Jump to content

Wikipedia:Teahouse

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 152.230.125.226 (talk) at 22:53, 7 February 2024 (Snow White cast: 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


article editing

hello folks I am trying to edit an article for school assignment would you please guide me on how to find a list of articles that need to be edited. Abdallah2211 (talk) 10:37, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your willingness to help, Abdallah2211. It's rather hard work, so choose a subject area that's of interest to you. (However, don't depend on your knowledge when you correct or add factual material. Instead, rely on, and cite, reliable sources.) Now surf around articles in that area of interest to you until you land on an article that has a template at the top warning of one or more defects in the article. It shouldn't take you long to find such articles. Try editing one of these. (Although a huge number of articles that don't have warning templates also have serious defects.) -- Hoary (talk) 12:43, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your response. Abdallah2211 (talk) 18:55, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Abdallah2211: Welcome to the Teahouse! If you like, you could review the CleanupWorklistBot listings for the areas of interest to you to find articles that have been tagged for needing updates. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 14:47, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much for your help. Abdallah2211 (talk) 19:03, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Abdallah2211: You can also try the Task Center Polyamorph (talk) 14:57, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
thank you for replying Abdallah2211 (talk) 19:44, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Usually, a teacher who assigns Wikipedia editing also lists articles the students can select from. Not for your assignment? David notMD (talk) 20:06, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
no we are free to chose Abdallah2211 (talk) 18:08, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Abdallah, and welcome to the Teahouse. I hope your teacher understands that there is no guarantee that any changes you make will necessarily be kept, and so they will assess you on your editing and not on the results of your editing.
If you think this might not be clear to them, please show them WP:Education program/Educators. ColinFine (talk) 19:41, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Abdallah2211 Many articles need improvement. (Some should be nominated for deletion. Some are so controversial that they are locked against editing by new editors.) I recommend you select an article because it is about a topic you know something about - review the article to find what can be improved or added - then do so, adding references at the same time as you add content. Consider practicing in your Sandbox until you think it is good enough to be pasted into the article. David notMD (talk) 21:24, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Would it be okay to translate a Scots language page into English?

Since the Scots Language is mutually intelligible with English, would it be appropriate for me, a non-Scots speaker, to translate a page from Scots Wikipedia into English?

The page that I thought I would like to translate is this one. All of the words seem to be cognate with an English equivalent, and the references seem adequate, so it passes that criteria.

Lastly, I would like to clarify that I would of course provide attribution to the original page in the edit summary.

Thanks, Slamforeman (talk) 20:45, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Slamforeman, most likely. If you need to, you can just machine-translate it and copyedit the result. Note that notability must still be established on English Wikipedia, since these are two separate Wikipedias. Sungodtemple (talkcontribs) 20:54, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Sungodtemple just to be clear, this is true even though WP:CXT disallows machine translation? I asked here to make sure that guideline does not apply in this circumstance. Slamforeman (talk) 21:01, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's a very short article with four sentences, most of which I can already understand. Common sense tells me it should be okay. Sungodtemple (talkcontribs) 21:20, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, that’s good to know. Thank you for your advice! Slamforeman (talk) 21:28, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If it is common sense and you can find no real problems with it then be bold and WP:IAR! jayhawker6 (talk) 03:16, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Slamforeman, Thank you for your interest in WIkipedia and in translations. You might want to familiarize yourself with this controversy a few years back when an editor who did not speak Scots performed thousands of inaccurate translations creating massive inaccuracies in the Scots Wikipedia.[1], [2]. Given that history, it may be best to proceed with caution, and consider collaborating with other editors who do speak Scots. You might want to reach out to Wikiproject:Scotland for some advice. Netherzone (talk) 21:12, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I’ve heard about that controversy, and I find it fascinating. I think that what happened there is unlikely to happen here because the controversy was that the user mangled the Scots Wikipedia with false words and incorrect grammar. Since I would be translating from Scots into English I would not be inserting false words into the article, and I try my best on the grammar aspect.
Of course, should I need to, I will not hesitate to contact Wikiproject Scotland users for advice. But I think in this case, as Sungodtemple points out, the page is much too simple for that to be a worry.
Cheers, Slamforeman (talk) 21:36, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You also have the advantage that several of the sources are in English. :) Netherzone (talk) 21:42, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Slamforeman, one other thing: per Wikipedia's licensing requirements, translating or copying from other Wikipedia articles is permitted, but you are required to provide attribution to the original authors in the edit summary field and provide a link to the original article. See WP:TFOLWP for a boilerplate example you can copy-modify-paste into the edit summary when you save your English version of the article. Mathglot (talk) 06:10, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have done so; please see The Cundeez article. Thank you for the reminder, though. :) Slamforeman (talk) 06:13, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

photo licensing

I have a photographic portrait of the subject of my biographical article, provided by a descendant of the subject, that I would like to include in my article. It is probably a commercial photograph, taken around 1943, but there are no identifying or copyright marks on the front or back of the photograph. I have no idea who the photographer is. How do I proceed with this? Draft: Anna Istomina 57.140.161 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Anna_Istomina Boat Scherzo (talk) 00:26, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Boat Scherzo: The image is in the public domain (assuming the photograph was published in Canada or the United States, which seem to be the most likely cases based on the draft). Images published in Canada before 1949 are in the public domain, and images published before 1977 in the United States with no copyright notice are in the public domain as well. You should be perfectly OK to use the image without any sort of restrictions. Tollens (talk) 02:54, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Graphic imagery as the leading visual

Greetings. I am commenting to impart a thought I've held for my many years on this site. Is it absolutely necessary to include graphic images (open body parts, etc.) as the first image in an article? I enjoy perusing articles discussing physiology or anatomy but admittedly have a weak stomach when it comes to blood, viscera, etc. In addition, I have scrolled through unsuspecting pages and accidentally moused over a link to a medical article, prompting a pop-up of a "gory" photo accompanying a summary. For this reason, I don't believe it's fair to tell a wary reader to stay away from medical articles.

I imagine I'm not alone here, and it would be fantastic if Wikipedia were to implement a censor warning or the like on pertinent imagery. Zyploc (talk) 01:39, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The concern you have is a common one, but the solution you propose is an absolute non-starter. It is 100% reasonable that an article called 'X' will start with and possibly have several other pictures of 'X'. And it's a widely-known slippery slope or form of cultural bias what one thinks someone else will find disturbing in any of various ways. So WP:NOTCENSORED is the stanard. But there are some personal settings you can make that hide images in general in certain contexts. See Help:Options to hide an image for some ideas. DMacks (talk) 04:14, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The best solution would be to not have preview images of internal organs. I think that is definitely a starter... Zyploc (talk) 05:32, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm afraid DMacks is right and it's definitely a non-starter. But on any individual article, you might be able to go to the Talk page and argue for a less stomach-churning image. In a lot of cases, it's frankly not the best possible image we have and shouldn't be there. The lead image ought to be clear and useful, and something super gory is only sometimes going to be the most clear and useful option. When it is, though, you're totally out of luck, sorry. -- asilvering (talk) 05:56, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But I do understand the rule. Feel free to just send the link to that page next time Zyploc (talk) 05:34, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Creating a page

Hello, Wikipedians! I'm trying to create an article but I don't know how (; - w -). Could someone help me? 8UB3RG1N3 (talk) 01:39, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, 8UB3RG1N3, and welcome to the Teahouse! You'll probably want to create your article as a draft to begin with – to create the page itself you can use the article wizard to do so. I would also recommend reading Help:Your first article, which has some information that may be useful. Perhaps the most important thing to keep in mind while writing your draft is that reviewers will check that the content in the article is supported by reliable sources: it is typically far easier to make sure that the draft is this way by finding the sources you will use first, and starting to write after that, using only the information in those sources – even if you already know a lot about the topic. Tollens (talk) 03:05, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Woah, I was about to ask the same question. Thanks for the explanation! Mariamnei (talk) 08:47, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Massive changes to an article

the article for the Nokia phone series is written very much like an advertisement, with a tag marking it as so for a long time. Other people have worked to make it a bit better, but because it is so widespread, the entire article (or most of it) would have to be changed. Before I would rework the article completely, I wanted to check to see if there was anything I had to do or request before making these changes, because the last thing I would want on my hands is an edit war Random IP User (talk) 01:46, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nope! You're allowed to WP:BEBOLD and edit the article yourself. Elli (talk | contribs) 01:48, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! Random IP User (talk) 14:02, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

how list illustrator in citation

I want to cite a book that has both an author & an illustrator. How do I enter the illustrator's name? Below, I listed her (Vey) as the 2nd author, but that's not quite right (using source editor). I read the help page for citations but I did not see it addressed. Partial citation:

cite book |last1=Moore |first1=Lucile |last2=Vey |first2=Evonne

Sunandshade (talk) 02:31, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sunandshade, you can put that information in |others=. From {{cite book}} :
  • others: To record other contributors to the work, including illustrators. For the parameter value, write Illustrated by John Smith.
  • Note: When using shortened footnotes or parenthetical referencing styles with templates, do not use multiple names in one field, or else the anchor will not match the inline link.
Umimmak (talk) 02:41, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That worked great. Thanks a lot. I now have (partial citation):
cite book |last1=Moore |first1=Lucile |others=Illustrated by Evonne Vey

Sunandshade (talk) 02:48, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Help with a page

Hi, I would like help in writing a Wikipedia page. Recently I received a notice about deletion criteria... WOW, I would like to ask if someone could advise on the sandbox page? I have removed all the links and phots after receiving the wiki speedy deletion notification... Could anyone help or give advise on this page? thank you Yumesaki Himeji (talk) 03:25, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Link: User:Yumesaki Himeji/sandbox
I will leave it to the more experienced people here to give you exact guidance, but my biggest concern is that you have provided no references for the information in your article. Wikipedia needs reliable sources independent of the subject to support anything written about them. Reconrabbit 03:35, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WOW, OK.... Now I am confused. Sorry. We had a meeting and reviewed the page content with links, and publications... But, then Wiki notification stated that the article maybe Promotional??? WOW... We believe the information was correct and factually addressed with links to universities etc. The article has taken a lot of time we admit, but that was because we had to wait for confirmation and additional information. We think (pretty sure) Government publications are a high standard of proof. In addition, A MOVIE has the subject (person) in it, with a photo from the National Government NHK TV productions... All excellent references. But, we still received the wiki notification for speedy Deletions.. So, we just spent maybe 2 hours deleting all the photos and references for the page information.... a lot of time and work has gone in to this project, so we honestly are trying to understand W Yumesaki Himeji (talk) 03:59, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Who exactly is "we"...are there multiple people involved? Is Chayne Ellis involved? DMacks (talk) 04:06, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Writers (Japanese) in our Japan group, When a project (Any Project) is started which has a written component, WE, meet and talk about how to portrait the information. WE, also read rule of Wikipedia to help minimize errors such as todays notification for deletion from WIKIPEDIA. WE, honestly believe that the reference comply to the Wikipedia page rules. So, we have deleted all reference (please see deletions) because we have no idea what or which was the problem. So, now following the Wikipedia help links, WE are here... Asking for help and a clear identification of what are the problems with page content... Thank you Yumesaki Himeji (talk) 04:17, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, Dr. Chayne Masaki-Ellis is involved. Copies are to his email address. Yumesaki Himeji (talk) 04:20, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note. Dr. Chayne Masaki-Ellis has a long history (over 20 years in Japan) and has had a significant contribution to the Japanese Medical practice which was focused on prevention, intervention and education. This has been the focus for 20 years, however, the UK Government has also started this similar system. There are several websites including dept of defence, New Zealand Police (in uniform) with his photo in Tokyo and publications. Please advise how to process. Thank you Yumesaki Himeji (talk) 04:25, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You can contest the Speedy deletion. If you do not, it will soon be gone without a trace. David notMD (talk) 04:21, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Each account is for one person. More than one person can work on the same draft, but each must have their own account. "We" is forbidden. David notMD (talk) 04:21, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Given that you confirm Masaki-Ellis is involved, the creator of this draft must declare at conflict of interest on the User page. See WP:COI, This does not prevent a person with a COI creating and submtting a draft. David notMD (talk) 04:23, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sentences such as "Ellis's dedication to fostering interfaith dialogue and promoting global understanding is evident in his invaluable work with the Oomoto International department. His exceptional contributions to the field of religious studies and cross-cultural communication have garnered widespread recognition and deep respect within academic and spiritual communities alike, for which Ellis received an award for his outstanding dedication." are promotional, and are valid grounds for Speedy deletion. I strongly recommend letting the Speedy deletion go forward and start over, with all factual statements verified by valid references (see WP:42). David notMD (talk) 04:27, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is unfortunate, WE !! think that any person who has dedicated 20 years of his life on the prevention of cancer should be recognized, and it was a foreigner that help the change. However, if wiki deletes the page, it is excepted. However, we will try again. Thank you Yumesaki Himeji (talk) 04:30, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Chayne Masaki-Ellis may have had a career that justifies a Wikipedia article. However, the person(s) trying to create the article do not understand Wikipedia guidelines and rules. David notMD (talk) 04:47, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your comment, yes, it would be true that WE (Japanese) do not fully understand the vast rules, regulations and by-laws on how to use Wikipedia, even in Japanese. However, our culture is to do our best to ensure WE don't offend or cause trouble to anyone. "I" am the writer and "I" will be held responsible for my actions. Not the other 12 people assisting me in creating this page or helping me to understand Wikipedia procedure. However, Mr. David, I along we the other 12 people are not professional Wikipedia editors that has a high editorial skills like you. This project is not common, however, the Japanese society give credit were credit is due. Thank you for all of your kind assistance and advise. Yumesaki Himeji (talk) 05:18, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You don't need to know every rule, and policy to just start editing on Wikipedia.
When I started, I barely knew what notability, or an infobox was. - Dents (talk2me 🖂) he/him btw!!! 08:07, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yumesaki Himeji, start by reading Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not, thoroughly. {The poster formerly known as 8781.230.195} 90.199.208.215 (talk) 18:19, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You may also want to read WP:PUFFERY. Understanding that page may help you write more neutral content in the future. CodeTalker (talk) 19:34, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Usage of new pictures in an article.

