Wikipedia:Teahouse

David notMD, a Teahouse host

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

Ask a question

Question forumMeet your hostsArticles to improveBecome a host

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

Help Wikipedia

Warning an IP user

Hello,

An IP user has made unnecessary changes to my sandbox. Luckily, an editor removed it for me (I didn't even realize until today, and gave he/she a barnstar for it.). The IP user also made unnecessary changes to the talk page of my sandbox. I had just removed it and gave them a warning at their talk page. I'm wondering what I should do now. Should I give the IP user a different warning again next time they vandalize?

Thank you.

Myrealnamm (talk) 01:44, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

@Myrealnamm: Welcome to the Teahouse. That's pretty much all you can do in the meantime. You can give them warnings increasing in severity if they persist, and if they accrue enough (usually with a 4th-level warning like {{subst:uw-vandalism4}}) you can bring it to the Administration intervention against vandalism board. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:06, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

You would typically increment by 1, starting from Template:uw-vandalism1, moving to uw-vandalism2, and so on till 4. If the edit is particularly egregious (extreme bigotry and such), I usually just skip to 4. If they vandalize after 4, report them to WP:AIV. It's worth noting this is a school IP so multiple users may see the message, not just the vandal. Sincerely, Novo Tape^{My Talk Page} 02:08, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks @Novo Tape. I didn't know it was a school IP. I know how frustrating it is when you find out you're actually talking to a group of people, not just one. Myrealnamm (talk) 21:09, 4 March 2024 (UTC). I'll keep sending notices to that user/group/ip if they continue doing things like that.

Whoops! Sorry the signature is at the middle of the message.

Plip!

Myrealnamm (talk) 21:09, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Myrealnamm, you'll get better at identifying school and other shared IPs over time. One giveaway is that most school IPs will receive warnings spaced out over several months or longer, whereas residential IPs tend to not have an extensive warning history. Additionally, I belive you get access to tools to identify the network subscriber once you're extended confirmed (maybe the access requirement is lower than EC, I'm not sure).Sincerely, Novo Tape^{My Talk Page} 22:41, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

OK Myrealnamm (talk) 23:39, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

@Novo Tape: I mean, most of the time you can just click Geolocate or one of the RIRs links at the bottom of the IP's contributions page, even us IPs can do that.

For this one you can see that the ISP in Geolocate (or Costumer for the America RIR) is "Conseil scolaire de district catholique de lEst ontarien", which Google Translate says stands for "Eastern Ontario Catholic District School Board". – 2804:F14:80E5:6B01:7C82:2614:FB15:AFC8 (talk) 00:14, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Didn't realize IPs could do that (and apparently the requirement for the full tools is just autoconfirmed). Guess I also need a trouting. Sincerely, Novo Tape^{My Talk Page} 17:17, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello @Novo Tape, which button is it at the bottom of an IP user's page? Geolocate? Proxy Checker?

Myrealnamm (talk to me) 23:23, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

I see that 2804:F14:80E5:6B01:7C82:2614:FB15:AFC8 says they used the Geolocate. Which one were you mentioning earlier @Novo Tape? Myrealnamm (talk to me) 23:27, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Myrealnamm, yes, I typically use Geolocate and whois. Sincerely, Novo Tape^{My Talk Page} 21:17, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

What is a "trouting"? Augnablik (talk) 15:42, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

WP:TROUT CodeTalker (talk) 03:05, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

It's just a little joke that Wikipedians use to tell others they did something silly. Such as,

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

. I trouted myself once because I put my signature in the middle of a message, not at the end. Myrealnamm (talk to me) 13:53, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Some like myself like to keep the trouts they've been hit with on their userpage as a reminder of the silly stuff we've done. I got hit with my first last week for something I did here. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 13:58, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

How to create category

Greetings,

I'd like to create a new category titled Safa Women's League similar to the Category:SAFA Women's League category but can't seem to figure out how it's done.

Secondly, I would like to know how I can create a source link using a clubs nickname of alternative name to the same page e.g. University of Johannesburg women's football is also known as UJ Ladies F.C. and I'd like to like to links this to the article.

Thanks in advance. Mcwamcwa (talk) 22:13, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Mcwamcwa, and welcome to the Teahouse. A category comes into existence as soon as somebody places an article in it - which (a little confusingly) you do by putting the category statement into the article. However, it is considered good practice to create the category page, with a description of what the category is: see WP:FAQ/Categorization#How do I create a category?.

However, I'm a bit puzzled why there should be a Category:Safa Women's League as well as a Category:SAFA Women's League. It might be best to discuss this at the talk page of WP:WikiProject Categories first.

For your second question, you can create a redirect page from the alternative name to the article. ColinFine (talk) 22:50, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

@ColinFine with regards to the redirect, I just read the article but it's a bit confusing as I do not have the horizontal lines at the top of my page. Do I then create an article titled UJ Ladies F.C. for example. A blank page with nothing written in it then after moving it to the article space redirect the page to the University of Johannesburg women's football page and that will create a redirect everytime someone types in UJ Ladies F.C?

I just want to check if creating a blank page with just the title on it is allowed? Mcwamcwa (talk) 20:20, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

No, you can create it directly in article space. Go to UJ Ladies FC (if that's the title). That's a redlink, so if you click on it, it will offer you the chance to create an article with that title.

Then you start editing it, and insert the single line

#REDIRECT [[name of target article]]

in it, and pick "Publish". ColinFine (talk) 22:17, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

@ColinFine done. I did UJ Ladies F.C. can you confirm if that's all that's needed? Thank you for your assistance in this. Mcwamcwa (talk) 09:52, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

@ColinFine It actually worked, thank you! Mcwamcwa (talk) 09:56, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Primary Sources.

If a page has only handful of secondary sources while it is dominated by primary sources. Should we include more secondary sources to that page? Sewnbegun (talk) 06:04, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

While it depends on the article, usually yes. See WP:PRIMARY for more discussion. Cheers! Remsense诉 06:07, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

@Sewnbegun: Yes, if possible. ExclusiveEditor _{Notify Me!} 10:10, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Sewnbegun, you cannot possibly understand yet how much that Teahouse hosts yearn for new editors to ask about specific articles instead of vague generalities. When you ask about a specific article, then Teahouse hosts have immediate access to a wide range of specific information about the article that new editors either do not know about or do not have access to. Teahouse hosts are here to assist you, but we need to know specifically where the problem is on this very vast project of 6,794,502 articles. Cullen328 (talk) 10:14, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

@Cullen328, I was talking about List of X-Men members page. Sewnbegun (talk) 12:55, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Sewnbegun, that is a list article which has different standards than articles about a discrete topic. You can find more about the standards at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lists. A big issue with lists is inclusion criteria. In this case, the vast majority of the entries are blue links, which is a good sign. Whether or not those individual articles are acceptable or not is a different matter which should be assessed by editors with expertise in superhero comics and movies. Frankly, I am not that type of editor as my interest in such things is fleeting. Cullen328 (talk) 20:37, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Okay, thank you! Sewnbegun (talk) 13:27, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Infobox weapon template

So I've been working on the Stimpex Dracon page and I put into the info box information such as the chassis, range, weight, payload and some of the stuff won't wont show up in the final edit yet it would show up in the source code Nayunjajangman (talk) 17:24, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Nayunjajangman, infoboxes do that if you don't adhere to the documentation. You may have added parameters not in the infobox you are using. You probably want to use {{infobox automobile}} instead of {{infobox weapon}}. Don't care about the infobox right now. Articles even don't need to have one. The problem with your draft is sourcing. You should seek to fix that first. See WP:REFB for how to; see WP:RS for what sources to use. Regards! — Usedtobecool ☎️ 17:35, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Infobox weapon is correct, just didn't have a parameter used correctly. Is vehicle wasn't selected so it just omitted anything relating to vehicles. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 17:37, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you @Usedtobecool! Nayunjajangman (talk) 17:38, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

As well as Reliable, sources need to be independent of the subject. Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources. . Your second reference is from the company, and the first one almost certainly comes directly from them too. ColinFine (talk) 19:23, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

@Usedtobecool Well that's as reliable as it can get since there is almost no information available on the internet (although if you are able to find something other than what I've referenced to I'll gladly retract my statement) and even if I was able to get my hands on the technical documentation of the vehicle I wouldn't be able to use it to update the page since it would be illegal to. Nayunjajangman (talk) 19:38, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

I am sorry I tagged the wrong person :/ Nayunjajangman (talk) 19:39, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

