2 was here!! (Talk to me!) (Goo Goo dolls) 14:17, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Remeber to tell the artist that if the avatar is of his own making, I believe that giving permission would allow anyone to have free use of the image everywhere (coffee mugs, T-shirts...). David notMD (talk) 16:09, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
nukunukunigirimeshi is someone that worked closely with the artist for years. I believe the avatar itself is by the artist, as it's been the same since 2016. (talk) 16:20, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Question

What's the difference between visual editor and source editor? Bzik2324 (talk) 05:03, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The visual editor attempts to be WYSIWYG and hides the wiki markup. The source editor shows the markup and provides an option to preview the end result. --Tagishsimon (talk) 05:35, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In addition, the Visual Editor suffers from a number of limitations. Many of these probably won't be relevant to day-to-day editing, but others will be. See WP:VE for details. Mike Marchmont (talk) 10:53, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I want need

Recently, I had created one article under title Draft:Jishnu Raghavan Alingkil but again it was moved to draftspace and it was rejected. Considering beacause G5. I'm crating article for one of notable well-known actor in Malayalam Industry. what to do now Vicky Kumar26 (talk) 05:58, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(User indeffed, draft deleted.) -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:46, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
okay, but, you gotta be honest, I want need has to be the funniest title i've seen yet on here. (anyway, good job with banning them!) Babysharkboss2 was here!! (Talk to me!) (Goo Goo dolls) 14:14, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

IP Problem

A IP here was warned for causing problems on a few pages, deleting references to "genocide" without reason. The IP is now on different IP's, causing more of the same problems. The changes can be seen here.

How can this IP can be stopped? Marwanaircalm (talk) 09:19, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment: Reported to WP:AIV. ContributeToTheWiki (talkcontribs) 11:20, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion a Draft

The next draft was deleted and marked as G-11. What causes the G-11 problem to be detected, what should I change so that this does not happen? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Nano_nuclear_energy_in LucasEmanuelRocca (talk) 13:00, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

LucasEmanuelRocca Draft:Nano nuclear energy inc was tagged by another editor who thought that it was unambiguous advertising or spam, per WP:G11. I cannot see the deleted draft, but it should be obvious why it is advertising. You may wish to read WP:NOTADVERT. Sungodtemple (talkcontribs) 13:49, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Admins might also wish to delete Draft:Nano Nuclear Energy Inc., yet another incarnation of the same article which is currently blanked by the user. G7 or G11, take your pick. --Tagishsimon (talk) 13:54, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding an article of a prominent living person

Hello, this is Yamantakks, hoping your day was going great. I was just randomly surfing about the web and lastly went to the article narendra modi and was reading the outer paragraphs which were written. I saw major criticism even on the topics like Article 370 which was, I believe, being misused even after the SC's verdict approving it. I believe that even if a figure is criticized, it should be kept under a seperate headings unless a major, inhuman crime is seriously linked with the personality and is supported by legal proofs. I think that the article needs serious rewriting because there are also any good deeds creditted to him and just blaming him for things on a reputable organization like wikipedia, is not justifiable and I came here to ask for help because the article is a major article and I believe it should be handled with great care and some more experienced editor should look into the matter.
Regards
Yamantakks (talk) 14:01, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Yamantakks: Narendra Modi is a hugely controversial person; you can rest assured that many editors are focussed on his article. You might wish to raise your specific concern on the talk page of the article. --Tagishsimon (talk) 14:06, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Tagishsimon,
I want to raise concerns about it but I fear that I don't know much of the wikipedia policies regarding this and as many editors have their attention over the article, I fear raising my concerns as I would not be able to raise my concerns and they will be useless without any backing of any wikipedia policy(s). I wanted to ask for help regarding the wikipeida's policy regarding articles on famous figures so I can understand and see for any improvement.
With Regards,
Yamantakks (talk) 14:21, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Yamantakks The main policy is the one on the biographies of living people. As already advised, the best place to make comments is at Talk:Narendra Modi. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:26, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Yamantakks In addition to what is seen at Talk:Narendra Modi the Talk page notes near the top that there are archives of older Talk page content. IT is possible that anything you have in mind has already been disccused. While standard Wikipedia guideline is edit the article, and go to Talk only if reverted by another editor, this article is so 'hot' that your best path is to propose new content (or deleting existing content) on the Talk page and abide by what other reply. David notMD (talk) 16:16, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Userpage Help