Hello,

While looking for pictures to use in my expansion of the article for the ship MV Rapana I came across this website, which seems to contain multiple pictures of the ship which would be useful in the article (as it show the ship before its conversion).

After reading WP:IUP, I decided to try and look for the source of these pictures. I managed to find one picture used in these (Newspaper 1 Newspaper 2) old Dutch newspapers articles. I also found this separate picture of the ship in another page, which I believe could also be useful.

Since neither of the pictures provide an author (and one of them is embedded in a newspaper), I am unsure as to their suitability for use in Wikipedia, and would like the input of more experienced Wikipedians on this issue.

Thanks! SpanCan (talk) 04:14, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SpanCan, "old Dutch newspapers" is not so helpful. I clicked on the links and found that they are to material published in 1935. commons:Template:PD-anon-70-EU may be applicable (depending on such matters as whether the photographer is named, and if so then when the photographer died). Please read commons:Template:PD-anon-70-EU/doc to determine whether it is applicable. If you have further questions about this, or other questions about copyright status or applicable templates, please ask them at commons:Commons:Village pump/Copyright rather than here: you'll be more likely to get knowledgable answers if you ask over there. -- Hoary (talk) 09:00, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I apologize for not being specific about the age of the newspapers. Even still, thank you very much for your help. SpanCan (talk) 12:39, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can you join this discussion?

Can you join this discussion on a suggested edit to Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources?

Thank you! User579987 (talk) 04:18, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @User579987, what's your question? Shalomie 👩🏿‍🦱 (she/her/hers) •~Talk~• •Contribs• 16:23, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

need adivice about corporate notability for wiki page submission

I received the below comment for my wiki page submission for my company page, "Odessa":

Comment: This draft is written from the viewpoint of the company, focusing on what the company says about itself. Corporate notability is based on what independent reliable sources have written about the subject. Not every business corporation is notable, and this draft does not establish corporate notability. You may ask for advice about corporate notability at the Teahouse.

Could you please advise the suggestion to resolve the same?

Mentioning the submitted content below for your reference:

"Odessa, established in 1998, is a software company headquartered in Philadelphia, USA. It is focused on providing software solutions for the asset finance and equipment leasing industry. Odessa opts for a customer-centric approach for its product, namely Odessa Platform, which can be customized to suit their clients on a requirement basis. Odessa Platform caters to end-to-end leasing requirements including but not restricted to lease and loan origination, portfolio management, lease accounting, asset and equipment finance, and so on. Company Overview[edit source] Odessa was founded by Madhu Natarajan and Jay Mehra. As of May 1, 2023 co-founder and Chief Executive Officer, Madhu Natarajan transitioned into the role of Executive Chairman with Eric Bernstein taking his place as the Chief Executive Officer. Simultaneously, co-founder and Chief Technology Officer Jay Mehra transitioned to the role of Vice-Chairman with Odessa's Managing Director in India at the time, Roopa Jayaraman stepping into the role of Chief Technology Officer. Additionally, the company has also promoted Sumit Maheshwari for Senior Vice President of Finance to Chief Financial Officer. Awards and Recognitions[edit source] ELFA - Operations and Technology Excellence Award, 2014 Best Tech Work Culture, Timmy Awards Inc. 5000 Monitordaily, Most Innovative Companies: Reinvention Affiliations[edit source] Odessa is a member of leasing associations such as: Equipment Leasing and Finance Associations (ELFA) Leaseurope Certified Lease & Finance Professional (CLFP) Foundation ^ ^ Jump up to:a b ^ ^ "Odessa and CLFP Foundation Collaborate to Drive Innovation in Certification Program". Odessa. 2020-02-25. Retrieved 2023-08-28."' LeasingExpert (talk) 05:12, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@LeasingExpert, have a look at WP:NCORP. -- asilvering (talk) 06:01, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
LeasingExpert, your editing history (limited to a draft on a single company), your username, and your description of the draft as "my company page" combine to give the impression that you are an employee of or intern at the company. Please read Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure before editing any further, and read it carefully. -- Hoary (talk) 08:48, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Confirming names of officers of the company and minor awards do nothing to confirming notability. David notMD (talk) 17:42, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Need advice

I am waiting for the reply from a user for weeks, where the user left a messege "replying soon" and haven't made a reply yet. What should I do here. I am not sure if this is the appropriate place for asking about this. Imperial[AFCND] 10:55, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please name the article, article talk page or editor talk page involved. David notMD (talk) 12:32, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This happened at Talk: Lalitaditya Muktapida. Imperial[AFCND] 18:08, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
While making no comment about the lengthy discussion on that Talk page, I see that you have just now reminded the editors who were participating in the discussion that you felt a reply was still necessary. They both continue to be active editors, so you should hope that they rejoin the fray. David notMD (talk) 19:58, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
May I know that if I edit that article, will that be a violation of regulations? Imperial[AFCND] 05:55, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can I edit in English Wikipedia?

Hello, my name is Hanoifun. I was a member in Vietnamese Wikipedia before I got banned from a Vietnamese Wikipedia administrator who accused me of sockpuppetry few days ago (even though I am not a sockpuppetry, I was like a noob when I edited Wikipedia page about 2 and 3 years ago) (reason I got banned written in Vietnamese). I think maybe he had some confusions and thought I was a professional sockpuppetry and tried to hide identity before socking. I want to edit in English Wikipedia, in Vietnam topic, add some information and make people know more about Vietnam country and Vietnamese culture. And I also want to prove to Vietnamese Wikipedia that I am not sockpuppetry and at that time, I was a beginner, not good in edit Wikipedia and maybe too childish (like I did spam in some page to buff my contribution, used Google to translate some pages at that time). Can I edit in English wikipedia? Thank you! Hanoifun (talk) 13:01, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Hanoifun: Bans and blocks (in most cases) only apply to individual projects, and we have no policies which prevent you editing here just because you're blocked elsewhere. Your edits may receive increased scrutiny, and your edits on other wikis can be examined for recent misbehaviour - if for example there are indications that any problematic behaviour is likely to occur here. At this time I see nothing to say you should be blocked and can't edit here. -- zzuuzz (talk) 13:21, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Zzuuzz Well, I'm so happy that I can edit there! Thanks! Hanoifun (talk) 13:29, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Hanoifun Just be aware that the rules on English Wikipedia are not necessarily the same as on other projects, and that we hear our rules and policies are generally much more strict and stringent too. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 21:26, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Nick Moyes Oh, thank you! I know that English Wikipedia is more strict than some other Wikipedia, so I have to learn more and more. Can you tell me some important rules, policies and some faults the beginner can easily have (Though I'm old in Vietnamese Wikipedia)? Regards! Hanoifun (talk) 08:35, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Hanoifun I've added a set of links on your Talk Page that you should find useful. The best way to learn how things work here is to edit in areas you are familiar with and keep an eye on the Teahouse to see what other new users are asking. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:32, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Hanoifun I suspect en.wiki is fussier on Notability, and our demand for Reliable Sources. Nick Moyes (talk) 17:56, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Nick Moyes Well, okay, thank you! I often use sources from reputable newspapers to edit (like The Guardian, The New York Times in English and Lao Dong news, Vnexpress News in Vietnamese). But do I have to add sources for all edits? Like when I translate some information in Vietnamese Wikipedia to English or just update the population of a town like some other Wikipedia. Hanoifun (talk) 00:46, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Any help?

Any help? use this section! Shalomie 👩🏿‍🦱 (she/her/hers) •~Talk~• •Contribs• 16:19, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Shalomie, I am unsure what you are asking. Do you have a question about editing Wikipedia? Please clarify. TypoEater (talk) 16:48, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Shalomie. What's your question? ColinFine (talk) 16:51, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sources list template

The Après moi, le déluge sources list is a template. Is there a way edits (titles, publication details, page numbers, URLs, etc.) for all the items can be made using VisualEditor rather than Source Editor?

I'd be happy to know if there's a more appropriate page for this question. Mcljlm (talk) 16:33, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mcljlm, you can edit links with using Visual Editor by change its name or author. However, you cannot change links as the viewer missing its link by yours because you changed the link. In Source editor, find the links that start with "www.", "https." etc. Do not change the link in both editors without finding yourself on Google. Consult WP:LINK for more. Shalomie 👩🏿‍🦱 (she/her/hers) •~Talk~• •Contribs• 16:51, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you want to add a wikilink, go to the upper center, see these link sign, thats where you add som wikilink. Highlight the words (or anything), click the "Link" button and you can select from Wikipedia or external (by inputting the URL). I hope this helps! Shalomie 👩🏿‍🦱 (she/her/hers) •~Talk~• •Contribs• 17:02, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Shonyx, I think you've entirely misread the initial question - and this response makes very little sense. 57.140.16.1 (talk) 17:02, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@57.140.16.1, thanks in advance. Shalomie 👩🏿‍🦱 (she/her/hers) •~Talk~• •Contribs• 17:06, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Mcljlm you should be able to edit the underlying templates in Visual Editor. Click on the Sources section and 'edit' in the top right. For each citation template under the Sources header, you can edit the details of the citation, which should show up once saved. Sungodtemple (talkcontribs) 17:15, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Mcjlm: Although your English is not very excellent, I believe you are asking how to edit citations. Please refer to Wikipedia:Citation templates and also see Wikipedia:Template Documentation for details on each type of citation template. Because the source editor is more convenient, faster, and doesn't lag when editing citations, it's preferable over the visual editor.
@Shonyx:, you're not really providing a helpful response to the query, as the IP suggested above. The user wants to know how to edit the citations in the sources section. 20 upper (talk) 17:16, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I asked about using VisualEditor since earlier today I tried for over an hour to change a title and add an Internet Archive link using Source editor but access-date=, |via= and |url= as well as the URL kept appearing in the preview. A few hours ago I was able to change the URL but was able to substitute one for the other in the box using VisualEditor.

BTW "not very excellent" doesn't sound idiomatic to me. English is my mother tongue. Mcljlm (talk) 20:09, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What sites to use for album review?

I am make a draft for Dirty Shine and one of the biggest things about it was its critical acclaim. However, all of the reviews are from sites not on Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Sources. Do I just not include reviews or can I do something else? Thanks! Rockboy1009 (talk) 17:35, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Rockboy, and welcome to the Teahouse. WP:A/S says This list is not exhaustive. Additional websites and print sources may also be used, provided they meet the criteria at Wikipedia:Reliable sources and WP:MOSALBUM#Critical reception. However, if you can't find any reviews that are in a source mentioned there, that is certainly a reason to be cautious.
Reviews are the most common kind of source for an album, but sometimes there can be other sources. But, particularly for such a recent release, reviews are probably all there are. If you cannot find adequate sources, then do not spend any more time on the draft, because it will not be accepted. It may simply be WP:TOOSOON. ColinFine (talk) 17:58, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

can I use information from Wikipedia for my own published texts

Can I use information from Wikipedia for my own texts I intend to publish? Ronnybaraf (talk) 17:52, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ronnybaraf: Welcome to the Teahouse! See Wikipedia:Reusing Wikipedia content. GoingBatty (talk) 18:33, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Reliability of Wikipedia may also be of interest. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 22:14, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unique section names

I'm currently trying to reorganise a list article (specifically List of architectural styles) into being sorted by geographic area first and then era underneath it. However, I'm at a bit of a loss as to what I should name the location-independent third-level era section headings (i.e. "Modern day" or "Prehistoric", as opposed to "Medieval period" or "Three Kingdoms era").