No worries. We don't first pick a subject, then make do with what sources are available. We first look at what sources are available, to make sure the criteria at WP:N are met, and on that basis, pick the subject we want to write about. Best, — Usedtobecool ☎️ 19:45, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello again, Nayunjajangman. Sources don't have to be online (though for something as new as this I doubt if there is anything published offline), but they do have to be both Reliable, and independent of the subject. If the only sources that have been published are from the manufacturers, then it is certainly WP:TOOSOON for a Wikipedia article on it, and you are wasting your time trying. ColinFine (talk) 22:22, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Question 2

I would like to upload a screenshot of a video game, but I'm afraid it is copyrighted. Is it? Kind regards 14 novembre (talk) 14:08, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

@14 novembre: Almost certainly, but unless you tell us which game, we can't give you a definitive answer. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:12, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

@Pigsonthewing Thanks for the answer, the game is EA Sports FC Mobile. Kind regards 14 novembre (talk) 17:33, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Video games#Screenshots advises that the the Gameplay section should have independent sourcing before adding a screenshot. ObserveOwl (chit-chat • my doings) 18:35, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

I can't imagine that is anything but "all rights reserved". Note that the header image on the article is "fair use", not openly licensed. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:42, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

an indian movie in box office collection ranking appears to have less BO than actual count. but i cant change the ranking number. what should i do?

the ranking of this movie remains same, it remains there only. should i cut and paste...? General Phoenix (talk) 15:43, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

@General Phoenix: Which article? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:13, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

list of indian films of 2024 General Phoenix (talk) 18:32, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

@General Phoenix: In that case, which movie? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:43, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

manjummel boys (2024). i cant change that ranking.... General Phoenix (talk) 17:23, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Am I doing this right?

I have been feeling rather overwhelmed and anxious to submit my edits to Wikipedia, because I (for whatever reason) feel there will be judgement from other editors concerning my edits. Over time I'm sure I will understand Wikipedia better, but is there a solution to my current predicament? If you have any insight please reply to this message, thanks! SHIBUYA8 (talk) 15:49, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

I think the simplest way to answer this is that of course you're going to be feeling anxious. Of doing something wrong, of having your edits reverted, of being spammed with essays and policies you'd never even heard of. All of that's understandable.

What you also have to remember is that Wikipedia is a massive project, with god knows how many editors, the large majority of which are here to do one of two things: To improve the site, and to help others either in the search of knowledge or the curation of it. The latter of those two includes you.

Nothing anyone says is likely to dispel your anxieties, all we can really say is that we were all where you are at one point in our time on this site and we're all here to help you.

You can ask questions here at any time, or you can head to the Wikipedia Discord server to do the same thing. I'm sure anyone would be happy to help you out. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 15:59, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

SHIBUYA8 In general, Wikipedia advice is be bold in your edits, but if reverted, discuss on the talk page of the article. New editors can be expected to reverted now and then, a common reason being the addition of content an editor knows to be true but not having added a verifying reference at the same time. Your own Sandbox is a good place to develop content and get referencing format correct before copying all that into an article. David notMD (talk) 16:17, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

@CommissarDoggo, thank you for the kind words. I'll be sure to join the Discord soon! SHIBUYA8 (talk) 18:32, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

@David notMD, thank you for the tips! I will definitely mess with my Sandbox some more. SHIBUYA8 (talk) 18:33, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

@SHIBUYA8 Welcome to Wikipedia! As @David notMD said, we encourage people to be bold when editing. The great thing about Wikipedia is that if you do make a mistake, it can be reverted. Also, I see you've already joined a WikiProject—these can be great places to ask more specific questions about editing on certain topics. Feel free to pop back over to the Tea House if you have any other questions or concerns. Happy editing! Unexpectedlydian^♯4talk^‽ 20:34, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

@Unexpectedlydian, thank you for the kind words. I love Japan, and I'm sure their WikiProject will help me understand Wikipedia better. Thanks again, have a good one! SHIBUYA8 (talk) 11:11, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

I would like to add information to the pages for "The Atlantic" and "Molly Ball"

I am a newbie. If this the wrong place to be asking for this help, please send me to the right place!

I would to add information to the Wikipedia pages of Molly Ball and also The Atlantic. But I think I may have a conflict of interest so I would like to ask someone "neutral" to add the information. The verifiable source of the information is an article by Erik Wemple of the Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/02/29/atlantic-krisher-japan-cambodia-settlement/ (gift link if you hit a paywall and can't read the whole artice: https://wapo.st/48OAGmU). The heading could be possibly titled "Legal Disputes" or "Notable Corrections":

This is the summary of facts (see Washington Post article to confirm):

Dispute Over Article Accuracy and Subsequent Settlement

In December 2017, Molly Ball wrote an article for The Atlantic titled "When the Presses Stop," focusing on Bernard Krisher's life as a journalist and philanthropist, notably his founding of the Cambodia Daily. Following its publication, Deborah Krisher-Steele, Krisher's daughter, contested several aspects of the story, leading to a lawsuit filed in Japan. The lawsuit highlighted concerns over factual inaccuracies and sought corrections to preserve Bernard Krisher's legacy.

The Krisher family's lawsuit brought attention to the challenges U.S. media companies face in international legal environments, contrasting with the protections they enjoy in the United States. Key points of contention included the portrayal of Krisher's response to Ball's personal health insurance issue while she was an employee at Cambodia Daily, descriptions of Krisher's journalistic style, and certain private details regarding Krisher's family.

After six years of legal proceedings, The Atlantic settled the lawsuit in January 2024. As part of the settlement, The Atlantic made 16 post-publication changes to the original article. These changes addressed various aspects, including the clarification of Krisher's efforts to assist with Ball's health-insurance problem in 2003, the nature of the insurance offered by The Cambodia Daily, and several other details related to Krisher's career and personal life. The Atlantic issued a statement regarding the settlement, noting that it was reached in good faith without admitting any liability or wrongdoing.

+++End of Summary+++

If a volunteer editor could help, I would appreciate it. EpicEpochEditor (talk) 16:35, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Hey @EpicEpochEditor! Use this wizard to perform a COI edit request on the relevant talk pages.

Cheers! Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 16:45, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! The hyperlink to "this wizard" led me to a blank page. Could you kindly tell me the URL and I will follow your guidance. EpicEpochEditor (talk) 16:51, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello! The hyperlink is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Edit_Request_Wizard/COI - Master of Hedgehogs ^{(converse) (hate that hedgehog!)} 16:52, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, got it! EpicEpochEditor (talk) 17:02, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Opinion pieces are subject to WP:RSOPINION. In this case, if the WaPo opinion piece is the only source for the proposed text, it needs be attributed in-text to Erik Wemple and his WaPo opinion piece. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 18:22, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

The opinion part of the piece by Erik Wemple is whether or not the same lawsuit would yield the same results in the US. I only repeated the facts about the case in Japan and the outcome, which are facts (verified by the Washington Post) and not opinion. Hopefully that meets the standards of Wikipedia. EpicEpochEditor (talk) 02:42, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

@The Master of Hedgehogs: A better way to give that link is Wikipedia:Edit Request Wizard/COI. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:46, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! - Master of Hedgehogs ^{(converse) (hate that hedgehog!)} 19:48, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you Master of Hedgehogs and others who piped in with guidance. I sent in my edit request to Wizard/COI for their review. EpicEpochEditor (talk) 02:31, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

The COI wizard is here to help you. 🌺 Cremastra (talk) 21:22, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Userbox

I need help on creating my personalized userbox(s). Fugabus (talk) 19:44, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello, @Fugabus! I recommend checking out Wikipedia:Userboxes#Creating a new userbox. - Master of Hedgehogs ^{(converse) (hate that hedgehog!)} 19:50, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Creating an article

Are there any specific requirements for creating an article? Does the topic at hand need to be popular/generally recognized by the general public beforehand? Cystidia (talk) 22:38, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

As a general rule yes, there are general notability guidelines, however there are specific ones to different topics. Your First Article will help you a whole bunch as well. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 22:42, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! Cystidia (talk) 22:45, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Using the excerpt template but changing the header level

Is there a way to change the header level of transcluded content when using Template:Excerpt? This seems like a common enough use case— when you want to nest an excerpt that has headers within it at a different root heading level than in the original article— but I can't seem to find any documentation about it. If this template doesn't support it, what are the recommended alternatives or workarounds? Brusquedandelion (talk) 22:59, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Brusquedandelion, I presume you are excerpting a section with all its subsections? If so, switch to just excerpting one section at a time (you will need multiple {{Excerpt}}s, one for each) and supply whatever heading or subheading you want just above each individual {{Excerpt}}. Mathglot (talk) 07:36, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

@Mathglot that solution occurred to me, but is painful and tedious if there are many subsections, and would require editing of the article embedding the excerpted text every time the sectioning of the excerpt changed, which partially defeats one of the reasons for excerpting... was wondering if there was a better way, but if not, it is what it is, of course. Brusquedandelion (talk) 10:38, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Avoiding indiscriminate listings in "Persecution of..." or bigotry/oppression-related pages