(User:Keagen J. Cole)

I was wanting to know: how do I make a subpage on my userpage without using the userbox maker? A lot of the articles I found on making a subpage manually either doesn't make sense or it doesn't give me a straight answer.  :-\ ​-Keagen J. Cole ​🐾 (talk) 14:27, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Keagen J. Cole,
I think you can type [[user:username/intented_title_of_the_subpage]] and when you publish the changes, the wikilink apears red and click it and clicking "create article". I hope it helps, if any furthre confusion, kindly reply or go through Wikipedia:Subpages.
Regards
Yamantakks (talk) 14:45, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a lot. :D It actually worked! ​-Keagen J. Cole ​🐾 (talk) 15:49, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Questionable Notability?

Hey! So how do you guys handle BLP's with somewhat questionable notability? Everyone would like to have a Wikipedia page, but many of them I've seen are fleshed out with WP:RSSELF, WP:UGC, WP:SELFSOURCE. How is significant coverage determined? I've found the below as guidance, and it makes sense, but as I'm going through and questioning sources, I'm getting some push back.

Thoughts?

General notability guidelines

If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be notable.

  • "Presumed" means if there is actual and real coverage in a number of independent reliable sources, then we presume the topic is notable. However, a subject that is presumed to be notable may still not be suitable for being included. For example, it may violate what Wikipedia is not.
  • "Significant coverage" means that sources address the subject directly in detail. No original research is needed to find the content. Significant coverage is more than trivial but may be less than exclusive.
  • "Reliable" means sources need to be written truthfully and honestly to allow verifiable evaluation of notability, per the reliable source guideline. Sources may include published works in all forms and media. Availability of secondary sources covering the subject is a good test for notability.
  • "Sources," defined on Wikipedia as secondary sources, provide the best evidence of notability. The number and type of reliable sources needed depends on the depth of coverage and quality of the sources. Multiple sources are generally preferred.
  • "Independent of the subject" excludes works produced by those linked with the subject including (but not limited to): self-publicity, advertising, self-published material by the subject, autobiographies, press releases, etc.

A topic for which this guideline has been met by agreement, is usually worthy of notice, and satisfies one of the guidelines for a stand-alone article in the encyclopedia. Verifiable facts and content not supported by multiple independent sources may be appropriate for inclusion within another article. Slacker13 (talk) 16:03, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Slacker13 and welcome to the Teahouse, I've made your second seciton heading, "General notability guidelines", a lower heading so it stays within the same top level section. I'd say in general most people should not want a Wikipedia biography. There's no actual advantage of having outside of some very small niches were it may help "promote" yourself. There are many potential downsides to having a Wikipedia article about oneself. I haven't had time to research your question more but it may be helpful for myself if I have time or other editors to provide a bit more context to your question. Thanks! Skynxnex (talk) 16:19, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thx! Slacker13 (talk) 00:48, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What are you asking? Babysharkboss2 was here!! (Talking Head's) (Goo Goo Dolls) 16:24, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You cut a huge amount of content from Joslyn Rose Lyons. Much of it was not referenced, and full of name-dropping. However, User:Materialscientist reverted your cuts, likely because so large and not well described in an Edit summary. A next step could be to open a discussion on the Talk page, or else make a modest cut with a better Edit summary and see if that remains. Or, try to add refs? David notMD (talk) 16:26, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
? Babysharkboss2 was here!! (Talking Head's) (Goo Goo Dolls) 16:28, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I add that much of the weak content was added by User:Managementartist who was asked if doing undeclared paid work on the article, did not reply, but stopped. David notMD (talk) 16:33, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! Slacker13 (talk) 00:49, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! Slacker13 (talk) 00:50, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. That's the second time someone has mentioned not doing such a huge edit. Will make sure to make smaller edits with better documentation moving forward. Slacker13 (talk) 00:51, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I note the problem here is not notability, but rather the addition of uncited & rather spammy content; and then its removal without the courtesy of an edit summary. --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:38, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
thank you! Slacker13 (talk) 00:49, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Grae Cleugh

Hi

Theres been a bit of buzz about this today and an article request was posted here. I wrote a quick article that meets notability guidelines, not known for a single event, secondary sources, numerous red links requiring clarity.