MOS:HEADINGS states that for technical reasons, you should always make sure that section names are unique in the entire article to ensure that links to that section from other articles go to the right place. However, it also says that headings should not refer to higher-level headings, which leads into a catch-22: How can I unambiguously refer to the same eras in different geographic areas without referring to the area in question in the section title? Doing so would also be clunky from a readability standpoint. Is there a way around this on the technical level to ensure that the link still goes to the right place?

IrisPersephone (talk) 18:40, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It’s more important that each heading be unique. If the best way to do that involves using slightly longer heading phrases or having them be somewhat redundant by including some higher-level text, that is okay. Better to avoid actual breakage that interferes in reader usability at the expense of style and linguistics. DMacks (talk) 18:46, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's helpful, thank you. IrisPersephone (talk) 18:49, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@IrisPersephone, fwiw, I don't think "Three Kingdoms" is really "referring to higher level headings" in the spirit of that guideline. -- asilvering (talk) 19:47, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I gave that one as an example of a "location-dependent" header that wasn't problematic (because it could only refer to one area when taken out-of-context, as opposed to "Modern era" which could refer to anywhere). The issue I was having was that I couldn't refer to all eras using descriptive titles like that, leaving me unsure what to call the rest without breaking that guideline. However, since it's more important to have unique headers, it's likely best to say something like "Modern Chinese architecture" and accept the fact that wording refers directly to the location heading above. IrisPersephone (talk) 19:58, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ah yes sorry, I misread you. Agree that "Modern Chinese architecture" is probably the best fix. You could also use specific years in the instances where that's applicable, but that might look pretty wonky if most of the headings are era names. -- asilvering (talk) 21:35, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The "way around this on the technical level" would be to add an unambiguously-named {{Anchor}} to each ambiguously-named section, and rely on those for stable linking. The disadvantage of adding hidden infrastructure like that is that editors who want to link to the article with the anchors from another articles may never notice that it exists, and so won't be in a position to make use of it.
- 2A02:560:5821:6C00:6C34:7F80:767:BA83 (talk) 14:43, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

hello happy monday + a question

hello everyone! hope you're doing good! where is the good articles link? I have asked this same question on "Any good articles out there?". Thanks! =D Jude Marrero \=D (talk) 21:01, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jude marrero: Welcome to the Teahouse, and happy Monday! See Wikipedia:Good articles. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 21:06, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a ton! =D Jude Marrero \=D (talk) 21:28, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The handy shortcut is WP:GA. Cullen328 (talk) 23:03, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Page history

Generally when I clicked on a revision history on a page (e.g. [3]), I would get to see the changes made and what the whole page looked like after the changes (so [4] + [5]) - now I only get to see what changes were made to the page, and not what the page looked like after the changes, when clicking on a revision history. Any idea of how to fix this? BeanieFan11 (talk) 22:01, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is a bug. There is some discussion happening at VPT. I am working on a bug report over on Phabricator as well. NW1223<Howl at meMy hunts> 22:08, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Addressing repeated rejections of my Wiki submission

Hey there! I submitted a new article for an AI security company that has over 20 citations--largely news publications and scholarly research which are all independent. I am still having trouble getting this approved and would greatly appreciate some expert help on this! Draft:Robust Intelligence Emanton (talk) 22:46, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Emanton. Your draft over-relies on the company's own website and other non-independent sources. An acceptable Wikipedia article about a company needs to be based on summarizing what reliable sources completely independent of the company say about it. Also, your draft is not currently submitted for review. I recommend a re-write first. Cullen328 (talk) 22:59, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also, your draft has been declined not rejected, and those are very different outcomes. Cullen328 (talk) 23:01, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Cullen, thanks for the helpful feedback. Only a few of the citations link back to the company website, the rest are all publications or research. Do you recommend entirely eliminating citations back to the company website? Thank you! Emanton (talk) 23:02, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your research papers are linked from arXiv. We discourage links to arXiv because the papers hosted there have not undergone peer review like at a reputible journal. At this point in time, I think it is too soon to determine if your draft is notable enough for an article. NW1223<Howl at meMy hunts> 23:07, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Emanton. Non-independent sources (such as the company's website) can be used in a limited way to support non-controversial factual data such as places and dates - see WP:PRIMARY. Where a source is being used in that way, it's fine. Otherwise, get rid of it, and of any information which is supported only by it.
Note that an article based on an interview or press release is generally not regarded as independent: if it is clear that the writer has done some independent research on the company, then that part of such an article may possibly be used. ColinFine (talk) 23:08, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Emanton, it's fine to use the company website. The main purpose of citation on Wikipedia is verifiability, and that's definitely a verifiable source. Your trouble is that the AfC reviewers are also looking to see that the topic meets notability guidelines. For you, the relevant guideline is WP:NCORP. That's a pretty tough one to meet. -- asilvering (talk) 17:14, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New logo of Deadpool 3 and title confirmed

There is a new logo of Deadpool 3 (an upcoming Matvel Studios movie), upload it please [6]https://www.instagram.com/p/C2-bvyqvFkt/?igsh=MWJsZHZoNnhua3Bwdg== And also, the title is confirmed by the director himself [7]https://people.com/ryan-reynolds-and-hugh-jackman-will-save-the-whole-marvel-universe-with-deadpool-3-says-x-men-director-8553683 152.230.125.226 (talk) 23:06, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome to suggest this at the foot of Talk:Deadpool 3. -- Hoary (talk) 02:22, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome to the Teahouse! The People article you mentioned states "Though Vaughn referred to the movie as Deadpool vs. Wolverine, it does not yet have an official title — Marvel's official website still refers to it as Untitled Deadpool Movie." Based on that sentence, I don't think it's reasonable to claim what the official movie title is. GoingBatty (talk) 06:56, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How to do Draft Submission for Review

Hi. I would like to do a draft submission for review, but am concerned by the process steps identified in ChatGPT 3.5. The steps they detail do not exactly coincide with what I am seeing on the Wikipedia user interface. In particular, I am concerned about the MOVE step and whether my document has been marked up correctly to ensure it doesn't get lost in limbo. Is there a straightforward process to do this detailing the exact steps? Thank you. Flightbook (talk) 00:14, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've added the information necessary to be able to submit the draft; this is provided if you use the Article Wizard to create a draft. 331dot (talk) 00:23, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, but can Article Wizard be used if the document for submission was not created using "Article Wizard" and already exists in my Sandbox? If so, how does one find the Article Wizard? Thank you. 24.224.87.173 (talk) 00:27, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As I said, I added the information needed to submit the draft to it, you may submit it when ready. If you click the words "article wizard" in my message, it will take you there. You may also access it via Articles for creation. 331dot (talk) 00:39, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
When I clicked on the Article Wizard link it took me to an introductory Sandbox page, with all of the details that you have to practice and make edits....etc. I have been working in my Sandbox page for over a week. The document is 2 or 3 pages long. What I would appreciate is instructions on how to publish (or move?) this existing document to either the Main Space(?) or some alternate location where the document can be reviewed, if necessary.... Thanks. Flightbook (talk) 02:32, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't really understand what you are asking- I provided you with the information to submit the draft for review, I placed it at the top and you just need to click the "submit your draft for review!" button on the screen. You apparently figured out how to move it yourself- unless you are experienced in creating articles successfully, this is ill advised. As noted below, you should be working on the existing article. I might suggest that you use the new user tutorial to learn more about what it is that is being looked for. While you might stumble upon a video that accurately describes this, better to get it from the source directly. 331dot (talk) 10:30, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
When you reach the article wizard by clicking the link I provided, it takes you to a screen where you are given the opportunity to practice in your sandbox, or to begin the process of creating a draft by clicking "Next". You should do the latter if you want to move beyond practice. 331dot (talk) 10:31, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I received a message that my IP address has been blocked, with the reason being "Block Evasion: As before?" I 'm not sure what "before" is being referred to. And it's an interesting reason because I'm not very proficient at any kind of evasion... If just making entries on an unfamiliar user interface and believing guidance from conflicting instructional videos in YouTube constitute evasion, then I am perplexed as to the purpose of a 6 month blockage... Flightbook (talk) 17:07, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you can edit this page, you are not affected by a block. 331dot (talk) 22:36, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Great. Thank you! Flightbook (talk) 22:43, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have created an utter mess. First, the article Serafín García Menocal exists. You have created Draft:Serafin Garcia Menocal (Engineer) (and moved it to Mainspace without a review, and it was moved back), when what you should have been doing is editing the existing article. You also created a version of the draft at User:Flightbook/sandbox2 and at User:Flightbook/sandbox3. None of these are properly referenced. See Help:Referencing for beginners for how to embed references in the text so that the software leaves a superscript number there and puts the ref content under References. Once either your Draft or Sandbox content is properly referenced, copy that into the existing article. Once you have done that delete the two Sandbox and tag the unsubmitted draft for deletion by putting Db-author inside of double curly brackets {{ }} at the top. David notMD (talk) 04:19, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your instruction, David. If I understood correctly, I will ultimately need to edit the prexisting stub on Wiki, rather than creating a second document by the same name. (Once I have corrected the referencing issue in my sandbox.) To add the new content to the existing stub I suspect that I will need to embed the narrow content from the preexisting stub into the broader context biography that I am attempting to create. Is that correct? i.e, It's not just a matter of copying it to the preexisting article since that would not be a readable, contiguous story? Thanks for any clarification. Flightbook (talk) 20:31, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
David, I have Read through the Help:References for beginners you sent me to and tried to practice the editing shown, but I can not seem to get past step 1. The RefToolbar shown in the above link doesn't match what shows up on my screen. My screen does not contain any RefToolbar with the >Advanced >Special characters >Help v Cite command. How do I get to this toolbar? Thank you. Flightbook (talk) 22:04, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Flightbook Are you using Visual Editor instead? Just click the "cite" button in the top toolbar. -- asilvering (talk) 22:12, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Because my previous attempts to use the Source editor did not function as I expected, I am trying to go back to the Visual editor. In the Help:Referencing for beginners it shows a RefToolbar that include the command "Cite". On my window, the toolbar I see has a " " button that I believe inserts a citation.... but causes all of the problems I had before. Can you shed light on what my problem might be?
Does "inline citation" mean that I have to be in Source mode to see the RefToolbar with the Cite command option? Thank you. Flightbook (talk) 22:29, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks asilvering! It looks like the Cite button only appears when I am in the Source editing mode! I missed the box at the top of the page that states "This is a how-to-guide. This page assumes you are in the source editor." Ugh! Flightbook (talk) 22:40, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I thought that might have been the case. That box is more visible now, so hopefully it won't trip up anyone else. There is a cite button in Visual Editor too - actually, I usually use this one, since the automatic citation in it is faster (imo) than doing it in source editor. -- asilvering (talk) 00:34, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jonathan Baldwin Turner

Hi, everyone!! I hope all of you are doing well. I am a descendent of Jonathan Baldwin Turner, whom I believe is a strong advocate of the land grant system for universities and colleges. I have a number of sources that support this very thinking. I really need someone to just redo the paragraph with sources? about Jonathan Baldwin Turner's involvement in the story and impetus of how the concept became law. Besides redoing the paragraph and adding the correct sources for that particular paragraph, I have a few other ideas/thoughts I have for the page. Thank you and so appreciate any help, Creative Lizzie Creative Lizzie (talk) 00:48, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Creative Lizzie. Since you have a Conflict of interest as a descendent of Jonathan Baldwin Turner, I recommend that you make a formal edit request at Talk: Jonathan Baldwin Turner. Include your sources. Cullen328 (talk) 01:01, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much for your information. I had no idea about the conflict of interest......so appreciate the knowledge! I saw an archived comment on a particular paragraph on JBT that said pretty much what I thought when I read it. Thx again and will follow up with TALK Creative Lizzie (talk) 01:21, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Creative Lizzie, I read that JBT died over a century ago. As a postface to your edit request, you might ask whether other contributors think that your chronological etc distance from JBT would make any COI less than acute and thus would permit you to write in the article directly. -- Hoary (talk) 02:26, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
HoaryCreative Lizzie (talk) Thank you for this idea! I appreciate the thinking. Jonathan is my 2nd great grandfather. Is there anyone who objects to me writing about him? I could see where you think I have a bias. My thoughts are that 3 men were really a team....Turner, Morrill and Lincoln who envisioned college/universities for the every day person. I am finding a lot of sources for Turner being the visionary and he did exchange letters with Lincoln. Turner also left his teaching position to lobby and promote the land grant system. Creative Lizzie (talk) 17:25, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question about Archiving web/news references.