Can someone point me in the direction of any guidelines (should they exist) on how to write and structure an article on the persecution or oppression of the members of an ethnicity/religion/political persuasion/sexuality etc. without producing a WP:INDISCRIMINATE listing of every time someone did anything bad to a member of the given group ever? Are there any concrete policies on this, or litmus tests for when a specific piece of content should be included in such articles? Some example articles, which range in quality, with some clearly leaning towards the indiscriminate end of things and others not so much:

• Persecution of Hindus
• Persecution of Christians
• Antisemitism
• Islamophobia
• Violence against LGBT people
• Anti-communism

You get the idea. Brusquedandelion (talk) 23:13, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Brusquedandelion, you are talking about a very specific and very small set. So, I think no, there's unlikely to be specific guidance on article structure beyond the general MOS:LAYOUT. The best advice I can give you is, follow the sources. Our articles appear to mostly be chronological lists of events; it's mostly history. I would imagine sources talk about more than history. So, you'd have to refer to sources to find how much WP:WEIGHT sources give to various aspects. Consider WP:SCOPE and WP:BALASP. These are all top level articles on the subject of persecution of these specific groups. They need to cover society, culture, history, politics, economics going back thousands of years. And the upper limit on article size is around 10,000 words of prose; ideally, you should aim for 6,000 words. You will have to read the most important literature on the topic and summarise what you learned. Off the top of my head, things that had long-lasting impact would be more important than things that are recorded but don't standout among every other incident. Systematic oppression stories may be more important than isolated incidents or bigotry in general. Things that still have impact today would be important. For the general case of what's indiscriminate, for example, if you end up listing the various incidents of persecution, refer to WP:LISTCRIT. I hope this helps to get you started. Good luck! — Usedtobecool ☎️ 17:23, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Gabriela Zych - translation from Polish

Moved from Wikipedia talk:Teahouse § Gabriela Zych - translation from Polish

 – — ObserveOwl (chit-chat • my doings) 00:15, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Dear Friends.

I have translated an article from Polish into English (it was on a list of articles that should be translated). Could a native speaker of English look at the thing, edit it and then give ma "a-ok" to post it on main Wikipedia?

LINK: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Kaworu1992/sandbox

Best wishes -- Kaworu1992 (talk) 21:27, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

EDIT: Also, can I add a photo of her even if it is being protected by the copyrights? It seems to me that American law is very different in that regard to Polish one? -- Kaworu1992 (talk) 21:30, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Photos (etc.) cannot be added to the usual repository of Wikimedia Commons unless they are in the Public domain or have been released under an appropriate Creative Commons licence by the copyright holder only.

On this English-language Wikipedia, use of copyrighted images is sometimes possible under the Fair use doctrine. This never applies to a living person, since it would be possible for someone to take a new photo of them and release it, but since this subject has been dead for 14-ish years, a single non-free image could be used if no suitable free image can be found.

HOWEVER, such 'Fair use' images can only be added to Articles – they cannot be added to drafts (or User pages, etc.). If you (or another) are going to use a non-free image under Fair use, you will have to wait until the draft is accepted as an article before adding it.

Lack of a photo will not affect the acceptance of the draft as an article, and you could add a note to the draft's Talk page explaining to reviewers that you have a particular photo in mind, and even add a link to it if it's on the Internet. Hope this helps (and that I've got everything right – copyright is very tricky.) {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 51.198.186.221 (talk) 09:36, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

@Kaworu1992 In relation to the text of the article, one of her key claims to notability seems to be that she "was running a mangle" for which she won a cross of merit. The "mangle" links to a disambiguation page which has no meaning I can see which would lead to a prize. Is this a mis-translation? I think it would be helpful to readers if you used the |quote and |trans-quote parameters on some of the references so that non-Polish speakers here on the English Wikipedia would understand more about what the sources say. I suggest you submit the draft to the WP:AfC process using the {{user sandbox}} template, so that experienced editors can formally provide feedback or suggestions. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:29, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Dear Mike.

I do not think she was awarded the Cross because of her mangle - more likely because of her Katyn activity. I mean, the official website of the Polish goverment is kind of laconic and I can only wonder. It does seems like she was awarded because of the mangle, though - maybe I will just put an enter in there?

I will also put the template in my sandbox so other can check the article ;-) Thank you for this suggestion ;-)

Best wishes

-- Kaworu1992 (talk) 13:41, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

@Kaworu1992 Sorry, I still don't understand why it is significant she was "running a mangle". As the target article says, that is an old type of laundry device for removing water from clothes. Was she providing some sort of laundry service and, if so, to whom and why? Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:47, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

I've just noticed that a small article Gabriela Zych already exists. As such, I think it would be better if you just incorporated the new material directly into it and then blanked your sandbox page. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:51, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Correct use of listas

I've written a couple biographies and want them to correctly list alphabetically by last name within categories. For example, both Rufus Clark and Geoffrey Cuming currently list by first name (R and G, respectively) in the categories they populate. Where am I going wrong here? ~ Pbritti (talk) 02:40, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi Pbritti. It looks like Rufus Clark has the DEFAULTSORT magic word but it's been left blank. That one should be "DEFAULTSORT:Clark, Rufus", and Cuming should follow the same pattern. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 02:52, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Aha! Thank you, Firefangledfeathers! ~ Pbritti (talk) 04:12, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Person not listening to me

User:Elvisisalive95 keeps reverting my edits without any summary; they also deleted my comment when I asked them about it. Can someone help? 2605:B40:13E7:F600:40FE:7B6D:17E8:D289 (talk) 03:26, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello IP 2605:B40:13E7:F600:40FE:7B6D:17E8:D289, I see two sides to this question. The editor is not talking to you. It is on them. They need to do better. But this sort of thing has happened to me too, at Songs 2 (Rich Mullins album), for example. The editor had reverted multiple attempts at redirection. So, I posted to their talk page. They didn't revert my message, but the reverted at the article again. So, I nominated the article for deletion. So, the second facet, what you can do next, comes down to WP:BLAR. As an IP, it would be cumbersome to create an AFD, so perhaps you might opt for WP:MERGE requests instead. Merge discussions are even worse-attended than deletion discussions but the final outcome that you seek would be the same, conversion of that article to redirect. I will ask the editor why they are not communicating with you, in the meanwhile. Regards! — Usedtobecool ☎️ 03:58, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

@Usedtobecool This IP is blanking pages prior to consensus, they had previously done the same to Metal-Head & then got blocked for edit warring. Now they’re back doing the same exact thing with another account. Elvisisalive95 (talk) 04:06, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Elvisisalive95, if I have this correct, they were blocked for one week in February, and they've been blocked again today. But they were not blocked in between when the recent incident occured. Honestly I am more sympathetic to the IP in the February incident. They were explaining themselves in the edit summaries and even started a discussion on the talk page. You breached WP:3RR without even using edit summaries. You were even warned by an admin to do better and you promised you would but here you failed to do so again. At no point, I see that the IP was told that policies required them to go to AFD once reverted in a WP:BLAR attempt. If someone had, then the case for disruptive editing would be much stronger. Please talk to editors who are not blocked, especially when they initiate conversations. WP:BLAR is not vandalism. Please stop characterising it as such, moving forward. As a recent changes patroller, it is paramount that you be precise about the reasons and the warnings that you use, since you are using automated warnings which say very specific things, which if they don't apply, the people who get warned are liable to think it was a mistake and just ignore it.
IP, you are blocked again, for one month, this time. You really need to stop edit-warring. That never gets you your object. Especially as an IP editor, you are easier to block and forget about than mentor. Please either make an unblock request or wait out your block. When you get back, only ever blank and redirect an article once. If that does not stick, initiate formal deletion procedures. Best, — Usedtobecool ☎️ 05:01, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

First of all i want to thank you for taking your time to go through this entire matter. As for this matter, failure to go through the proper channels & blanking pages prior to consensus is vandalism. That’s why they got blocked for the 2nd time. I had already explained that to them the last time and they came back doing the same thing. Template warnings were sufficient for this specific case in my opinion. Again, thank you for what you do, you’re appreciated here. Elvisisalive95 (talk) 17:55, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Elvisisalive95, please refer to WP:VANDALISM. The word has a specific and narrow meaning on Wikipedia, and abusing it is considered a personal attack which is prohibited by our behavioural policies. Whether you use an automated message or write your own, you are responsible for its content. Templated warnings are sufficient when they say what is reasonable to say in a given situation. Regardless, you don't get to drop warnings and completely refuse to talk with them further, communication is still required. — Usedtobecool ☎️ 17:32, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

I agree with you my friend. Bottom line is no one can blank a page prior to consensus, which is why the IP got blocked. I hope you have an awesome week! Elvisisalive95 (talk) 18:47, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Is RYM reliable?