Clearly there is more to add but the bare bones looks good to me. Can anyone make any minor tweaks and resubmit. 86.167.216.44 (talk) 17:27, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It needs much more than minor tweaks. Please see the advice you have been given at Draft:Grae Cleugh.Shantavira|feed me 17:34, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
your right about the bare bones part. Try adding more content, expanding, and adding things like more ref's, or categories. Babysharkboss2 was here!! (Talking Head's) (Goo Goo Dolls) 17:41, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The main issue is the lack of reliable sources - WP:RS - not the need for more content, expanding, nor categories, none of which are reasons for the article not being promoted. Please don't give new users very poor advice; it's unhelpful. --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:49, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't give out misleading advice. This draft was declined for lack of evident notability, and more content won't resolve that, at least not directly. And categories should not be added to a draft, not that they would have any bearing on notablity, either. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:49, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't ask the same question at several places. This has also been answered at the AfC HD. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:46, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There is no advice.
The article meets minimum requirements, please publish. 86.167.216.44 (talk) 17:49, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There is advice: that it lacks reliable sources. It will not be published until that is addressed. --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:50, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The article meets minimum requirements, please publish[.], yeah, no. just because some page meets the minimum of something doesn't mean it'll be good. I could fill out every required test answers, doesn't mean i'll pass. On Wikipedia, same thing, the minimum of what you put in, is going to be met with minimum response, in your case, rejecting your article. Babysharkboss2 was here!! (Talking Head's) (Goo Goo Dolls) 17:52, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Babysharkboss2, please STOP giving bad, and in this case completely incoherent advice. It is disruptive and unhelpful. --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:56, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Babysharkboss2, please STOP giving bad, aight. Babysharkboss2 was here!! (Talking Head's) (Goo Goo Dolls) 18:01, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Its the same reference as this page 2002 Laurence Olivier Awards, are you suggesting that page should be deleted. 86.167.216.44 (talk) 17:54, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
a short article clears up the red link issue. 86.167.216.44 (talk) 17:55, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You can either take the advice given, 86.167.216.44, or watch the article languish as a draft. Your choice. Bar-room lawyering is not going to move the dial. What may be a reasonable cite for a set of awards may be insufficient for a BLP. --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:58, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There is no particular need to "clear up the red link issue". And even a short article will need to demonstrate notability before it will be published. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:59, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes there is. Red links are routinely deleted. 86.167.216.44 (talk) 18:11, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The article 2002 Laurence Olivier Awards demonstrates one notable event with 2 references on that page, the publishers page provides a brief and reliable biography backed up by a secondary biography at doolee.com. A review demonstrates it is not a passing mention.
I disagree with your assertion and you have been unable to coonvince me otherwis as you do not provide concise reasoning just extrapolated arguments which are without merit. 86.167.216.44 (talk) 18:14, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That's fine. Still doesn't get the article promoted, though, does it? --Tagishsimon (talk) 18:16, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I doesnt need promoted, it needs published. would adding a coupl of reviews of his work in national press help promote it. 86.167.216.44 (talk) 18:19, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Promotion, in this context, is the same as published. Yes, adding reviews in would help. --Tagishsimon (talk) 18:21, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The thing is, I don't need to convince you of anything. You need to convince an AfC reviewer (and I'm more than happy to recuse myself) that this draft warrants publication. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 18:19, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I added the less reliable doolee reference as it verifies the facts on his publisher Bloomsbury's website.
I disagree that his publishers website is not a valid source.
I added a couple of national press reviews for context, and added the references from 2002 Laurence Olivier Awards. 86.167.216.44 (talk) 18:51, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
And resubmitted. Declining reviewer User:NoobThreePointOh suggested other editors can help. 86.167.216.44 (talk) 19:06, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Further context: Talk:Royal Conservatoire of Scotland#Grae Cleugh (Protected Edit Request), User talk:Primefac#Grae CleughJéské Couriano v^_^v Source assessment notes 18:20, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Lawrence Olivier Award for Most Promising Playright is not a sigificant award (awarded only in 2002 and 2003 and then discontinued). David notMD (talk) 22:01, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Draft deleted with statement that it was created by a blocked User, using an IP address. David notMD (talk) 22:05, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Monthly Donation