Hey there. I've returned after a month of inactivity and I have a question about "Archived links".

I'm currently updating an airline article that I've started: (Toki Air), and already found some dead links. How do I archive the reference links, as many other notable articles all have web sources that are archived. Any help will be appreciated. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁=☁=✈) 02:51, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Midori No Sora, go to the Wayback Machine and feed each link to it. If a link is dead: You're likely to get a set of hits for each of a number of years. If an access date is provided in the WP article for the dead link, start by trying a Wayback scrape that's close to that date. If none is provided, start by trying the earliest scrape. Consider the possibilities that (i) the article lives on at its old address, but now behind a paywall; (ii) the article lives on, but at a new address. With the latter possibility in mind, try googling for the title, etc, of the article. If the link in the WP article is still working, then find the most recent scrape at Wayback and add that. If Wayback has nothing for a page that's accessible via a working link, then get yourself a user ID for archive.org (if you don't already have one), log in, and ask Wayback to archive that page. (It will usually do this, but won't do so immediately. Read the small print and be patient.) -- Hoary (talk) 08:23, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is also a tool that automates this process: [8]. Ca talk to me! 12:30, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you @Hoary and @Ca! 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁=☁=✈) 15:54, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I added myself to a Wikipedia article and it became the wrong person.

Hello. I entered myself on a Wikipedia page about Evergreen State College alumni. I put my name in the Music category with some information about myself. It shows up on the page but when I click my name, it links to another person with the same name. I have no idea how to fix this. Notefarmer1 (talk) 03:04, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A subsequent edit removed your attempt to add Bob Phillips to the list. Do not try again. People in Notable people or Alumni lists all have existing Wikipedia articles about them, which is why the names show up as blue. If there had not been an existing Bob Phillips who is not you, then what you added would have shown up as red and warranted being reversed. David notMD (talk) 04:34, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
David notMD, Thank you for your explanation. I couldn't figure out how to remove it. Don't worry, I won't try that again! How was I to know you have to have your own Wiki page to be added to one? I guess you don't get to be recognized unless you already are recognized. That's true in many aspects of life. I actually got to that Wiki entry looking for a drummer who played on my recordings while I was a student there. Notefarmer1 (talk) 05:21, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Notefarmer1, if Wikipedia did not have that standard, messy, inaccurate alumni lists would totally dominate articles about colleges and universities. Can you imagine how many con artists would just love to be listed as graduates of Oxford, Harvard, Cambridge or Yale? Cullen328 (talk) 07:55, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I can understand that. But why was it not mentioned in the process of adding information to a Wikipedia entry? Had I known this policy, I wouldn't have tried to add myself to the list. Notefarmer1 (talk) 09:00, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Don't worry. That's how Wikipedia works. We all learn by making mistakes and being corrected. No editor is expected to be familiar with all Wikipedia policies, as there are many, but you will find the relevant ones here and here Shantavira|feed me 09:41, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for that response. Notefarmer1 (talk) 10:22, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stub Conflict

Hi. I would like to add a comprehensive biography that can be found on wikipedia by simply typing the person's name. The problem is that a Wikipedia stub already exists using that person's name and contains a very narrow and incomplete fact related to that person. When I published the biography, I appended (Engineer) after the person's name, as was instructed in various Wikipedia videos. The result is unsatisfactory in that unless a user appends the suffix "(Engineer}" to the query, only the incomplete and unsatisfactory stub shows up... Is there a way to get rid of the stub so that I can eliminate the suffix from my title? Thank you. Flightbook (talk) 03:08, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have created an utter mess. See reply to your previous query, earlier today. David notMD (talk) 04:06, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
People coming to the Teahouse for help are often very aware that they have created an utter mess. Please don't WP:BITE. -- asilvering (talk) 17:16, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
See #How to do Draft Submission for Review (but before that, #Corrupted reference numbers, and before that, #Sandbox Issue). -- Hoary (talk) 06:21, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Flightbook, the solution to a poor quality stub article, in particular Serafin Garcia Menocal, is to expand and improve and upgrade the stub. Writing a second article about the same topic is not permitted. Can you imagine how strange it would be if this encyclopedia had three separate biographies of Abraham Lincoln? It simply would not work. Cullen328 (talk) 08:03, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Cullen328. What you say makes sense.My query was due to some language in the Wikipedia "stubs" definition section that suggested that weak and incomplete stubs could be removed. No offense was intended. Flightbook (talk) 16:33, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How to check block reason

Hello teahouse members, how do I check the block reason of an IP? My school is range blocked and I would like to know why (vandalism if i were to guess)


98.42.148.45 (talk) 07:00, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The vast majority of rangblocks of school IP addresses are because of vandalism. Cullen328 (talk) 07:41, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The edit history of the IP address may give some clues. If vandalism, expect to see many reversions. If copyvio or grossly insulting content, the edits may have been WP:REVDELed and no longer visible. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:19, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If the school IP adress(es) is/are currently blocked and you know the IP, you can use Special:BlockList to find, amongst other things, the block reason for any blocks affecting that IP. Victor Schmidt (talk) 12:26, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I recently came across an article with the name Dave Wiskus while adding the listas parameter to articles from the list of articles missing the listas parameter. I found out later that the article was a redirect to Nebula. Is this a normal thing on Wikipedia? Just curious. Yuthoob (talk) 11:55, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Yuthoob The redirect page explains the situation fairly well. Wiskus was the founder of the streaming service and its CEO, so he is mentioned on the target page. He doesn't meet the notability guidelines for people WP:NBIO but could do so in future, in which case the redirect would become his biography. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:16, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reporting an administrator / moderator

Hello all.

How am I able to report a moderator / administrator? I am having a particular issue with a user called MrOllie, who is repeatedly reverting edits due to "blatant promotion," despite some edits only being adding an infobox (all the information in which can be found in the existing article, or in the references already cited).

From background research, I can see that they have a prolific history of reverting edits for nonsense reasons, usually having to do with sources (you can find many of these by googling the username).

Thanks in advance. Adeuchar (talk) 13:14, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Adeuchar, welcome to the Teahouse. If you have a problem with an administrator, especially if your problem involves regular edits as this does, you can report them to any applicable noticeboard just like you would any other editor, the default usually being WP:Administrators' noticeboard/incidents for acute problems or WP:Administrators' noticeboard for more chronic issues.
If you decide to do this, be sure you read the instructions very carefully (they should appear in a big red box on the editing screen for each page), and be aware that there is no immunity for the original posters on those pages; your behavior can and will be scrutinized as well, and if other editors come to the conclusion that MrOllie's concerns are justified, it may well be you who receives the consequences. Writ Keeper  13:24, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Forgot to ping Adeuchar Writ Keeper  13:25, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This one is the top-to-bottom promotional bad edit. Other edits may have been caught in the crossfire. Or, you are getting reverted because you are directly editing the article instead of making requests on the talkpage as WP:PAID advises. I advise taking the advice. Admins are not going to take your side. MrOllie has not done anything over the line to deserve admin involvement. Usedtobecool ☎️ 13:29, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Additionally, you appear to be evading a block. So, it's likely this account will be blocked soon too. I advise you go back to the original account and make an unblock request. The article is likely to be protected against editing by all but the most experienced editors, soon. You have no recourse but to follow policies. Usedtobecool ☎️ 13:34, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Order by first or last name?

I've been using the Greatest Hits Volume One/Two/Three listings recently to find album articles, and the ordering is a bit of a mess at the moment, which I'd like to try and clean up. I've already done so for "Two", where the order was mainly alphabetical by artist's last name. For "One" and "Three", the order is currently mainly by artist's first name, however.

If it were, say, book titles and author names instead, by last name would feel like clearly the way to go. Here, the first/last pattern is only one among several, because of stage names and band names and the like. That muddies the waters, and makes me dislike by first name less than I otherwise would.

The only thing I feel definite about is that the pages ought to agree with each other.

MOS:LISTSORT is no help, and MOS:LISTOFWORKS doesn't quite apply, I think.

Any good precedents? Other thoughts?

- 2A02:560:5821:6C00:6C34:7F80:767:BA83 (talk) 14:31, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse! I recommend alphabetizing the same way you'd see in a record store: by artist's last name (e.g. Biily Joel would be under "J") or band name (e.g. Flaming Lips would be under "F"). GoingBatty (talk) 14:42, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weighing in because the asker requested it on my talk page. My personal preference is to alphabetize by the artist name as it would be displayed in an article title if the song/album had its own article, so for individual artists it ends up being by first name. However, I've seen a few discussions about this topic and would say that the overall consensus skews toward sorting by last name, as GoingBatty said. In practice I usually just go with whatever sorting is already in place on the page, as the very small difference isn't worth the effort and possible conflict. -- Fyrael (talk) 19:44, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Consistency, no matter which way, would be quite a bit more user-friendly. An unreliably ordered list is a negligible improvement on an unordered list, and even for lists that fit on a single page, the result is that it's likely quicker to type the name into the CTRL+F box than to try and spot it directly. If, as you say, no consensus has materialized, though, I quite agree that there's little to be done. Thanks for the rapid response!
- 2A02:560:5821:6C00:6C34:7F80:767:BA83 (talk) 20:13, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If no one else can come up with any good precedents (I can't, and I'd generally agree with GoingBatty), you might try leaving a comment on the article talk page explaining your proposed edits. If no one gets back to you there within a week to complain, I think you're probably free to fix it up however you'd like without anyone objecting. -- asilvering (talk) 22:01, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adding International Peace Organization

I am trying to post information about an international peace organization that hosts a Peace Symposium in the spring and a Peace Walk and Peace Expo on September 21 (International Day of Peace). The organization qualifies for inclusion on a page that lists peace prizes given by organizations, List of peace prizes and peace organizations. I have news articles to support these events. I would appreciate some guidance on how to proceed. JasonMIIPH (talk) 15:55, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@JasonMIIPH All the organizations in that list have existing full articles in Wikipedia (i.e. are bluelinks). That is the requirement for inclusion, hence you would first have to draft an acceptable article about the new organization, showing how it meets the WIkipedia definition of notability. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:15, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
.... and your userpage is not a place to draft such a description of the organization which you seem to be associated with. See WP:COI and WP:PAID. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:17, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Jason and welcome to the Teahouse.
The combination of your user name and your wording in the paragraph above read to me as saying "I represent MIIPH and I am trying to use Wikipedia to promote it". I realise that that is probably not what you think you are doing, but that is how it comes across.
I see that your user page appears to be a misplaced attempt to write an article (your user page should be primarily about you as a Wikipedia editor: a limited amount of information about you outside your Wikipedia work is permitted, but a promotional piece about an organisation is not. See WP:UP
I also see that you were asked a year ago to clarify your relationship with MIIPH, but you have not done so. If you are not connected with it, then say so; but if you are, then you need to be aware of what it means to edit with a conflict of interest. If you are in any way employed or paid by the Organization, you must make a formal declaration as a paid editor.
Most list articles in Wikipedia are not lists of items (people, organisations ... ) but lists of Wikipedia articles about such items. WP:WTAF says to write the article first, (and get it accepted into the encyclopaedia) and only then add it to a list article.
Unfortunately, writing an article from scratch is not easy, and it is much harder if you have a conflict of interest (because it is likely to be harder for you to forget everything you know about the subject and write a summary of what the independent sources say).
My advice to new editors who want to do this is always to put it aside, and spend several months learning how Wikipedia works by making improvements to some of our existing articles - learning in particular about verifiability, reliable sources, neutral point of view and notability. ColinFine (talk) 16:17, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Further, the first source cited on your user page is based on an interview with Jason Dean, coordinator of MIIPH. This means that it is not an independent source, and can be used only in very limited ways - see PRIMARY. In particular, it cannot contribute to establishing that the organization meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability.
If you are Jason Dean, as I guess, then before you do anything else, you must make the mandatory declaration of yourself as a paid editor.
Then, if you wish to pursue this, (and assuming you do not intend to take my advice and learn the craft of editing before you do so) you need to find at least three reliable, independent sources that talk in some depth about the organization (see WP:42), and then, as I said, forget everything you know about the organization, and summarize what those sources say. ColinFine (talk) 16:24, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Frederick James Eugene Woodbridge

n the article on Frederick James Eugene Woodbridge the following appears:

"They had 4 children, Frederick James Woodbridge, John Woodbridge, Donald Woodbridge, and Helena Woodbridge."