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Is the genre section of Rate Your Music reliable to add as a genre on Wikipedia? Spencer524 (talk) 04:42, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

No. See WP:RYM.
It's always a good idea to check WP:RSP for questions about source reliability. CodeTalker (talk) 05:00, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

If RSP doesn't have the thing your looking for, WP:RSN is another good place to ask NW1223<Howl at me•My hunts> 15:44, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

yeah I checked, RYM isn't reliable, if you are an administrator, you might want to check Another Day in Paradise by Phil Collins page. Spencer524 (talk) 15:46, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Spencer524, and welcome to the Teahouse. If an article is citing an unreliable source, anybody may remove the citation - it doesn't require an admin.

The best action always is to find a reliable source, and substitute it; or if a reliable source cannot be found, remove the citation and the information which depends on it.

But editors being busy people and working on what they choose, often people will just add a tag: probably {{unreliable source}}. ColinFine (talk) 16:28, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

How to make it neutral tone, or improve.

I am currently revising an article about an Austrian artist(painter), and the article requires a neutral tone. I have made my best effort to ensure the text is neutral, but I would greatly appreciate the assistance of experienced editors in reviewing and improving the content. Your expertise will help ensure that the article maintains a balanced and unbiased perspective.

Thank you for your time and consideration. Wikiasd (talk) 08:46, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

I would generally refer to WP:PUFFERY, which has more tips and examples.

Looking at your first few sentences:

Franz Brandner is an Austrian artist renowned for his vibrant works that often reflect his experiences in South Korea.

Right out of the gate, renowned for his vibrant works is unacceptable editorializing. Try known for his works inspired by his experiences in South Korea.

Brandner showed an early affinity for the arts. His passion led him to pursue a formal education in art, culminating in his graduation from Art College. During his college years, Brandner was exposed to a wide range of artistic styles and mediums, which would later influence his diverse body of work.

Once more, showed an early affinity is not empirical—if a source relates this, that source should be attributed, phrases like this should not be written in wikivoice. Moreover, this likely shouldn't be here at all unless it's particularly relevant to what reliable sources say about the subject. I would rewrite this as Brandner was exposed to a variety of aesthetic influences while attending art college, which would later influence much of his work.

Also, it would be nice to hear what the influences are proportional to their attestation in sources so it rests on the substance of the topic.

To reemphasize, terms like vivid and significant role in fostering cultural exchange through his art should almost never be used in Wikipedia's own voice. If they are due at all, they should be attributed. If you end up with too many quotes after that, that means you're still trying to puff the subject up. Once again, check WP:PUFFERY. Cheers! Remsense诉 09:00, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

This article is suffused with windy nothings. "Brandner’s professional journey began with the establishment of his art studio in Innsbruck" means, I think, "Brandner set up his studio in Innsbruck". "[P]romoting mutual understanding and appreciation between the two nations" is a staple of the most somniferous of speeches, delivered to people yawning, nodding off, or fiddling with their phones. -- Hoary (talk) 12:33, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Another example of 'content' not supported by a reference: "His work has attracted the attention of art enthusiasts and dignitaries alike..." And throughout, I agree there is so much vague laudatory wording. The root of the problem is that you - the creator - moved this from your Sandbox to mainspace without submitting it to Article for Creation for a review, which would have resulted in it being Declined. It is possible that a New Pages Patrol reviewer will convert it to Draft status, or even Speedy deleted it as unacceptable. David notMD (talk) 13:02, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Wikiasd On a different note, I strongly suspect you created your account to conduct undeclared paid editing. You created a Sandbox draft of this article on 28 Feb, then on 9 March added word hyperlinks to a dozen random articles (all since reverted), so as to qualify for creating an article in mainspace - and then moved your Sandbox to mainspace on the same day. Please reply. David notMD (talk) 13:26, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

How do I get review from the sandbox draft? Wikiasd (talk) 18:45, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Franz Brandner has been deleted by an Administrator. You have an early version at your Sandbox. You can work on that - avoiding all wording that is not neutral point of view - and submit it for AfC review when you believe it is ready. Before that, I strongly recommend that if yours is a paid or personal connection to Brandner, you use the instructions at WP:PAID or WP:COI to describe your connection. David notMD (talk) 20:18, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

"Reaction" to a novel

I'm preparing a review of a novel (in Visual Editor). In the "Reaction" section there will be a selection of comments from published articles. I'm also thinking of including the ratings from people who have bought the book on Amazon, i.e. 45% very good, 30% good, 15% poor etc. Would this be appropriate for a Wikipedia article? Pjplumbing (talk) 11:30, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Pjplumbing, refer to MOS:NOVELS if you aren't. It should be a "Reception" section rather than a reaction. As for Amazon, the answer would be no, almost always. You can't cite to Amazon directly. If another reliable source has quoted those numbers, put them in good context that also fits well within the article, and the numbers are not outdated already, is when I would find them acceptable. Best, — Usedtobecool ☎️ 11:46, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

See also: WP:AMAZON — Usedtobecool ☎️ 11:48, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

If your question is about Mrs Osmond, which has been accepted as an article, then your Reception section already has quotes from a number of professional book reviewers. That should suffice. Although you did not ask, in my opinion the plot summary is far too long. David notMD (talk) 13:11, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Infobox

The infobox I added stops in the middle, it is not visible 'front desk'. The information wich follows, and thus is not visible, is written in the same way as the foregoing, so I don't have a clue what's going on. This is te page: https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmonie_%22De_Vriendenkrans%22 Mathuw (talk) 14:49, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

This is a question better asked at the NLWiki's Teahouse (assuming it has one). CommissarDoggo^Talk? 14:51, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

I am sorry, as soon as I logged in, I was sent to the English Wiki. I will try to move over to the dutchmen. Mathuw (talk) 14:54, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

No worries, I hope you find an answer. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 15:06, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Articles not posted

I have written articles on two artists: Wallace Bradstreet Putnam, and Rafael Leonardo Black. Neither one of them appear on Wikipedia, but I do not understand why. Is there someone I can contact to ask why? FrancisNaumann (talk) 15:06, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

It appears that you've put in undeletion requests for the two articles, one of which has been returned to your sandbox.

Looking at the article itself, it's absolutely filled with puffery and is a nightmare for anyone who holds neutral point of view dear. You'll need to seriously improve it before it can become a full article. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 15:11, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Wallace Bradstreet Putnam has not been submitted for review since un-deletion was requested. Theroadislong (talk) 15:12, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Here is the page that actually got undeleted, it has only a single source and is similarly filled with puffery and a lack of a neutral point of view (I also noticed you appear to be involved in that singular source?). CommissarDoggo^Talk? 15:13, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

User has also extensively edited the article about themselves here Francis Naumann without any declaration of conflict of interest. Theroadislong (talk) 15:19, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Mobile page creation

Can pages that don’t exist be viewed and new pages be created on the (IOS) app? 2600:100A:B1E1:6558:82D:BE41:7B6C:7CF7 (talk) 15:17, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

I'm sorry but pages that don't exist cannot be viewed on any app, neither can they be created on the iPhone app. For more information please see mw:Wikimedia Apps/iOS FAQ Shantavira|^{feed me} 10:57, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

But you might find User:Cullen328/Smartphone editing helpful, IP user. ColinFine (talk) 17:27, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Preview mode is not working

It only displays the edit window. Other features that depend on the Preview Mode, like What links here? are not working either. deisenbe (talk) 15:33, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

This is on an iPad using the Safari browser. deisenbe (talk) 17:52, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

I installed the Duck Duck Go browser and it runs fine. Something I could do is erase and reinstall Safari. In fact I should do a hard close on it. deisenbe (talk) 18:54, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Hard close solved nothing. It is impossible to un-install Safari, the system prohibits it. deisenbe (talk) 19:09, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

The inability to uninstall one browser doesn't prevent you from installing an additional browser, as an alternative. 1.33.56.248 (talk) 21:47, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Vandalism

If a user keeps vandalizing an article, what do I do? The crazy thing is that it's not one user, it's multiple! Also how do I protect articles like other users? CreatorOfMinecraftHerobrine (talk) 15:48, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

If you have a plugin like WP:TWINKLE then it's pretty easy to deal with vandals through the warning templates. If I may ask, what page are you referencing? CommissarDoggo^Talk? 15:53, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302. See its talk page to help understand what's going on CreatorOfMinecraftHerobrine (talk) 15:54, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

@CreatorOfMinecraftHerobrine, page protection can be requested at WP:RFPP. 57.140.16.57 (talk) 16:34, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello, CreatorOfMinecraftHerobrine. I don't see vandalism on that article (which is defined as editing intended to damage Wikipedia). I see users inserting information which others disagree with and remove. This is normal on Wikipedia: see WP:BRD.