Hi, I began monthly donations over a year ago so that I could give more as I really believe in Wikipedia and its mission, thank you for what you do! But I need to stop the pop ups to donate, I feel horrible ignoring them. And also get a tad annoyed. I just created my online account, at least I don’t recall having created one in the past.. I read once recently that there was a way to do this, but can’t find it? Can anyone share this process please. Sw8689 (talk) 18:32, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sw8689: Welcome to the Teahouse. If you don't want to see the fundraising banners, you can uncheck Preferences → Banners → Empty Fundraising in your preferences. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:35, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Is "Album of the Year" a valid source?

I've seen this site numerous times when looking for more independent sources for more information on an article I'm working on.

The site seems to be a journal that writes on albums and singles releasing, but it may be user-generated content, with some content appearing to be automatically generated


While on the topic, I'd also like to know what sites are valid and invalid as a source for an album/song releasing, (Spotify, Apple Music, Genius, Amazon Music, etc), I've looked through some of the guidelines on what sources would be allowed or not, but I can't tell if these sources would be independent or not (talk) 18:40, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The reliable sources noticeboard is usually the place for this. Sungodtemple (talkcontribs) 19:20, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Vanillyn: The consensus at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 316#Album of the Year is that it is not considered a reliable source. More information can be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Sources. GoingBatty (talk) 22:32, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

i would like to help add images for companies that have a missing logo image in their infobox if anyone could help me build a list to do that. i had someone once help me build a list for searching for books without covers, so something like this would be great. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Search&search=incategory%3A%22Books+with+missing+cover%22+insource%3A%2Fpublished+%2A%3D+%2A20%2F&ns0=1&fulltext=Search Iljhgtn (talk) 19:20, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think the best you'll find is Category:Pages using infobox company with a logo from wikidata - UtherSRG (talk) 19:28, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
k i will look at that link. Iljhgtn (talk) 19:29, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oh wait... Those *have* a logo. No, {{infobox company}} doesn't have a "no logo" tracking category. - UtherSRG (talk) 19:29, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
was just about to respond saying that... Iljhgtn (talk) 19:30, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
i looked at AirWatch randomly, and they had a logo, so my first "spot check" demonstrated the list was not complete at least.. Iljhgtn (talk) 19:30, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've put in a request for Category:Pages using infobox company missing logo to be added as a tracking category. Let's see what that request brings... - UtherSRG (talk) 19:38, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@UtherSRG @Iljhgtn might be worth asking at WP:VPT if there is a way to do a SPARQL query or something else for searching articles that transclude the template with an empty logo parameter. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 21:58, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
i have never asked anything of the village pump. i can try Iljhgtn (talk) 00:14, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
the category would be easiest. i asked about it at the village pump, but i am not sure if i asked correctly. thank you both. Iljhgtn (talk) 00:19, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Question regarding the understanding of Orphan pages.

Greetings everyone, hopefully you all are doing well. I want to understand the application of orphaning and de-orphaning the Wikipedia pages. Some of the pages I have seen having orphan tags, have a lot of links to them, yet the tag is there, and in one case it was introduced after links were introduced to the page by another editor.