However, the John Woodbridge linked to could not be Frederick's child:

"

John Woodbridge VI (1613–1696) was an English nonconformist, who emigrated to New England. He had positions on both sides of the Atlantic, until 1663, when he settled permanently in New England. Could someone help? Leonard waks (talk) 16:46, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Leonard waks I've fixed it for you. See this edit ([9]) for how. It's a pretty simple fix that you can do yourself if you spot another problem like that in the future. -- asilvering (talk) 17:23, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks so much. Leonard waks (talk) 18:02, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

IMDB Film Title

Hello dear Helpers, I'm just creating a wikipedia article about myself HERBERT FORTHUBER actor. I have problems how to put in my filmography (referred to IMDB). I tried several versions, but non of them seems to work.

Here are two titles as examples: James Bond: Quantum of Solace IMDB-Link: https://pro.imdb.com/title/tt0830515?s=08c6bfac-d0f2-4acc-2419-6f66f56263f4&site_preference=normal

Fifty Fifty https://pro.imdb.com/title/tt27458299?s=42c6bfaf-d163-f3a4-d451-9540cb837b9f&site_preference=normal

It would be great if you could help me. All the best Herbert Forthuber Forthuber (talk) 17:04, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Forthuber Sorry, I think you're going to want to reconsider. I've left you a message on your talk page. -- asilvering (talk) 17:19, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Error

Please someone help me fix error (unknown to me) in my newly created draft- Draft:Kanak Bhawan TheProEditor11 (talk) 17:47, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TheProEditor11 Welcome to the Teahouse. Could you be specific about what the errors are that you’re seeing? It generally looks ok to me, though some paragraphs need citations to support the stated ‘facts’. Nick Moyes (talk) 18:04, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I cleaned up the error, it was because they included the <reference></reference> code mid draft. @TheProEditor11there is no need for a reference list mid article. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 18:06, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also, section titles needed double =, as in == == which I fixed David notMD (talk) 18:08, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank-you so much for fixing the error! Really thankful! TheProEditor11 (talk) 03:21, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@TheProEditor11: Reference #6 doesn't seem to support the sentences in the "History" section. GoingBatty (talk) 18:48, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, you are right. Thank-you for noticing it! I will replace it with better sources! TheProEditor11 (talk) 03:22, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

help editing

I have made changes to an article , and the changes are still pending. how long before the changes get approved?

https://ar.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D9%85%D9%87%D9%86%D8%AF_%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B3%D8%A7%D9%8A%D8%B1?wprov=srpw1_0 Muhannad Al Sayer (talk) 18:31, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Muhannad Al Sayer: This page is for questions about the English Wikipedia. You need to ask someone on the Arabic Wikipedia, which operates by its own rules and practices. ~Anachronist (talk) 18:35, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

new page

Can anyone recommend a service to start new page at wikipedia?

Sugarpantsjohnson (talk) 19:25, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can you describe what you're looking for? I don't immediately understand but once I do I'd be more than happy to help! Dionysius Millertalk 19:31, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
thanks
looking for help to create a page Sugarpantsjohnson (talk) 19:34, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Sugarpantsjohnson Welcome to the Teahouse. The only way to create a new page is to learn to do it yourself. Anyone offering to make a page about you or your company/band/product is a scammer. You’d be charged thousands for a draft article that won’t meet our notability requirements. Sorry. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:32, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Sugarpantsjohnson Oh, and you might like to read this recent scam story. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:36, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
thank you so much for that nick
so there aren't any services that are accredited?
I'm trying to create a page or two for my wife and her company and feeling a tad overwhelmed at the process Sugarpantsjohnson (talk) 19:39, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, it is generally not acceptable to write an article for yourself, your business, or your family member as that is seen as a "conflict of interest". You can make a general request while making your conflict of interest clear. If you post the company's name and/or website on my Talk Page I can probably help let you know if the company meets Wikipedia's fairly strict requirements for a topic/company/person to get an article. Dionysius Millertalk 20:02, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Dionysius is in error. Itis not forbidden to try to create and then submit a draft about your wife and/or her company. Your COI (see WP:COI) means that you must declare your connection on your User page. Of greator importance, you cannot create content because you know it to be true. Instead, see WP:42 for an explanation of the nature of references you must have to verify every factual statement. WP:BLP also worth a look. David notMD (talk) 20:46, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I did say generally. The point is that it's easier with help to make such a decision with help when you have five day's experience. So, @Sugarpantsjohnson I'd recommend reading up on it at the sources kindly provided and asking experienced editors for advice. Dionysius Millertalk 20:52, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello respected, I know that you will help me with the page, and for that i am thankful from the bottom of the heart.

I ask you from the bottom of my soul to help me correct the page for a famous Macedonian doctor and writer. The page has been translated into 7 world languages, there is not only an English version. If you want to help me, I'll send you the page ?

Thank you Shviki (talk) 19:45, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely, I'd love to help out! You can send over any of the articles and I'll take a look! If you'd like I can just make it or we can collaborate. Dionysius Millertalk 20:04, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am grateful, we have not only English version, we made seven languages worldwide for our famous writter.. Help me.<3
Draft:Aleksandar Saša Trajkovski – Wikipedia Shviki (talk) 20:15, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Admittedly, I'm not entirely certain that Trajkovski meets the high requirements for an article on English Wikipedia. I wouldn't say I know 100% he doesn't, but reading the Macedonian and Romanian (a language I understand) versions, I'm not confident.
Two of the four sources are self published, one is a 404 error, and the last is three paragraphs from what appears to be a tabloid and smells paid for. At the very least, I'm not too willing to champion an article I don't see as within English Wikipedia's rules.
I do encourage you to read some of this site's many guides, rulebooks, etcetera as to make a decision for yourself. I'm obviously not the end-all-be-all, so the decision rests in your best judgement and further requests made for advise and/or help. Dionysius Millertalk 20:46, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I will add that for Draft:Aleksandar Saša Trajkovski, what is needed is references that are about him. Referencing his publications does not contribute to establishing his notability for the English Wikipedia. David notMD (talk) 20:49, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@David notMD, that's not quite true. As a physician, he might be notable under WP:NPROF. As an author, we'd require references about his writings, not necessarily about him. -- asilvering (talk) 21:41, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Acknowledged. In the existing draft his potential for notability looks to be connected to his poetry. David notMD (talk) 22:09, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This References are not in Macedonian version, he had 7 versions of his page, we have poets with En wiki with only three book. If zou understand Macedonian, PLEASE read above
д-р Александар Саша Трајковски - Македонско Научно Друштво - Битола (mnd-bitola.mk)
https://bitolanews.mk/2023/08/29/%d0%bf%d0%be%d0%b5%d1%82%d0%be%d1%82-%d0%b0%d0%bb%d0%b5%d0%ba%d1%81%d0%b0%d0%bd%d0%b4%d0%b0%d1%80-%d1%81%d0%b0%d1%88%d0%b0-%d1%82%d1%80%d0%b0%d1%98%d0%ba%d0%be%d0%b2%d1%81%d0%ba%d0%b8-%d0%be%d0%b4/
https://markukule.mk/%D0%B4%D1%83%D1%88%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%B0-%D0%BD%D0%B0-%D1%87%D0%B0%D1%80%D1%88%D0%B8%D1%98%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%B0-%D0%BD%D0%B0%D0%B3%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B4%D0%B0-%D0%B7%D0%B0-%D0%BD/
https://biznisvesti.mk/nova-kniga-poezija-i-nagrada-za-nashiot-poet-i-doktor-aleksandar-sasha-trajkovski/
https://mnd-bitola.mk/%D0%B4-%D1%80-%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%81%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B4%D0%B0%D1%80-%D1%81%D0%B0%D1%88%D0%B0-%D1%82%D1%80%D0%B0%D1%98%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B2%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8/
https://smart.sdk.mk/vesti/lekarot-aleksandar-trajkovski-objavi-dve-knigi-poezija/
https://netpress.com.mk/lirski-elegii-na-aleksandar-tra-kovski-na-prodavana-vo-prodavnicata-na-kindl/
https://smart.sdk.mk/vesti/knigata-lirski-elegii-na-poetot-i-doktor-aleksandar-trajkovski-prevedena-na-angliski-jazik/
https://www.crnobelo.com/novosti/domasni/101678-makedonskiot-poet-i-lekar-aleksandar-sasha-trajkovski-e-dobitnik-na-platinesta-plaketa-za-najubava-poezija
https://novvavilon.medium.com/%D0%B8%D0%B7%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%B7%D0%B5-%D0%BE%D0%B4-%D0%BF%D0%B5%D1%87%D0%B0%D1%82-%D0%BA%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B3%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%B0-%D1%85%D0%B0%D0%B8%D0%BA%D1%83-%D0%BF%D0%BE%D0%B5%D0%B7%D0%B8%D1%98%D0%B0-%D0%B1%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%BA%D0%B0%D0%BD%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE-%D1%85%D0%B0%D0%B8%D0%BA%D1%83-%D1%85%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%BA%D0%B8%D1%80%D0%B8-%D0%BE%D0%B4-%D0%B4-%D1%80-%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%81%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B4%D0%B0%D1%80-%D1%81-%D1%82%D1%80%D0%B0%D1%98%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B2%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8-c7923bf4a052
https://bitolanews.mk/2023/08/29/%d0%bf%d0%be%d0%b5%d1%82%d0%be%d1%82-%d0%b0%d0%bb%d0%b5%d0%ba%d1%81%d0%b0%d0%bd%d0%b4%d0%b0%d1%80-%d1%81%d0%b0%d1%88%d0%b0-%d1%82%d1%80%d0%b0%d1%98%d0%ba%d0%be%d0%b2%d1%81%d0%ba%d0%b8-%d0%be%d0%b4/
https://bitolanews.mk/2023/06/19/%d0%b0%d0%bd%d0%b0%d1%82%d0%be%d0%bc%d0%b8%d1%98%d0%b0-%d0%bd%d0%b0-%d0%bf%d0%be%d0%b5%d0%b7%d0%b8%d1%98%d0%b0%d1%82%d0%b0-%d1%88%d0%b5%d1%81%d1%82%d0%b0%d1%82%d0%b0-%d0%ba%d0%bd/
https://www.crnobelo.com/novosti/domasni/99043-nova-kniga-poezija-i-nagrada-za-makedonskiot-poet-i-doktor-aleksandar-sasha-trajkovski
https://antropol.mk/2023/06/19/anatomija-na-poezijata-shestata-kniga-aleksandar-sasha-trajkovski/
https://denesen.mk/nova-kniga-poezija-i-nagrada-za-poetot-i-doktor-aleksandar-sasha-trajkovski/
https://ohridsky.com/tag/d-r-aleksandar-sasha-trajkovski/
“ДУШАТА НА ЧАРШИЈАТА” – награда за најдобра поетска книга за книгите “Лирски елегии” и “Поеми од Балканот” на поетот Александар Саша Трајковски - Маркукуле (markukule.mk)
„Лирски елегии” на Александар Трајковски најпродавана во продавницата на „Киндл” | NetPress
ПОЕТОТ И ЛЕКАР АЛЕКСАНДАР ТРАЈКОВСКИ ЈА ОБЈАВИ ШЕСТАТА КНИГА, „АНАТОМИЈА НА ПОЕЗИЈАТА“ - СМАРТ - СДК МК (sdk.mk)
News Network : Нова книга и награда за поетот и лекар Александар Саша Трајковски
Нова книга поезија и награда за поетот и доктор Александар Саша Трајковски (daily.mk)
https://asantovski.wixsite.com/space-radio/single-post/%D0%BB Shviki (talk) 21:16, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
All info about him is here Aleksandar Saša Trajkovski - Wikidata Shviki (talk) 21:53, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Alalch E.: Thank you from the heart: This is the page Draft:Aleksandar Saša Trajkovski – Wikipedia Shviki (talk) 20:11, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merging draft and article

Hello, I am looking for tips or guidance on comparing and combining an article draft with an article, via merger. The draft is at draft:Barry Gough (businessman) and the article is the same title, Barry Gough (businessman). Have already read up on WP:Merging but have not performed one before. Thank you for any advice. Matthewvetter (talk) 20:11, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Matthewvetter! In that circumstance, I would just copy any useful elements from the draft to the live article, and include in the edit summary something like Merging in Draft:Barry Gough (businessman). Once that is complete, just turn the draft into a redirect by replacing the content of the page with #REDIRECT [[Barry Gough (businessman)]]. Hope that helps! Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}}talk 00:48, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How/who do I report users to?