If users are repeatedly editing against consensus, then that might be disruptive editing, for which they should be warned and if necessary taken to WP:ANI ColinFine (talk) 16:41, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

@CreatorOfMinecraftHerobrine: Please see WP:NOTVANDAL. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:59, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Kernow

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Hi, why do Palestinians get to be from Palestine, but Cornish people from Kernow are forced to be "English" on Wikipedia? Do you only listen to what the colonial oppressor says about their prize or not? 86.3.208.127 (talk) 16:56, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

honestly i have thought about that too...british empire yk. india also faced this but we fought back (no political or religious issue here, just historical) General Phoenix (talk) 17:25, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Exactly. It's imperialism! So it's particularly galling, as a colonised minority, to be trying to correct this on English-language Wikipedia and having the editors here tell me I'm "vandalising" because they are upholding English imperialism. 86.3.208.127 (talk) 17:35, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

I fixed the Richard Carew article my 'ansome. 😁  Tewdar  17:50, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

You are a gentleman and a scholar, thank you. Kernow bys vykken, pard. --86.3.208.127 (talk) 20:03, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Meur ras dhis, yma an wiasva ma er agan pynn, soweth...  Tewdar  20:12, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Gwir an ger. Gwikor Frank (talk) 20:15, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

I fixed the Kitty Jenner article, sos. If they call that vandalism, they're high. --Gwikor Frank (talk) 20:46, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

An ughella, yns...  Tewdar  21:26, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

IP editor, Wikipedia operates on consensus, so you will have to convince other editors interested in these articles to accept the changes you want to make. There is frequent disagreement about terms like "British" as opposed to "English" for example, and it gets worse from there. A line of argument that compares Cornish people to Palestinians is unlikely to be persuasive, in my view. The bottom line is that you cannot force your changes through, and must persuade those who disagree with you, using arguments based on Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Cullen328 (talk) 18:00, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

So, how, precisely, do you expect a national minority, one that has been oppressed for centuries, to convince the national majority that colonises it to agree to respect their identity? Numerically, this seems doomed from the start. 86.3.208.127 (talk) 19:58, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Pretty much yes, see WP:RGW. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:02, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

But the problem is, you are not recording accurately. There is no record of a legal rejoinder of Kernow to England. Legally, Cornwall is not part of England. Indeed, sources cite it as being separate from England throughout history. Wikipedia is choosing false information that does not exist over true information that does. 86.3.208.127 (talk) 20:05, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

And you wonder why Wikipedia editors are mostly straight white dudes from the global majority. --Gwikor Frank (talk) 20:15, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

I'm fairly sure we have at least an essay on "Should they be called British or whatever", but haven't found it. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:27, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Might you be thinking of WP:UKNATIONALS? Shaws username . talk . 18:31, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Looks like it! The WP:UKCHANGE part seems on-topic. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:40, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

So, if sources support it, nationality = Cornish would be acceptable in the lead and infobox, correct? 🤔  Tewdar  19:20, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

In the lead I think so (although some people might disagree) but I don't think so for the infobox since legally speaking they are/were British nationals. However MOS:INFONAT does say that there's no reason for nationality to be in the infobox when it can be inferred from birthplace. So, from my interpretation, there's no reason to have the infobox give either as a nationality when it also has a birthplace. Shaws username . talk . 19:49, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

So it seems like what you're telling me is that it would NOT be considered vandalism to list a Cornish person as "a Cornish [author or whatever]" in an article on English Wikipedia? And yet, every time I do so, I am told I am vandalising. 86.3.208.127 (talk) 20:00, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

You need to provide reliable sources, like I did on the Richard Carew article.  Tewdar  20:04, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Whilst I get while you're coming from, I'm not sure I should have to cite that Kernow isn't in England any more than I should have to cite that Tibet isn't. --86.3.208.127 (talk) 20:06, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

It's the only way to win around here, like it or not.  Tewdar  20:17, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

@SchroCat Stop reverting my CITED edits that are in line with what was discussed here. Hey @Tewdar, you need to see this. Gwikor Frank (talk) 15:29, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

No. Stop with the ridiculous regionalist edits. Feel free to take me to ANI if you don't like it: you will soon find out the views of the general community towards pseudo-nationalist-driven editing. - SchroCat (talk) 15:32, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

It's not nationalist, it's literally using CITED sources, everyone here agrees that's OK and Cornish IS a nationality! What's wrong with you? Gwikor Frank (talk) 15:36, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Perhaps that is a good suggestion. Reverting well-sourced material, and calling this ridiculous regionalist edits, is certainly not a very good look. I notice you did not revert my changes to Richard Carew (antiquary).  Tewdar  15:37, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

@SchroCat: - this is me asking you nicely to stop removing sourced material. Why would you want to go to ANI? The consensus and sources do not seem to agree with your interpretation.  Tewdar  15:46, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

I have spent literally all day carefully sourcing my edits and this 'fellow' has reverted them all because, apparently, Cornish is "Not a Nationality". I assume he knows something about MY nationality that the COUNCIL OF EUROPE does not. Gwikor Frank (talk) 15:49, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

i strongly support you General Phoenix (talk) 15:54, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. If you have the time to say so here that would be much appreciated: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Disruptive_editing_from_Gwikor_Frank Gwikor Frank (talk) 15:56, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi IP, the other thing is that you're an IP editor, sorry to say. You'll find people will be less twitchy on the vandalism reversions if you stick around for a while on a named account. -- asilvering (talk) 04:50, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

I checked some of yesterdays edits, didn't see anyone use the word "vandalism", so "every time" is wrong. Some reverts had no WP:ES, but so did the original edits. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:10, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

It's right here, don't gaslight me. 86.3.208.127 (talk) 09:34, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Still not "every time", but yes, there it is. @The Herald, do you think WP:VANDALISM was right in context? WP:NOTVAND applies to automated messages as well. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:46, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

There are four sources that describe Carew as Cornish (and several more for a CITEBOMB if necessary), and zero sources that describe him as British or English (that I could find). Incidentally, I have found Wikipedia's treatment of Cornish people, language, and culture to be, in several cases I have been unfortunately involved in, utterly disgusting.  Tewdar  19:08, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

I fully agree with you re: our treatment here. I'm an administrator over on Kernewek Wikipedia, but I never come here any more because of the way this Wiki treats us. Gwikor Frank (talk) 20:10, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

"I never come here any more." But here you are. 1.33.56.248 (talk) 21:40, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

What a helpful comment. You're quite right, though, I have newfound zeal for English Wikipedia editing thanks to the excellent example of shown by Tewdar. Gwikor Frank (talk) 22:22, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

I read a comment the other day on here that claimed Cornish people are mostly descended from 18th century immigrant miners from the Midlands and their families. Can you imagine anyone making such ridiculous claims about other ethnic groups not getting INSTA-PERMABANNED?  Tewdar  11:48, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

• Responding due to the courtesy ping Like Cullen328 said, Wikipedia operates on consensus. If your edits are being reverted everytime as test edits or vandalism, then you must approach an alternate method. I agree it might be in hindsight that the automated warnings termed them as vandalism, but they were constituting to disruption since your edits were not supported by references from reliable sources. Cornish or British, you have to back up your claim, else it will be defaulted to British per the already established consensus. You may start discussion in respective talk pages or even an RfC if you are interested genuinely in changing the 'wrong'. Thanks and happy editing. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 10:19, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

  So, to clarify, you do not think that being born in Cornwall makes one Cornish? The facts speak for themselves! Gwikor Frank (talk) 10:33, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

  Most of the time, there are literally zero sources supporting claims that people born in Cornwall are 'British' or 'English', but somehow nobody ever asks for any sources for that. Hmm. Sounds a little bit one sided. I'd say the WP:EXTRAORDINARY claim in these cases would be that the individuals are British or English, myself. Where can I read the 'already established consensus'?  Tewdar  11:42, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

  Are you claiming that people born in Cornwall are not 'British' or 'English'? Legally Cornwall is part of both England and of the United Kingdom. So that seems like a bit of a "blue sky" claim? Martinevans123 (talk) 15:53, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

  Who, me? I just follow the sources, me. If they say Cornish, that's what I say. If they say British or English, that's what I say. If they say nothing, I follow the relevant Wikipedia default recommendation.  Tewdar  16:15, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

  Regarding the Council of Europe determination, described at Cornish National Minority, does giving Cornish people the same status as the Scots, the Welsh and the Irish, create a nation of Cornwall? Or does it just protect them as a minority within England or the UK? That source is not clear. And is it meant to apply retrospectively, to all people who have ever been born in Cornwall, or does it just apply going forward? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:27, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