It has become very confusing, any help is highly appreciated. Thank you. Ms.Aloisia (talk) 21:16, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Orphan#Criteria: "It is now recommended to only place the {{Orphan}} tag if the article has zero incoming links from other articles." It gets misapplied a lot, which is a shame. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:25, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed it is. Also this has contributed in confusion as well. Thanks a lot. Ms.Aloisia (talk) 21:59, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Ms.Aloisia: You removed an orphan tag from Megan Aubale Epstein claiming "per Wikipedia:Orphan#Criteria".[4] But the article has zero incoming links from other articles so it clearly satisfies the criteria. I have restored the tag. Please be more careful. If you think that article has incoming links from other articles then you have misunderstood something. We can clear up what if you say why you think it does. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:17, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well, yes, but also per Wikipedia:Orphan "Editors may also remove the tag from any article if they believe that de-orphaning is unlikely to be successful" and in this case we're dealing with a completely non-notable subject, a real-estate agent who is vanishingly unlikely to be linked to from any other article because of her thorough non-notability. --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:36, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It was her 20th edit. I don't really think she is qualified to judge "de-orphaning is unlikely to be successful". And considering her posts here, I guess she did think there was at least one article link. If the subject is non-notable then the article can be deleted. If the subject is notable then it might be added to e.g. List of people from Sacramento, California#Business. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:07, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Ms.Aloisia: - To clarify orphan vs. not orphan, check out Database reports/Orphans with incoming links report. Most articles listed may have already been de-orphaned by other editors as that daily-bot only updates the report every 4-days or so. Important – the only sure way to verify if an article is an orphan is "What links here" (alt-shift-j). Regards, JoeNMLC (talk) 23:53, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Need help with citations

So I was going through random pages and found this page (Daltmar) with no citations but a link to a government website so (after some trial and error) I made that into a citation but then this happened:

CS1 error on Daltmar[edit source]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Daltmar, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help) Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 15:39, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

So umm what did i do wrong? 50tr5 (talk) 22:19, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@50tr5: You've used the cite web template, but you have not included a title= parameter within it, and so the bots are now on your case. Maybe want title=Cercador, Daltmar ... I've added that just now. --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:22, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wondering how to address problems with this BLP. There are some odd references, such as <ref name="aboutexec">The only senior executive to have had a piano in his office</ref>. Is it better to remove refs like this and have completely unsourced information? Or to remove content not properly sourced? I think there is only one complete ref to an independent source with full details of date and author, the Santa Barbara News Press one. I can't see any RS online that would verify the details of his life, just two reviews on Publishers Weekly, but sme of his career may pre-date online sources. Thanks. Tacyarg (talk) 22:29, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That was really bad. Another editor - Caeciliusinhorto - beat me to the removal of all of the crap. I think I need to go and wash my eyes with bleach or something now. --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:55, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A little more help on my first article.

This may be the last question I ask for a while, sorry for the bombardment of questions! I'm asking more as a general question, as I don't feel it's fit to make an AfC help desk request. This is about the draft Draft:Inabakumori, which was originally created by Neeerrrd, but seemingly abandoned.

  1. The article was partly translated from the same article on a different language, what would I do to clarify that?
  2. While I'm the person mainly working on editing the article, I also got some slight help from people related to the subject, would I need to clarify that/who?
  3. While this question may fit more on another page, I'd like to know whether something like Spotify or Booth would be helpful for sourcing the release date of certain songs.

(talk) 22:41, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

1. You could add an edit summary to a null edit (e.g. add a space to the article) specifying the source of the text
2. You do not need to include a roll-call of helpers. You are responsible for your edits.
3. I don't think either of Spotify or Pixiv / Booth is a reliable source, so, no. --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:16, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I can't publish my edits.