Special:Contributions/Omarshahkeelmalik

Special:Contributions/Umermalikshahkeel


^It seems those two users above are only here to spam links to some online casino Kasperquickly (talk) 21:22, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Kasperquickly you're looking for WP:AIV. You might also want to enable WP:TWINKLE. This allows you to easily leave talk page warnings for spamming, vandalism, etc. -- asilvering (talk) 21:32, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I hasten to add - the warnings come first. AIV is the answer to your question as written, but you shouldn't go there right away. The guide linked at WP:AIV will tell you when bad enough is really bad enough. -- asilvering (talk) 21:34, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Authority control

please help me with Authority control databases with this page Draft:Aleksandar Saša Trajkovski – Wikipedia :

https://id.oclc.org/worldcat/entity/E39QDDVwgGxK4vyYR9RqV6fkkf

Library of Congress authority ID https://id.loc.gov/authorities/names/n2024001790.html

VIAF ID: http://viaf.org/viaf/3630164423041120530007

ISNI: https://isni.oclc.org/cbs/DB=1.2//CMD?ACT=SRCH&IKT=8006&TRM=ISN%3A0000000504648303&TERMS_OF_USE_AGREED=Y&terms_of_use_agree=send&COOKIE=U50,KENDUSER,I28,B0028++++++,SY,NISNI,D1.2,Ebf864f37-50,A,H1,,3-28,,30-41,,43-59,,65-70,,74-75,R176.1.15.2,FY

NL CR AUT ID: https://aleph.nkp.cz/F/I4G5QNC53BSTIKNS2LGP3UN3I5JQJVDPSNHHBSEPCINBBQHKFL-00111?func=find-c&ccl_term=ica=js20221169677&local_base=MOBIL-AUT

Open Library ID: https://openlibrary.org/authors/OL9955863A/Aleksandar_Sasha_Trajkovski

and reference abou him:

д-р Александар Саша Трајковски - Македонско Научно Друштво - Битола (mnd-bitola.mk) Shviki (talk) 21:33, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Shviki, authority control doesn't work on draft articles. If the subject has a wikidata item, they will automatically connect once the article is in mainspace (ie, is no longer a draft). It looks like those appear in Aleksandar-Saša Trajkovski (Q109748846) already, so there isn't anything further you need to do. -- asilvering (talk) 21:39, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you.Will if I press submit, it will no longer be a draft, What else I need to give you as information for he writter _ Shviki (talk) 21:45, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Shviki no, if you press "resubmit" it will still be a draft, and it will return to the AFC queue for a reviewer to look at. I'll leave a note on the draft for you so that reviewers are aware of the info in wikidata. -- asilvering (talk) 21:49, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you from my heart <3 Shviki (talk) 21:51, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Publishing an article

Hi there, I am new here and am wondering if my draft article needs to be reviewed and edited before being publicly published?

If so, is it possible to contact the user reviewing my article to contextualize my standpoint on it? I am concerned about a conflict of interest issue.

Many thanks Annalewis0022 (talk) 21:35, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Annalewis0022 what draft article are you talking about? I don't see that you've written one...? If you're worried about conflicts of interest, you should go through the process at WP:AFC. If you start your article through WP:WIZARD, it will go through AFC by default. Make sure to read the info at WP:COI if you haven't yet. -- asilvering (talk) 21:37, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have not yet drafted my article on Wikipedia, as I do not want it to be read yet. My concern is my article will be rejected without discussion as to why I suppose. Thank you for the links though! Annalewis0022 (talk) 21:54, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your article might be declined through the AFC process, but it will not be rejected without any discussion whatsoever. (We use the word "declined" to mean "you can resubmit this", whereas "rejected" is "do not resubmit this", and is very rarely used.) AFC declines are very common - don't worry about it. Try to take the reviewer's comments into account before resubmitting. If you don't understand them, you can ask the reviewer directly or come back here for more help. -- asilvering (talk) 21:58, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Annalewis, and welcome to the Teahouse, and to Wikipedia.
My experience is that when new editors try to plunge straight into the challenging task of creating a new article, they often have a miserable and frustrating experience. Would you build a car as your first engineering project? Or give a public recital one day after beginning to learn a musical instrument?
I always advise new editors to spend a few months making improvements to existing articles and learning about how Wikipedia works - especially about verifiability, reliable sources, neutral point of view, and notability, before trying it. Then, when they have some understanding of these ideas, they can read your first article and proceed. ColinFine (talk) 23:13, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reference naming

Is there a policy on naming references? I assume nothing needlessly offensive but how about things such as deceptively labelling a reference in a style commonly used for books such as AuthorNameYearPageNumber when the source isn't actually a book. I noticed this on one article I was editing and it almost tricked me into thinking it was a reliable source when it wasn't. Traumnovelle (talk) 22:13, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Traumnovelle, if you're asking about the "whatever" within <ref name="whatever">, I see nothing wrong with an author's name, a year, and a page number, if these do in reality correspond to what's being cited. If OTOH it were, say, "NNabokov_New Grove_2001_12_237", suggesting (for some fluff written by some hack for an in-flight magazine) a nonexistent article by Nicolas Nabokov in the New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, I'd strongly object to it. -- Hoary (talk) 22:49, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think Traumnovelle is talking about Sfn style short notes. There is indeed no reason not to use these for everything - Traumnovelle, if I'm correct and you meant short footnotes, I urge you to banish the idea that anything in sfn is a reliable source. It's more often used by more reliable editors, but it isn't any kind of comment on the sources themselves. -- asilvering (talk) 00:20, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It wasn't the author's name and there were no pages as the source was a website. I removed the source already because it's unreliable and replaced it with a reliable one but I am wondering about what kind of standard we have for reference naming. I usually cite studies with citer but the reference names are long and complex so I usually shorten to something simple (although not that informative).
The reference in question that was surreptitious was several years old and I doubt the editor is still active but I'm wondering about it in case I come across it in the future if mislabelling references in a deceptive manner would violate any sort of policy.
Also to address asilvering, I'm not talking about footnotes. Traumnovelle (talk) 00:27, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think in that case if you were to notice a pattern it would just fall under the general "disruptive editing". You'd want to make sure first that there wasn't some good reason for it that you'd just managed to miss, of course, but I don't have any idea what good reason anyone would have for writing down the wrong author's name. -- asilvering (talk) 00:31, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'll keep that in mind if I come across it again, thanks. Traumnovelle (talk) 00:46, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Traumnovelle, Wikipedia policies are few (and near immutable). Wikipedia guidelines are many. Life's too short to keep searching among them. I'd like to recommend WP:DICK, which covers so much -- but I'm disappointed to find that our nervous or sensitive betters have done away with it. Anyway, it's good to hesitate before chastising other editors, let alone calling them dicks, as the history of these somewhat misleading references could be complex. As a ferinstance, editor A cites a page in a book. Later, editor B can't immediately find that book but can immediately find a web page that he or she rightly or wrongly thinks (i) is reliable and (ii) says what the book is cited for saying. Thinking that a web page will be more convenient for readers of the article, and that a reference name is just an arbitrary name -- think of the zillions named ":0"! -- and isn't even visible to the reader of the article, they change the content of the one informative REF tag but leave the name of the REF tags unchanged. As a later editor, I'd be annoyed by this, but I wouldn't call editor B a dick. (I wouldn't even mutter it under my breath. I'd just roll my eyes.) -- Hoary (talk) 00:58, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable source?

I've just started working on a draft article for Zach Panning and have found extensive sources from two websites that I'm not sure qualify as reliable citable sources. They are https://www.flotrack.org/, and https://citiusmag.com/ I feel strongly that they do qualify - they have staff, function officially within the track world, etc. but I just want to be sure. Wondering what you (all) think. AdmiralAckbar1977 talk contribs 23:16, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AdmiralAckbar1977, the place to ask is WP:RSN. -- Hoary (talk) 23:26, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

how should i view the critism section?

Should i view it as either endorsing the critiques in question? As showcasing a list of critiques made by diferrent people on the matter discussed? How should i take critisism? 181.1.138.237 (talk) 23:27, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Are you referring to a particular article, or generally? Wikipedia articles summarize what independent reliable sources say about a topic. That something is present in an article should not be taken as an "endorsement" of anything. 331dot (talk) 00:00, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How to provide proof of death for subject of wiki article?

Hello,

My father (Gene Merlino) passed away last month, and I edited his article to reflect his death and the date. The changes were rejected due to lack of verifiable information, which makes sense. The note says that only reports of his death in the media will be sufficient, which I don't think will be possible. I can provide a copy of his death certificate, if that will be sufficient.

Thank you, John Merlino Myrddin111 (talk) 00:07, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Was there a local obituary published in a newspaper or funeral home site that can be used as a reference source? Karenthewriter (talk) 00:18, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Very sorry to hear of your loss, @Myrddin111, and thank you for trying to update the article. In order for readers to be able to verify sources used on Wikipedia, they need to be public. So the only way for us to use a death certificate would be for you to publish it online (ideally from somewhere that proves your identity). As Karen said above, a local obituary (even if published only in print) or information about the funeral would be preferable. Best, {{u|Sdkb}}talk 00:45, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Myrddin111: you have all of our sympathies. I found this blog entry which is an obituary. It may not be a traditional Reliable Source, but under the circumstances I will use it to update the article.--Gronk Oz (talk) 00:59, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much! I have requested an obituary page to be dedicated to him on this site, and it should be available shortly. Myrddin111 (talk) 22:50, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Help with updating dead name

Hi! I don't manage my Wikipedia artist page or have experience editing. I'm a nonbinary person who changed my first name from Lily to Lucky to better reflect my gender. Was curious if anyone is able to update the name here? A friend was able to change it in the body of the article but not the title.

Thanks in advance. I'm so grateful for any help!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lily_Benson 2603:8000:D600:3510:4C52:6EEA:5E8:6F5 (talk) 00:17, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We'd be happy to. Can you give us any kind of source we can cite for this change? (Not that I think this is likely, but for all we know you're a troll with a vendetta against the article subject or something.) -- asilvering (talk) 00:24, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Citation and Numbering

Hi. I'm having trouble citing references in my Sandbox in the Source mode. I place the cursor in the location that I wish to reference, and press Cite in the tool menu. I then select the template, fill in the content and Insert press Preview. The document then shows the citation that I've typed in the Reference list, but with no number. In the main text there is also no number or indication that a citation has been made where I had the cursor. Would someone be kind enough to show me what I might be doing wrong? Thank you. Flightbook (talk) 01:36, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Flightbook, I see no recent edits by you to anything that might be called a sandbox. After editing, press "Publish changes", and link here to the result of publishing those changes. -- Hoary (talk) 01:56, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Hoary. When I hit publish changes the numbering showed up in both places.... so some progress on that front. A couple of questions... 1) Do I need to erase all of the references that were previously listed below the Reflist to prevent duplication? I suspect this might be the case since I'm reentering everything with Cite and the appropriate template... 2) When you instructed above to "link here," how do I do that? What does it mean to link here? 3) Because I earlier erroneously MOVED my Sandbox to the Active area, when I now select Ssandbox below my name, It tells me it doesn't find me anywhere! To continue my editing I'm having to select User:Flightbook/Sandbox2. But the only way I can get there is to manually enter the above in the Wikipedia Search Box and wait for it to find the content before I can edit it. Thanks for your assistance. Flightbook (talk) 02:16, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Flightbook: I see this diff [10] for an edit you made after posting this question. The results look fine to me. Please clarify what problems you are seeing RudolfRed (talk) 02:14, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi RudolfRed. The reference entry problem is queried Hoary on appears to be solved. I think I just need to erase all the manual entries I had earlier made below the Reflist so that they don't show up as duplicates in the Reference section. I asked him a couple of additional questions related to accessing my Sandbox page, and what he meant by "linking to here." Thank you for your assistance! Flightbook (talk) 02:33, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lack of notability on game studio draft.

Hi there,

Not long ago I create a draft article for Hypergryph, known for Arknights, but it got declined due to a lack of notability a couple of weeks later. I have placed a notice on the draft saying that it is "a work in progress open to editing by anyone" while I am still looking for sources. Here is the draft.