  It would be pretty weird if it didn't apply retrospectively, as someone famous for being Cornish, for work for the Cornish language or Cornish culture or whatever, would then be English one day and then Cornish the next. Commonsense says that for example, when Daphne du Maurier helped found Mebyon Kernow, the nationalist party in Cornwall, that she didn't feel English but Cornish. That should be something that wikipedia was able to express. Brwynog (talk) 17:45, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

  Afaict, on WP, Cornish is an ethnicity and Cornwall is a county in England (views on this exists). MOS:ETHNICITY states "Ethnicity, religion, or sexuality should generally not be in the lead unless relevant to the subject's notability." Going by that, it's not a one-size-fits-all situation. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:42, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

  In other words, if a person is notably Cornish and references can establish that, it can be used, but should not necessarily be used just because someone was born there. Is that what you are saying? Brwynog (talk) 17:48, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Editing with vpn

Aside from my phone, my only way of editing would be on my school laptop. The issue is the school uses Securly which led to a friend of mine getting her account blocked. If I sign in on my laptop will my account get blocked? Is there any way to get around this issue? (Hope this is the right place for this)Flaming Hot Mess of Confusion (talk) 18:30, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

@Flaming Hot Mess of Confusion Welcome to Wikipedia! If you don't get good reply here at the Teahouse, you can try Wikipedia:Village pump (technical). But give it a day. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:45, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

@Flaming Hot Mess of Confusion According to [1], Securly uses a proxy server, which means that anyone using a proxy to edit can be blocked on sight according to WP:Open proxies. If your personal laptop does not use a proxy, then you should be able to edit with it just fine. Happy editing! ‍ Relativity 04:41, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

I guess you have to log in or use an IP. Cwater1 (talk) 17:53, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Skye Terrier: - Statue - Tartan - Name Day

I would like to offer Wikipedia information on the Skye Terrier. Such as: the Life-sized statue on the Isle Of Skye unveiled by HRH Princess Anne; The Skye Terrier Tartan; and 'Skye Terrier Day' being 21 February. I have document items I will happily email to Wikipedia so as to ensure that the information is correct. Bruce Wylie (talk) 19:40, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia @Bruce Wylie! If you could provide reliable sources (see this), someone could definitely add the information to the page. Happy editing! Kline • talk to me! • contribs 19:48, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Bruce Wylie. You could discuss this at Talk:Skye Terrier, but that talk page has been dormant since 2009. Cullen328 (talk) 01:02, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Let's elaborate a little, Bruce Wylie. If you could specify one or more of what Wikipedia classes as reliable sources for each of these claims, then you'd be welcome to do either of two things with the claim. You could post the claim/suggestion, of course with its reliable source(s), to Talk:Skye Terrier, in the hope that somebody else will add the material to the article. Or you could edit Skye Terrier yourself, adding the claim with its reference(s). Yes, the talk page has long been dormant, but no matter. If there's no response there after a couple of days, post a message to the foot of Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Dogs, inviting people to respond on Talk:Skye Terrier. Whichever your choice, it won't be necessary to send any email. (I do wonder, however, what the significance might be of "XYZ Day" being such-sand-such a day of the year.) -- Hoary (talk) 01:17, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Renaming an article

Hello! I came across this article and noticed that Kofax was renamed to Tungsten Automation. I see in the talk pages that there is a request to make the changes too.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Kofax

I don't mind making the changes, but I don't know how to change the article name and redirect it. Could anyone explain to me how and/or link me to an article about the process?

Thanks so much. LaesaMajestas (talk) 20:07, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

@LaesaMajestas, you can change the name of an article by moving it to a different title, but I think in this case you have to discuss it in the talk page and get the approval. You can find the info at WP:MOVE. Excellenc1 (talk) 20:19, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Excellenc1, thank you for your help. I went ahead and moved it - it seems such a clear-cut case that I hate to delay the project and use editor bandwidth discussing the obvious. I appreciate you sending me to the relevant articles on it. LaesaMajestas (talk) 20:27, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of an article due to WP:1S

This article contains only one sentence so I draftified it. Should it also be speedy deleted? (I didn't find any criteria that it satisfies). Excellenc1 (talk) 20:16, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

The draft shouldn't be deleted as it is well.. a draft but I tagged the redirect per CSD criteria R2. Hope that helps! Kline • talk to me! • contribs 20:23, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

In my opinion drafitfying was appropriate. If the creating editor was new to Wikipedia, perhaps some time could have been allowed to add to the 'article', but considered a long but mixed editing history of editing, making it a draft feels valid. You did the courtesy of notifying the creating editor that it was now a draft. David notMD (talk) 20:27, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Antoneta Alamat Kusijanovic

I wrote an article on Antoneta Alamat Kusijanovic that wasn't approved based on notoriety. Can someone let me know why the French version of this is approved? See at link: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antoneta_Alamat_Kusijanović Thank you! 2AMUser (talk) 23:01, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi, the fr wiki has their own notability guidelines, the ones here on en wiki are different. You can see them at WP:NOTABILITY Shaws username . talk . 23:13, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

2AMUser, Draft:Antoneta Alamat Kusijanovic is not an article but a draft. (I suspect that the surname is misspelled, for Kusijanović.) The draft sounds strangely matey, referring to her has "Antoneta". (En:Wikipedia uses surnames -- other than for Vietnamese, Icelandic, and perhaps some other peoples.) We read that MURINA continued to garner critical acclaim as one of the Best Films of 2022 by The Hollywood Reporter, Associated Press, Vogue, Vulture, The Atlantic, The A.V. Club and The Daily Beast. Why "Best Films" and not "best films"? Why MURINA and not Murina? Why is this major claim sourced simply to "Variety", a link which, when I click on it, confirms none of this? -- Hoary (talk) 01:01, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Merged articles

I was merging articles a few days ago and forgot to apply the discussion closed template. Should I apply it now? OrdinaryGiraffe (talk) 01:12, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

OrdinaryGiraffe, can you say where? The answer is almost certainly yes, but it's better to be specific and make sure. Regards! — Usedtobecool ☎️ 17:35, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Southwest Transitway (Winnipeg) and Winnipeg Rapid Transit OrdinaryGiraffe (talk) 21:53, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Should books on a page be classified under 'Further Reading' or 'In Popular Culture'?

I need some clarification on the best way to classify books on a page: under Further reading or In popular culture? Does this classification differ between BLP and Non-BLP pages? Charlie (talk) 02:18, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello, CharlieMehta. You can read Wikipedia:Further reading and Wikipedia:"In popular culture" content for additional guidance. Here is an example: If a respected historian writes a widely reviewed new book about Harry Truman, then that may belong in a "Further reading" section. If an author writes a best selling novel with Truman as a major character, then that may belong in an "In popular culture" section. Cullen328 (talk) 02:45, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

The only other factor is that BLP pages require extra care and caution. Cullen328 (talk) 02:47, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

@Cullen328 Thanks for the clarity. The example you gave clears much of the doubt I had. Charlie (talk) 11:24, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Small arrow pointing to the left

Hello,

While editing, I have seen this symbol in the VisualEditor. I don't know what it means, and it cannot be copied to my clipboard. Can someone explain what that is?

Thank you. EatingCarBatteries (talk) 02:20, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

@EatingCarBatteries: Those are carriage return symbols. They should correspond to single new lines made in source editor. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:30, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Help please

Two editors have a history of wholesale replacement of the article about the book The Wonder Weeks. I sure would appreciate an experienced editor helping to resolve the matter.

It was reverted to a stub most recently in December 2023. In February, I started revising that version. I built carefully, step by step, correcting factually wrong information and adding relevant information. Today MVoltz reverted the entirety to her version of December 2023, without notice on the Talk page. I had previously documented each substantial point on the Talk page. It is my perception that their rejoinders there either failed to recognize those points or were unresponsive to them, but you can judge that for yourself.

One editor, Pizzaman, has demonstrated on the Talk page that he is importing material from the Dutch Wikipedia community. Apparently, according to the article on the Dutch Wikipedia, this sort of edit warring is kind of the norm there. He and MVoltz seem to be upholding somebody's ill feelings about a controversy involving one author of the book which took place in that country 26 years ago. You can read what I think is an NPOV account of that controversy in my recently reverted February version. The current version (reverted to 2023) is one-sided by omission, and IMO verges on the scurrilous.