I tried to publish my edits, but there is a "report edit" button. This makes me feel unsatisfied. 2605:8D80:4A2:42F3:DA:D0C5:5DFD:F30 (talk) 23:02, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to have tripped edit filters, and reported the issues at Wikipedia:Edit filter/False positives/Reports. I suggest you await the outcomes of those two reports. --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:13, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Getting into translating

Hello, I made an account a few months ago and decided to try translating an article on the Spanish Wikipedia, https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Txoria_txori, because I had been looking for information on this song and noticed that no corresponding article existed on the English Wikipedia. Unfortunately my translation was declined at AfC due to use of copyrighted material. I have been reading Wikipedia policies and now understand that I should not have uncritically translated material from another-language Wikipedia without ensuring that it also fit English Wikipedia criteria (I think the problem is that the Spanish page included the full text of the poem/song, but I am not sure; I also can't remember if I figured out how to actually note that I was translating and not writing. I definitely would have tried to note that, but I might not have noted it correctly.) Since then I've just been doing minor typo fixes and things as I run across them.

I don't have any specific obsession with "Txoria txori" (although I love the song) and am just as interested in translating any other page. I found Category:Articles needing translation from Spanish Wikipedia and would like to start translating some of those articles. However, from my experience I now know that I cannot trust that an article on another Wikipedia will be acceptable on English Wikipedia. I've looked at the guidance on Wikipedia:Translation but is there anything else I can/should do to make sure that my translations fit Wikipedia standards? For instance could I ask an experienced editor to look at my translations before I add them to an article?

Since my first major edit was ill-informed I am particularly keen to make sure that I follow all policies and don't keep blundering around breaking things.

Thank you for your help. Copyedit & Translate (talk) 23:40, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you do get over the Txoria txori experience; translation is a good means of increasing coverage on EN wikipedia. Worthwhile you checking out Help:Translation. There is not a copyright issue in translating from e.g. Spanish wikipedia, although an edit summary should be used to note that that is what you have done. I can't speak for the Txoria txori experience; perhaps it was song lyrics in the article? But categorically basing an EN WP article on a translation of an ES WP is not a copyright violation. --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:46, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
hello, C&T, and welcome to the Teahouse.
If you want to translate an article from another Wikipedia, your best approach is to check that everything in it is referenced, and that the sources are suitable for English Wikipedia (in terms of reliability and independence). Only articles (or sections) that meet those criteria are worth translating. Any other material you can only use if you can find suitable sources for - and you will then need to check whether they are a summary of the sources you have found, or need to be rewritten anyway. ColinFine (talk) 03:03, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

articles

looks like there is quite a backlog, so no rush, but i have a number of articles outstanding that have not yet been reviewed. Earthscraper and some others if anyone is able to help with this. if i should just keep waiting, that is fine too. i have written a number of articles previously that have all been reviewed just fine, it just seems like recently it is extra backed up. one day, i will need to apply for auto-patrol so that i do not need to contribute to the backlog, but i don't have 25 articles yet. Iljhgtn (talk) 00:18, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

moving draft to talk

I have a draft article that I want to move into talk but have not idea as to how to do this. Urbanformlab (talk) 01:43, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you want to place a draft in talk? 331dot (talk) 02:10, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Urbanformlab, and welcome to the Teahouse. Do you mean Draft:Myer R Wolfe? I guess you mean "mainspace" rather than "talk"? You would do this by the MOVE function, but I think your account may not have made enough edits to have access to that yet.
However, even if you can, I urge you not too move the draft to mainspace: if you do it will at best be reverted to Draft. The problem is that there is as far as I can see not a single source cited that meets the triple criteria of being reliably published, wholly independent of Wolfe, and containing significant coverage of him (see Golden rule)
Without such sources, the draft does not meet wikipedia's criteria for notability, and furthermore there is almost nothing that can validity go in the text of the article. 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) 03:22, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

500 edits and 30 days tenure passed, what's next?

So I have made more than 500 edits and my account is more than 3 months old, but I still can't edit extended-protected articles, and Wikipedia hasn't notified me about how I have made 500 edits as a milestone. Is there another step that I have to go through in order to be allowed to edit extended-protected articles without the need of edit requests? Because I tried doing so for Foreign relations of Israel due to a grammatical error and Nicaragua being incorrect but User:Leoneix won't allow me and I'm mad. Underdwarf58 (talk) 05:39, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Page Review!

Requesting for Page Draft:Dwaraka Creations Review! Mr.shaikmeer (talk) 05:45, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]