What can I do to find notability for my draft?

P.S. Speaking of, I play Arknights :) TriFusion (talk) 03:03, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think the problem you're running into is that almost all of the sources you are using are press releases or are about the media that Hypergryph has produced, not Hypergryph itself. This exact thing happened with Taiwanese mobile game company Rayark, Inc. Arknights and the various productions of Hypergryph like Prelude to Dawn are probably notable on their own, though the producing company has probably not received enough coverage to merit its own article. Reconrabbit 03:16, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Assistance with Deleting a Draft

Recently, I created a draft for an article about an Oppenheimer actor which was subsequently declined: Draft:Troy Bronson Actor After reviewing the feedback and considering the best approach to address the issues, I decided to start afresh and created a new draft that better aligns with Wikipedia's guidelines and standards: Draft:Troy Bronson 2024

Given this context, I would like some assistance in deleting the original draft. I believe removing this draft would help avoid confusion and ensure that the focus remains on the improved version!

~~~~ EagleSleuth (talk) 03:32, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have placed a tag asking for it to be deleted. You can use the tag {{db-author}} in the future. NW1223<Howl at meMy hunts> 03:44, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
EagleSleuth, there is no article titled Troy Bronson. If there were such an article, about a trombonist, physicist, landscape gardener or whatever of that name, then "Draft:Troy Bronson (actor)" would have been a good title. But as it was, "Draft:Troy Bronson" would have been good. The title "Draft:Troy Bronson Actor" would never be required. If you decide that you don't like a draft that you created, simply delete its content and start afresh. Asking for it to be deleted while you restart elsewhere is a waste of people's time. (And there are no circumstances in which "Draft:Troy Bronson 2024" would be a suitable title.) -- Hoary (talk) 04:12, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is no "Draft:Troy Bronson" anymore because i got help deleting trough live-help, the new one up for review is Draft:Troy Bronson 2024, are you suggesting to change it's title? ~~~~ EagleSleuth (talk) 04:15, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Do not exist: Draft:Troy Bronson and Draft:Troy Bronson (actor)
Exist: Draft:Troy Bronson 2024
Explanation: The existing is indeed about a guy named Troy Bronson from Oppenheimer who happens to be an actor. EagleSleuth (talk) 04:17, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Turns out there already is a Draft:Troy Bronson. But this will probably die of old age (six months) soon. Simplest is just to ignore it: If a reviewer is impressed by Draft:Troy Bronson 2024 they'll be able to rename ("move") it when they promote it. -- Hoary (talk) 05:20, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the heads-up I've been pouring effort into Draft:Troy Bronson 2024, hopefully it doesn't fade. Here's hoping it catches a reviewer's eye for all the right reasons before it gets a chance to 'die of old age.' Appreciate the advice on the renaming process too! EagleSleuth (talk) 05:32, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
EagleSleuth, drafts only 'die of old age' after they have lain entirely unedited for a continual 6 months. It certainly won't expire while it is awaiting a review after having been submitted for one. Incidentally, you can continue to improve it during the wait, as well as after it has been Accepted or Declined. Do not be disheartened if it is Declined – that just means "needs further improvement" (usually in areas that will be specified). Only if it's Rejected should you give up on it, and I'm sure from a cursory glance that it won't be. Good luck! {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.199.208.215 (talk) 07:40, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would not be concerned about the existance of Draft:Troy Bronson. It was created in 2022 and the creating editor has done no editing on anything since then. It will be deleted by an Administrator for lack of activity. If your effort succeeds, it can be moved to the name without the 2024 when approved. David notMD (talk) 13:34, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'd want to suggest that one for speedy deletion because Draft:Troy Bronson is a new one that has been improved and is awaiting approval; nevertheless, I'm not the author. How can I go about doing that? Also, thank you for your support and thorough explanation of the draft process. Your feedback is very welcomed and encourages me to continue improving the post. I look forward to making it better! EagleSleuth (talk) 20:42, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ref # 9 includes a United States Social Security number. Is this a violation of Wikipedia rules concerning individual privacy or security? 76.14.122.5 (talk) 03:49, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps not if it's for somebody who, we're told, died 49 years ago. But that's an interesting reference. Do you know what "Source: Death Master File (public domain)" means? I certainly don't. -- Hoary (talk) 04:02, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's not legal nor appropriate for a Wikipedia page to contain the Social Security number of a deceased person. EagleSleuth (talk) 04:38, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@EagleSleuth: It may not be appropriate, but I am skeptical it's illegal. In some states it's publicly available; for example in Virginia your driver's license number is your social security number. ~Anachronist (talk) 05:39, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Hoary The death master file is a database of all deaths recorded by the US Social Security Administration. I'm not whether it counts as being in the public domain. Although it is "publicly" available, I believe that it is only provided to people who have a legitimate need to access the data. 76.14.122.5 (talk) 06:38, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My brother, who studied policy making, has explained that the Death Master File is indeed a database maintained by the US Social Security Administration, containing records of all deaths. While it may be considered publicly available, access to this database is typically restricted to individuals with a legitimate need for the data, such as government agencies or financial institutions. However, regardless of its accessibility, it's important to consider the privacy implications and ethical considerations of including Social Security numbers, even for deceased individuals, on a public platform like Wikipedia. EagleSleuth (talk) 07:40, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, of course, if your brother said so, Wikipedia would have to accept this as gospel. (Yes, I know sarcasm is the lowest form of wit, but you do realise that the word of an anonymous inexperienced contributor that someone else whose identity we don't know has said that something is a fact will in no way influence what does and doesn't happen here?) Deb (talk) 09:30, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also not sure if it's illegal, but in an article about a living person I would contact oversight about someone's SSN in an article. Could someone explain what the privacy guidelines are for dead people? HansVonStuttgart (talk) 09:39, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Our stringent policy about Biographies of living people can extend for months or perhaps a year or two after their death, primarily because of the very real potential of poorly referenced content causing harm to family and close friends shortly after a death. So, Toby Keith is covered by the policy, but not someone who died 49 years ago. On the other hand, I see very little need in any but in the most unusual situations to include a Social Security Number or any analogous personally identifying number from any country on this encyclopedia. Even if a person has died, they may have an estate with financial assets that is an ongoing legal entity for the benefit of the person's heirs, and that number if misused may assist criminal activity. This type of data offers no value to our legitimate human readers but may endanger the heirs if the legions of bad actors get their hands on it. Cullen328 (talk) 09:59, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks to all for your replies. I see that the ref that included the SSN has been removed from the article, although obvs it is still available in the history if someone wanted to go digging for it. (which is unlikely, imo) 76.14.122.5 (talk) 20:09, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Create reflist in different groups.

Hi, Is it possible to separate the refs related to the sfn format from other refs? For example, here all sources are placed in a reflist (normal references and sfn) and the sourcing was not done in a neat and clean way. How to put sfn at the beginning of the reflist and other references after it? Pereoptic Talk✉️   10:00, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Pereoptic: Welcome to the Teahouse! You could replace each instance of <ref> with <ref group="groupname"> and then add {{Reflist|group=groupname}} above {{Reflist}}. GoingBatty (talk) 14:32, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've been reading the village stocks...

and I noticed there are certain people who are "editors". Does that mean that only certain people can edit or that certain people have certain permissions to edit certain things? Cdominic8 (talk) 14:59, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not exactly problem I know but I'm super new to editing so I don't know what I'm talking about :) Cdominic8 (talk) 15:01, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Cdominic8, welcome to the Teahouse. "Editor" is a general term for anyone who edits Wikipedia, rather than just reading it, which includes you and me and whole hosts of other folks. There are more specialized terms for those with certain rights or who do certain things - admin, reviewer, template editor, etc. 57.140.16.1 (talk) 15:02, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes we are all Wikipedians. Lectonar (talk) 15:05, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In general, even people who have not created accounts can edit articles. Some articles are semi-protected or protected (a symbol of a lock appears at upper right), which requires an account and a history of editing first. David notMD (talk) 16:02, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki User: SmartCake

I need help with a biography of a living person Smartcake (talk) 15:05, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

information Note: this appears to be about the contents of the since-deleted User:Zuleika Lee Castro. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 15:10, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The OP has now been blocked from editing, for various reasons. 57.140.16.1 (talk) 17:02, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Any advice for my draft? Should I submit it btw?

I've been creating a draft for the local mosque in my neighborhood (I had doubts about the idea at first but my school encouraged me to do it), but I don't want to submit unless I'm sure it'd get accepted because I don't want to tell my school that I suck at doing this XD. Here's the draft btw: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Al-Qaed_Ibrahim_Mosque Moe the Alexandrian (talk) 15:13, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Moe the Alexandrian: Welcome to the Teahouse! Did you upload copies of publications to amazonaws.com (which could be a copyright violation), or did you just find them there? (References do not have to be online.) I suggest using additional parameters in your citation templates to make it easier for people to find sources offline, such as |author=, |publisher=, |year=, and |pages=. Good luck with the draft! GoingBatty (talk) 15:39, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why thank you for the welcoming! No, I was just looking for sources really that's all, and I found a source, I didn't upload anything really. Also, thanks for the advice! Moe the Alexandrian (talk) 16:08, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Alexandrian, and welcome to the Teahouse. Successfully creating an article is challenging, and anybody who thinks that not getting one accepted on the first attempt means the writer "sucks" is somebody whose opinion is worthless.
It's not clear to me whether you mean your school officially suggested this, and will censure you if you are not successful, or whether you are talking about unofficial attitudes. If it is official, I suggest you look at WP:Education program and show it to anybody else who needs to see it. Otherwise, I suggest you ignore people's opinions, and concentrate on doing the best job you can in contributing to this amazing project.
I'm not a reviewer, but it looks to me as if your draft should be accepted. It could do with more about the back-story - how the mosque came to be built, who was involved, etc - if you can find it; but I think it is a good start. ColinFine (talk) 16:42, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello again, and thanks for welcoming me! The school didn't officially suggest this, it was just the headmaster and a few of the workers who expressed delight about my idea, which is why they let me edit on the school computer. But yeah, I still don't want them to think I'm bad or it wouldn't be worth their time to give me the school computer to edit. Thanks a lot for your suggestion, I think I just saw a book on the detailed history of the mosque so yeah I'll be using that. Thanks once again! Moe the Alexandrian (talk) 17:03, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have just accepted your draft which was excellent, well done. Theroadislong (talk) 17:13, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you kind sir, it is my first page ever. Hoping for much more in the near future, proud to be a wikipedian! Moe the Alexandrian (talk) 17:50, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

PLEASE, can you help me with the page. Draft:Aleksandar Saša Trajkovski – Wikipedia. The page has been translated into 7 world languages, there is not only an English version. This is link for reviewers: subject is Aleksandar Saša Trajkovski (Q109748846) Thank you <3 Shviki (talk) 15:48, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Shviki: Welcome to the Teahouse! I see you're working on Draft:Aleksandar Saša Trajkovski. Articles on the English Wikipedia should be written based on multiple independent reliable published sources that provide significant coverage of the person or topic. Maybe some of the articles on the other language Wikipedias have references you can reuse in this draft. The "Membership" section should have sources or be removed. For each non-English reference in the draft, you could add |trans-title= and |language=. Good luck with the draft! GoingBatty (talk) 15:58, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
More citations are needed for this page 𝑭𝒊𝒍𝒎𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔 (talk) 15:59, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse Hosts are here to advise, but not to be co-authors. David notMD (talk) 16:04, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shviki According to the article editing history you are not the person who created the draft and have not made any edits to the draft other than to submit it to AfC (Declined). You action is unfair to the creating editor, as that person may intend to further improve the draft before submitting it. David notMD (talk) 16:08, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I completely apologize David, I have no wikipedia experience, so I cannot edit the page, I just wanted to help make an article with an English version for our doctor and the greatest modern Macedonian poets. Notice an apology once again. Shviki (talk) 17:07, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Referencing problem.