I am at a loss how to engage these two editors in good faith discussion. I am reluctant to take it to the admin noticeboard. I think it would be much better for one or more other editors to take a look and help establish a factually accurate, NPOV article. I will try to be attentive but I have an extended family funeral gathering coming up, and Wikipedia has a small part in my life. I would be most happy to have other eyes looking to the accuracy and NPOV of this article. Bn (talk) 04:17, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

@Bn: The article talk page is hard to follow. Current discussions seems to be intermingled with older discussions, and many posts are very long and detailed. Since it seems you cannot get consensus through discussion on the talk page, look at WP:DR for guidance on how to resolve the dispute. Do not engage in an edit war. RudolfRed (talk) 04:38, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Bn, I'm afraid I think the shorter version is considerably clearer. I agree that there is a clear bias in the article against the content of the book; this is pretty normal on wikipedia for topics that are considered "fringe" - see WP:FRINGE. I do think it would be helpful if the article were expanded, but at a skim through the different versions of the article, it looks to me like most of what's in the current version should stay. I do think people have been pretty rude to you in the course of the talk page discussions, but you also appear to have baselessly accused another editor of having a COI, which isn't very kind either. If you would like to open a formal process that isn't ANI, you could try WP:DR. There's also WP:3O but I'm not sure it's exactly in scope, since the dispute at times involves more than two editors.

Werdna gave you very good advice, at the bottom of the article's talk page. If you can't see why statements like "it gives parents practical guidance to help their baby's cognitive development" or "This book derives from almost five decades of research" are not neutral statements of fact in this case, I think it's time for you to step away from the article. -- asilvering (talk) 04:43, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

[Edit clash] Bn, I've removed your email address from your message above. You're free to set up your account here in such a way as to allow people to email you. If they take this option, then when mailing you for the first time (via Wikipedia) they won't be shown your address. (This is good, as a small but significant minority of the small number who email me appear to be unhinged, and when I, very deliberately, don't respond, they give up. It's not a good idea to divulge your email address in any other way here, especially when you're in a content dispute. ¶ This page is not the right place for discussing content disputes, but anyway I took a quick look at Talk:The Wonder Weeks and sampled from the wall of text that I encountered there. The arguments appeared to be over content; I didn't notice any name-calling or other childishness. If you added a lot of substantive points, arguing for each, but got what has seemed to you to be an uncomprehending, unthinking or otherwise seriously defective response, I suggest that you repeat yourself, but to do so only one point at a time, acknowledging that you have made the same point earlier and briefly explaining why you're saying it a second time. Perhaps (i) Proposal; (ii) Position in the discussion above where you made the proposal before; (iv) Reasoning for the proposal; (v) Arguments against any arguments already posted against. When this first (re)proposal has been digested, and not before, set off on the second one. Et cetera. ¶ I note that you say that the article in its current state "verges on the scurrilous", and that the author of the book that's the subject of the article is described as still alive. You may wish to bring up the matter on WP:BLPN. Whether you take the matter there or to a different noticeboard, please don't take it to more than one, and please say here where you have taken it. -- Hoary (talk) 05:03, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, your replies are helpful in different ways. I very much appreciate your responding, even though as you say @Hoary this is not the appropriate place. I do confess to feeling intemperate, at the very late end of a long work day, to find my good faith revision (22 separate edits) supplanted apparently on the assumption that I was doing the same thing as she, copying and pasting an earlier revision over the current one. I should think the appropriate thing would have been to edit it.

 

@Hoary, your suggestion is best, negotiating one point at a time on the Talk page. There is a long list of points of agreement and disagreement that I posted in Talk in 2021 under Toward NPOV Consensus. There was no reply to any of them. One at a time may fare better.

 

Aside from what's unsupported by or contradicted in RS, the highest priority is to represent both sides of the controversy. This has several aspects, including:

 

• Refutation vs. failure to replicate
• Fired vs. resigned near end of contract
• Unscientific vs. an episode within a century-long scientific controversy still ongoing

 

I'll nibble at it when I have time.

  Bn (talk) 22:32, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Second efn won't work

Guys, I feel stupid because I used {{efn}} twice in an article and the second one gives a bogus error. It doesn't do that in any other example article I see and recall editing. Please double check here! Thanks! — Smuckola(talk) 04:50, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

@Smuckola: The second one has = in it, which requires special handling. See the note at the top of {{efn}} RudolfRed (talk) 05:00, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

@RudolfRed: Awesome. I googled this, and I was reading a Talk page comment about the cite errors, which talked about equals signs, but I didn't realize this. ;) Thanks. — Smuckola(talk) 05:02, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Submit Article means it is about to be published, what about the article that still work in progress?

Submit Article means it is about to be published, what about the article that still work in progress?

Can I receive feedback while still working on it, even better, Wikipedia is an open source so anyone can contribute right? So, How do I "submit for feedback" not "submit for publishing" as I know it is not ready since it is work in progress, and not having article deletion all the time. Unsteadyflyingfish (talk) 05:19, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Clicking on "Submit article" means calling for a reviewer to decided whether it should be published. I'm not sure what you mean by saying that "Wikipedia is an open source", but yes, any editor (or more strictly any editor who isn't blocked, etc) can contribute to a draft. There's nothing in particular that you need to do in order to get feedback. Here's my feedback. First, Draft:Vasanta Group (Real Estate) is pretty close to Draft:Vasanta Group (already deleted twice in November '23 as clearly promotional). The newer draft:

Vasanta Group, a prominent Indonesian real estate and lifestyle development company headquartered in Tangerang, Banten, has made significant contributions to the nation's real estate landscape. Established in 2015 by a group of visionary founders, namely Tri Ramadi, Agnus Suryadi, Erick Wihardja, Nicholas Hum, and Denny Asalim, the company's growth has been characterized by innovation, a commitment to quality, and ethical business practices.

The older one:

Vasanta Group is an Indonesian real estate and lifestyle development company headquartered in Tangerang, Banten. Founded in 2015, The company has been active in Indonesia's real estate sector. Its founders, including Tri Ramadi, Agnus Suryadi, Erick Wihardja, Nicholas Hum, and Denny Asalim, have diverse backgrounds and experience s in the real estate industry.

You have succeeded in turning down the promotionalism, however. Still, your new draft is closer still to Draft:Vasanta Group (Real Estate) as created by you and deleted in January '24:

Vasanta Group is an Indonesian real estate and lifestyle development company headquartered in Tangerang, Banten. Founded in 2015, the company has played a significant role in Indonesia's real estate sector. Its founders, including Tri Ramadi, Agnus Suryadi, Erick Wihardja, Nicholas Hum, and Denny Asalim, have diverse backgrounds and extensive experience in the real estate industry.

And a question: Are you perhaps an employee of the Vasanta Group? -- Hoary (talk) 06:41, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Archiving references

Most references here are archived on archive.org, but is it okay to use archive.is? Kk.urban (talk) 06:31, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Kk.urban, you will probably find the info at WP:ARCHIVEIS helpful. It contains some comparisons between Archive.today (the main site accessible through archive.is) and other arching sites including Wayback. Unexpectedlydian^♯4talk^‽ 07:46, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Naming a tweet

How should I name a twitter post? Abigbagel (talk) 06:40, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Please see Template:Cite tweet/doc. -- Hoary (talk) 07:25, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Citing a YouTube video

I'm looking to contribute to a page on Lorentz force with a bit on popular culture (a game called Metal Gear Rising: Revengeance), but since I can't directly cite the game, I'm trying to cite one of the trailers for the game. However, when I was trying this out on my sandbox page, I got a message telling me the YouTube citation was blacklisted. How should I proceed? Should I look for some other source to cite?

Thanks. ThatThing1911 (talk) 09:54, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

@ThatThing1911 Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! Assuming you mean Lorentz force. In short, do not add pop-cult stuff just because it exists. What you need is a an independent WP:RS that noticed the game had Lorentz force in it and bothered to comment on it. And even if you do have that, someone might think including it fails WP:PROPORTION. I remember adding this [2], but it was removed at some point, and that's not unreasonable.

See Metatron#In_popular_culture or Tardigrade#In_popular_culture for an example of the kind of sources that may be acceptable. Hope this helps. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:32, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

@ThatThing1911: It's because YouTube short links with "youtu.be" are blacklisted. Use youtube.com links instead. Also check WP:RSPYOUTUBE. ObserveOwl (chit-chat • my doings) 13:14, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

And Gråbergs Gråa Sång is right, too. "In popular culture" content should be usually cited to reliable sources independent of the game "that establish its significance to the article's subject". ObserveOwl (chit-chat • my doings) 13:21, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Abortions

WTH is Trump dictating ban to abortions when abortion is needed to save women's life? This is a decision made by a women and then her doctor! My first pregnancy was a result of forced sex, aka rape. It was in London, England and if the abortion was not performed it would have resulted in my death and thus death of unborn child. Tell Republicans that decision to abort has to be made between a women and her doctor! Tell them to STOP! Gzubicka (talk) 11:40, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Do you have a question about using Wikipedia, Gzubicka? (That's what this page is for.) -- Hoary (talk) 12:03, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

I remember a similar post... Last week maybe? It's not from the same user looking in their contribs. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 12:09, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

OP blocked as NOTHERE, after looking at their edits. 331dot (talk) 12:42, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Advocacy explains why this type of impassioned commentary is not appropriate on Wikipedia, although it is welcomed on many other websites. Cullen328 (talk) 18:14, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

How to upload this picture

Hi there i wanted to ask how could i upload this Picture Ali Jinnah Inspecting Guard Honour Baloch regiment, which i wanted to use in the article. How can i upload this on Wikicommons without any copyright? Rahim231 (talk) 12:39, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. That likely depends on copyright law regarding images in Pakistan, depending on when an image enters the public domain. 331dot (talk) 12:41, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

See c:Com:Pakistan. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:28, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Changes to articles

what are the stipulations required for changes to be accepted? 2603:6080:ADF0:95A0:4A1:CDAE:63DA:7039 (talk) 12:49, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. We can give you a better answer if you tell what sort of change you wish to make. 331dot (talk) 12:51, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi! Thank you for the welcome! I was wondering just in general once an entry is made, how do you go about editing it in the future? 2603:6080:ADF0:95A0:4A1:CDAE:63DA:7039 (talk) 16:33, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, that's not much clearer. Is WP:OWN what you're after? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:31, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

It depends on the situation. Start with reading WP:TUTORIAL. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:10, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Article review for over 2 Month ...

hello, i have an article that has not been checked or released for two months. what can i do? (User: Don-miguel-de) Draft:CIVIS Media Foundation Don-miguel-de (talk) 12:55, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

It was declined today. Drafts are reviewed in no particular order by volunteers, working on what they want when they choose to. There is no way to guarantee a speedy review. 331dot (talk) 13:11, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Editing a text further before the second review? (and bullet lists in the reference list)

Hi to everyone,

I created my first Wikipedia page a few months ago. The first review rejected it because I did not add enough sources and the text was not encyclopaedic enough. About ten days ago I made improvements and pressed the "publish" button again. As far as I understand, the text should now be sent for review again. As I now realised, an editor made substantial edits to the text in these past days. They shortened it, removed several contents, and included many new references. While those edits improved the text, they made me see I could add other edits to improve it even further with more sources and specific contents.

My questions is: should/can I go ahead and add my edits on top of those made by the Wikipedia editor, or should I hold off my edits until the article goes through review?

I also would like to know how I can include a bullet list in the list of references.

Thanks so much for your help!

Best wishes, Simonescoffier (talk) 13:51, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Yes, feel free to keep improving it as the review is pending; currently there are many many drafts pending review, so the more improvements you make, the better chances are of it getting improved.

The list of references is properly formatted, you don't need to edit it.

Cheers, Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 15:08, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Template for WikiProject requested move notifications

What template do people use to issue notifications on WikiProjects of the creation of a requested move that might be relevant to the WikiProject? I see Template:RM notice, but this doesn't seem to produce the same text that I most commonly see actually used on WikiProject pages, which looks something like this:

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Some Page#Requested move 12 March 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject.

By contrast, Template:RM notice produces the following:

An editor has requested that Some Page be moved to another page, which may be of interest to this WikiProject. You are invited to participate in the move discussion.

This later format, while communicating more or less the same thing, isn't what I actually see people using. So what's the template that produces the former (and why do people prefer it)? Brusquedandelion (talk) 13:55, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

@Brusquedandelion it looks like it's wording used in the user script rmCloser User:TheTVExpert/rmCloser. Nthep (talk) 16:38, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

The review process

In a discussion I had with a reviewer of an article I have drafted, the reviewer mentioned what "another reviewer" might do. This leads me to ask: Will there be "another reviewer"? How many reviews should I expect? Who would have the final say on whether to accept this article?

I'm afraid I'm finding Wikipedia's review process a bit opaque, and I would greatly appreciate clarification of this. Thanks. Johsebb (talk) 18:16, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. If you resubmit your draft, another reviewer will review it. As long as the draft is not rejected(only declined) you may keep resubmitting it for reviews- though it will be expected that you make progress towards resolving the concerns of the reviewers. There is no particular individual who will "have the final say"; any reviewer that feels the draft is acceptable will accept it. 331dot (talk) 18:37, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. Johsebb (talk) 20:00, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Johsebb! The AFC system puts all submissions into a pile. You have not currently submitted your draft, but it was done twice previously and each time reviewed by different reviewers. You are expected to take the feedback from previous reviews and submit again when you feel you've addressed the issues. Provided you are not disruptive about it, there is no limit as to how many times you may resubmit. As long as the draft is among the submissions, it's likely to be looked at by multiple reviewers, this being a volunteer project. Most may skip, some may comment, finally someone will click the accept or decline buttons and you're back to looking at the feedback and improving the draft for another attempt. Here's what's important: You need to bring evidence that the topic you are writing about meets WP:GNG. Since you are writing about a topic in mathematics, it should be sufficient if you can show that it has been investigated and published about by multiple independent mathematicians (either the mathematicians should be reputable or the publication needs to be). Better still if someone has summarised the state of developments in the field in an independent review work or textbook. Once you have a notable topic, only the most egregious content problems may result in the draft getting declined. Your draft should not contain copyright violations or violations of the policy on biography of living persons. And your draft needs to adhere to the core content policies, verifiability, no original research and a neutral point of view, to the extent that is reasonable to expect from new editors. You may refer to MOS:MATH for some advice about writing better articles, but take the gist of it, you need not attempt to follow every advice as though it were a rule. Regards! — Usedtobecool ☎️ 19:00, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks very much for the detail. Johsebb (talk) 20:00, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Dealing with copyright infringement from 2007

What's the best way to deal with copyright infringement that happened June 1, 2007 [3]? The vast majority of the content is taken verbatim from Murderpedia.org (currently blacklisted here, though I can post the full link if needed). Over 100 edits later, I'm not sure how you would identify which ones need redacting. In the meantime, I've just deleted the offending material from the article. Thanks. _signed, Willondon (talk) 19:38, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi Willondon. Are you sure that Wikipedia copied Murderpedia, and not vice versa? The Murderpedia entry for Hein uses Wikipedia as a citation. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 19:44, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Looking at Earwig, there's actually a far more pressing matter, shown here. I don't believe Murderpedia even gets a passing mention due to the level of dilution almost 20 years will bring.

While it's understandable that the rating is high due to the massive quote, it's less understandable in regards to the amount of red outside of it. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 19:45, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. When I was checking what was and wasn't copied, I got to the end of the MP article to see "Wikipedia.org". What a mess. In the original post (cited above), the first part is almost completely unsourced, save for the official Appeals Court documents. Well at least there's not the hassle of dealing with a copyright infringement. I'm guessing the best approach is just to get rid of everything that isn't sourced. Not sure what use to make of the Copyvio Detector results. _signed, Willondon (talk) 20:09, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Willondon While much of the article is not referenced, it dates back to at least 2007. A more conservative approach to massive deletion would be to tag the article at the top as needing references. David notMD (talk) 20:58, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Yes, that would normally be my first approach, except the content has been challenged by user MaxamillionWeatherby, on the grounds that it is incorrect and/or obsolete and harmful to the living person the article is about. They've also mentioned an inability to bring the article up to date because sources haven't given coverage to the story developments some twenty+ years later. Anyway, I continue to discuss it on their talk page. So I'm satisfied with the conclusion of this thread here. Thanks again for all your insights. _signed, Willondon (talk) 21:28, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Need help with formatting my user page

I just created my user page, but i would like to catogorize it and make it special, could someone expirenced help me with it? Lolzer3000 (talk) 20:22, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

@Lolzer3000 Welcome to the Teahouse. You may find some useful self-help resources at Wikipedia:User page design guide. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 20:29, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Mass changes needed for retirement of Drug Information Portal

The National Library of Medicine's Drug Information Portal has been retired, with all information moved to the Library's PubChem database. I think all the links to the Drug Information Portal should be updated to the corresponding article in PubChem. I suspect that someone can set up a bot to do this, but I don't know how. Perhaps someone can point me to instructions to do this or turn this over to someone who already knows how? — HowardBGolden (talk) 20:40, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

@HowardBGolden: You can ask at WP:BOTREQ. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:51, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

How dó you cite a Books?

What is the template Blackmamba31248 (talk) 21:26, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Blackmamba31248, you can find the template for citing books here: Template:Cite book. You can also cite books quite easy in visual editing mode by clicking the citation button (it looks like this: " ), then selecting 'Manual' and then 'Book'. Hope this helps! Unexpectedlydian^♯4talk^‽ 21:29, 12 March 2024 (UTC)