Hi. I'm the process of editing a document, replacing each incorrectly written citation so that the wiki program knows they are there.  Up to now things were going well.  The program was renumbering the changes I entered in proper sequence and at the bottom of the page they were showing up correctly below the  References line.  On attempting to enter citation number 5 (which was the first time a book was being cited, rather than news), the program enters the citation but renumbers it "one," and all previous citations shown in the Reference list disappear.  Can anyone tell me what is causing this and how to fix it? (On occasion I have been getting a "Reload" pop-up on my screen that I have been ignoring, since I don't know what that will do...)  Thanks. Flightbook (talk) 17:15, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Flightbook. The usual reason for things disappearing from a page on editing is that something before them is not being closed properly, so it's swallowing the rest (as far as the parser is concerned). It's hard to say more without seeing what it is you are doing specifically. ColinFine (talk) 17:28, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You appear to be creating two new versions of an article that already exists here Serafín García Menocal]], you can improve that one rather than create a new one. Theroadislong (talk) 17:32, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Theroadislong. Sometimes when I ask for help I get multiple responses and suggestions (a great thing!), but I'm not sure if my reply to one is seen by all the others. So I wanted to make sure you saw my reply to the concern that there is another (stub) Biography on the person that I'm writing on. 1) I don't know if any real-time edits I make to the existing stub will be visible to the outside world while I'm still wordsmithing... 2) I haven't figured out how I will merge the much broader biography into the existing stub with the same title. I'm concerned about the granularity. If the finished Biography winds up being 2 pages long it, it would be awkward to have the material in the stub content taking up 1/3 of it. (It is like the hypothetical situation of having a 2 page Biography on Thomas Edison, and having 1 of the 2 pages dedicated to his 4-H club activities....) Flightbook (talk) 18:54, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Colin, That's possibly what's going on. I always like to Preview the changes before publishing and messing something up. Perhaps I need to publish each change before moving to the next one. Theroadislong suggested that I Publish now so that they can see what is going on. I will try that and see what happens. Flightbook (talk) 18:22, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Flightbook, I assume that this is about User:Flightbook/sandbox2. I see that you've redone 1..4 as proper references. If you've done anything to citation 5, you haven't saved your change, so I can't see what you did wrong. Maproom (talk) 17:39, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wow! Once I hit Publish the whole problem disappeared! Thanks, Everyone! Flightbook (talk) 18:23, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. The problem has disappeared. I am working on Sandbox2, since everything that was in Sandbox was moved and there's nothing there... I don't know how to access or change anything in Draft, but at some point I will need to replace the flawed copy in Draft with the completed Sandbox2 content.
A bigger challenge later on will be how to merge the much broader biography into the existing stub with the same title. I'm concerned about the granularity aspect... If the Biography winds up being 2 pages long it, it will be awkward to have the stub content taking up 1/3 of it. (It is like the hypothetical situation of having a 2 page Biography on Thomas Edison, and having to include 1 page on his 4-H club activities....) But I guess I will have to deal with that when I'm further down the road. Thank you! Flightbook (talk) 18:34, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Flightbook It is not usually recommended to usurp an article like that, it would have been better to have made incremental changes to Serafín García Menocal. Theroadislong (talk) 18:57, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think that I will ultimately have to do that once my draft biography is complete. (I'm trying to put together a comprehensive biography in the workbook just so that I (myself) can summarize the big picture of the man's life and present accomplishments that might be important to the reader). It will be a challenge to integrate the broader life-story into the existing stub, but I will give it a try if I get that far... I don't have any intention to usurp a good article. But it does make my effort to convey the big picture more difficult. Flightbook (talk) 19:31, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Is it a concern that the Whit Haydn article was heavily edited by an account named Whit Haydn? Most of the "Life" section of the article has no sources listed for the information in it. Can I remove the parts that have no sources? Oliver Phile (talk) 17:50, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Oliver Phile: Welcome to the Teahouse! Per the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle, you may revert unsourced additions by Haydn. Haydn should be submitting edit requests on the talk page instead of adding unsourced content to the article. I have updated {{Notable Wikipedian}} on the article's talk page. GoingBatty (talk) 20:06, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Links| Sources

Hello. I hope you can help me. I have several questions about the links and sources.

  1. If the article is written in English, and sources I refer to are written in another language, should I translate the text of the references in English?
  2. In which way I have to form references? What is the best way they look like?
  3. What information from source should included the text of references?

Lool forward for your reply. Thanks in advance.

Best regards Stephanie Boyko (talk) 18:29, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Stephanie Boyko: Welcome to the Teahouse! When using a citation template such as {{cite web}}, you can use parameters such as |language= and |trans-title= to help those of use who don't read non-English languages. Fore more details, pleasse see the template documentation such as Template:Cite web. GoingBatty (talk) 19:59, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summary format of edits made by automated or semiautomated tools such as bots or scripts

Is there any specification of format of an edit summary format of edits made by automated or semiautomated tools such as bots or scripts?

When I filter edits, I can specify whether it was made by a human or a bot. However, I am curious how does Wikipedia know that?

Is there any specific text that the bots leave in the edit summary in order these bot edits are classified as such?

I wanted to be able to classify these edits myself. However, I didn't find any rule such as one similar to other rules (WP:BOTEDITSUMMARY might have been an example) or a specification.

However, I've noticed that automated or semi-automated tools add # character to the edit summary.

Where can I find more information on that requirement (if any) for edit summary format for bots? Maxim Masiutin (talk) 19:29, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Maxim Masiutin: Welcome to the Teahouse! I believe the watchlist marks an edit with (b) to indicate it was made by a bot if the user has a bot flag. There's nothing special about the edit summary that does this. GoingBatty (talk) 19:57, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My question is that when a bot makes an edit summary, this edit summary is a string. I was interested in the format of this string, in particular whether the # character has any meaning. By displaying as "(b)" that you mentioned Wikipedia somehow already parsed this edit summary to figure out that it was bot. So I was interested to read about the format and the requirements, if you are aware. Thank you for your quick reply! Maxim Masiutin (talk) 20:06, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Maxim Masiutin: There is nothing in the edit summary string that causes the (b) to be displayed in the watchlist. Bot owners should follow Help:Edit summary just as everyone should for manual edits. GoingBatty (talk) 20:28, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How does the Wikipedia then distingushes between the bot edits and human edits if there are no differences in the edit summaries left by the bots and left by the humans? Maxim Masiutin (talk) 20:39, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I read that page before writing at the teahouse, but there was no information that I searched. I also checked the page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Edit_summary_legend but also didn't find anything there :-((( Maxim Masiutin (talk) 20:43, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Maxim Masiutin: As I wrote above, I believe the watchlist marks an edit with (b) to indicate it was made by a bot if the user has a bot flag. GoingBatty (talk) 20:46, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OK, thank you, that makes sense! Thank you for your explanation! Maxim Masiutin (talk) 21:06, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Maxim Masiutin: Yes, a bold b and bot filters on edit lists are entirely determined by whether the account has been assigned a bot flag by a bureaucrat. Unauthorized bots without the flag are sometimes discovered and blocked. If you want to make your own bot then see Wikipedia:Bot policy. Some bots make an edit summary containing "#" before the name or shortened name of the bot like in [11]. Such edit summaries were coded by the bot operators and I don't know any features which use the "#". Edit summaries are automatically shown in parentheses and my example says "(Rescuing 1 sources and tagging 0 as dead.) #IABot (v2.0.9.5)". That gives a misleading impression that "#IABot (v2.0.9.5)" is added after the edit summary. The bot operator was a little tricky and the edit summary without the surrounding parentheses is actually "Rescuing 1 sources and tagging 0 as dead.) #IABot (v2.0.9.5".[12] PrimeHunter (talk) 22:40, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Great explanation, thank you! Very helpful! Maxim Masiutin (talk) 22:42, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New editor; Help!

I just started editing for wikipedia and i don't know where to start. i'd like to edit or even make articles but i dont know how to find things in my range of knowledge. Rotprince (talk) 20:18, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Rotprince. Please take a look at Wikipedia:Community portal and Wikipedia:Task Center. Cullen328 (talk) 20:31, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Rotprince: Welcome to the Teahouse! 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, and then spend a significant amount of time editing existing articles to hone your skills. If you like, you can visit the Wikipedia:Task center to find ways you can contribute. When you have enough editing experience, then visit Help:Your first article for lots of information about creating new articles. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 20:31, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do Helicopters fall under the aviation category?

Just wondering because they are flying machines and Aviation is a general term, im currently editing 2024 in aviation and woud like to know so my edit doesn't get deleted, im rather new and havent done major edits like this before. Lolzer3000 (talk) 20:22, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Lolzer3000: See Aviation, or General aviation. Bazza (talk) 20:25, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Bazza 7 Thanks Lolzer3000 (talk) 21:33, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Lolzer3000, and welcome to the Teahouse. As far as I can see, your edit belongs perfectly well in that article - you've even backed it up with a reference: well done.
But note that, if somebody disagrees that it fits, and reverts it, that is no reflection on you: that's how Wikipedia works! See WP:BRD.
If there's another case where you are uncertain whether an edit is appropriate, the best thing to do is to ask first, on the article's talk page - in this case Talk:2024 in aviation. ColinFine (talk) 21:33, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Helicopters are definitely part of aviation. The search helicopter intitle:"in aviation" finds many other mentions in similar articles. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:10, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

on the border between "proper wording" and fancruft

is the extent to which articles on any given franchise use wording specific to that franchise a concrete guideline, up to consensus within that franchise's boundaries, or somewhere in between?

because from what i've seen, articles on pokémon stick pretty closely to the games' wording (give or take the possibility of a debate on whether pokémon should be labeled fictional characters or species), while articles on jojo's abnormal proceeding are a bit less fixated on that, such as not capitalizing dio's name in the context of his post part 2 counterpart cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 20:55, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, cogsan. Generally the answer to questions like this is: What do the independent sources on which the article is based say? ColinFine (talk) 21:35, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
from a quick look, the answer seems to be "follow the ingame wording religiously or you'll die" for pokémon, and "eh, you do you" for dio
though it still seems consensus has been reached somewhere around here to keep the "io" lowercase, so i'll follow that
thanks cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 22:35, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Cogsan: See Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Writing about fiction. I don't know anyhting about jojo. JoJo's Bizarre Adventure#Plot says: Part 3 ... Dio Brando (now referred to as only "Dio"). Are you saying he is referred to as "dio" at that point? If that's the case then it sounds like an error to claim "Dio" in qoutation marks, but I think it would be confusing if the article generally switched back and forth between "Dio" and "dio" depending on which part it referred to. Many of the 22 mentions aren't even about a specific part. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:47, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
dio, in the context of parts 1 and 2, is referred to as "Dio Brando"
in part 3 onward, he's referred to as "DIO" (all caps, no last name)
the difference, and what a "part" is... probably just don't matter, now that i think about it cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 22:24, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category and subcategory

Hello! Is it okay to have a page in both a category and its parent category? I made a category called Former Musicians of the Philadelphia Orchestra under the category Musicians of the Philadelphia Orchestra. Should I have people who are in it in both? Thank you! Tuxedoed (talk) 22:19, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Tuxedoed: Welcome to the Teahouse! Per WP:CATSPECIFIC, an article would be in Category:Former Musicians of the Philadelphia Orchestra or Category:Musicians of the Philadelphia Orchestra, but not both. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 22:39, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed inline template not working?

Greetings.
I have disputed a couple of subjects in an article. One discussion is from years ago; it's the disputation of a commonly repeated factoid that, even if sources suppport it, is unsupported by reality. It was too long as to make a note. Here is the link:
Talk:David_Carradine#Disputed:_Americana's_"people's_prize"_at_the_1981_Directors'_Fortnight (link not working here)
More recently, I disputed an assertion in the same article because it is not supported by the source given:
Talk:David_Carradine#Disputed:_Thai_police_suggested,_is_not_supported_by_the_source. (link working here)
The problem is, in both cases, that clicking on the template part "discuss" in the article, leads to the Talk page, but a message appears there saying "The topic could not be found. It could have been moved or deleted." But both posts are actually there, neither moved nor deleted. The recent one is still on the Talk page current page, and the old one is here:
Talk:David_Carradine&oldid=1053759681#Disputed:_Americana's_"people's_prize"_at_the_1981_Directors'_Fortnight (link not working here, working in this format: [[13]])
but different versions of the links in the templates still lead to the same message; even putting the links here with the [[ ]] format is not quite working.
So, anyone can see what is the problem?
Thanks. Maykiwi (talk) 22:26, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Snow White cast

Please, add Emilia Faucher as young Snow White and Alan Tudyk as the Magic Mirror in the cast of the Snow White (2025 film) article. Sources: [14]https://snowwhitemuseum.com/about-the-film/sequels/snow-white-2025-disney-remake/ [15]https://youtube.com/watch?v=jcze6-WBDUE?si=9um51gld2Y60zAzm [16]https://thedisinsider.com/2024/01/17/emilia-faucher-to-play-young-snow-white-in-the-rachel-zegler-led-remake/ 152.230.125.226 (talk) 22:53, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]