Wikipedia:Teahouse

Marchjuly, 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

Admin

How do I submit an RfA? Frozen902 (talk) 21:11, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Frozen902, you have only 55 edits over a period of four years. In practice, administrators must be highly experienced and fully conversant with Wikipedia's policies and guideline, and are expected to have significant creation of high quality new content. Thousands of good edits are expected. Your chance of being selected as an administrator at this time is essentially zero. Please read WP:RFA. Cullen328 (talk) 21:22, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Did you perhaps mean AfC? Your draft Draft:Andrey Kulsha has been declined for reasons given. David notMD (talk) 22:38, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

I know there is no way for me to become an administrator. I'd just like to know how so in the future I can do so. Frozen902 (talk) 00:17, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Actually, its not even possible to submit an RfA given that they just added a requirement to be extended confirmed (after 500 edits and 30 days of editing) so, definitely zero. And even when a candidate has 500 edits/30 days, candidates will almost certainly fail the RfA. This means that the de jure requirement is 500 edits/30 days, but the de facto, something like 10,000 edits/1 year. It was the case where a non EC user could still submit an RfA, but required an EC user to confirm it which I assume no one would accept the submission. JuniperChill (talk) 19:41, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

I think you mean voters on a Request for Administratorship usually expect at least 10,000 edits and one year as a registered editor.

Work in some of the backroom stuff—Articles for deletion, New Page Patrol, and more. Have a clean record, understand and practice the Five Pillars of Wikipedia. Watch how other editors make changes. Learn to enjoy working with other editors. Use your sandbox a lot for practice. Enjoy Wikipedia—if you don't enjoy editing here, slow down and read the articles on subjects that interest you. Then make small edits. Always add an edit summary explaining what you did and why. — Neonorange (talk to Phil) (he, they) 07:35, 15 July 2024 (UTC) —

How to change picture on Wikipedia Page.

I'm new to editing a page and I wanted to change a picture on a footballers page I don't know how to. If anybody could help that would be amazing. i will link the page where the picture is. Lloyd Kelly Sauberos (talk) 22:16, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

@Sauberos Depends. We can use that particular image because the copyright holder clearly states that it's ok. Almost all random pics you find online can't be used on WP/Commons because copyright. So the question is, what do you want to change it to? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 22:42, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

to a newer picture of him but i found it online😭 Sauberos (talk) 22:46, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Nearly all pictures found online are Copyrighted and cannot be used on Wikipedia. Often, there will be a copyright declaration near the image or at the foot of the web page it's on, or on the first page of the website, but even if there is not, copyright must be assumed, as it exists automatically when a new picture (etc.) is made and does not need to be claimed. Some images found online may be illicit copies, but copying and re-publishing a stolen image is as bad as stealing it directly.

A picture found online of a living person (to whom Fair use cannot apply) can only be used on Wikipedia if is covered by Public domain (which will not be the case here), or if the copyright holder has explicitly released it under an appropriate Creative Commons license. Copyright holders can also release pictures to Wikipedia, but have to fill out a specific legal form to do so.

Using copyrighted images without permission can result in legal action. See Wikipedia:Copyrights for more details.

I advise you to read in full all of the texts I have linked to, not because you need to know all their details, but because it will bring home to you how complicated Copyright is, how serious copyright infringement is and why Wikipedia does not allow it.{The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.82.201 (talk) 09:46, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

okay thanks Sauberos (talk) 03:48, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

How to post emojis that look like you? Thanks a lot Junurita (talk) 03:41, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

what? Sauberos (talk) 03:48, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

sorry,How to post emojis like you.My english is not good. Junurita (talk) 04:30, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

WP:EMOJI may have something helpful. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:05, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you very much. Junurita (talk) 09:28, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

If you have a Windows 10/11 computer you can easily input emojis by pressing the Windows (⊞) and period (.) keys at the same time. Masatami (let's talk!) 15:38, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

💥 I've learned something today. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:43, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Junurita (talk) 09:39, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Eamwit

why was this draft rejected? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Eamwit 50.45.214.102 (talk) 23:09, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello, IP user and welcome to Wikipedia. The reasons why your draft was declined are in the gray boxes inside the AfC submission templates on the top of your draft. The reasons say: "This submission is not adequately supported by Reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources." Hope this helps. Meltdown reverter (mail) 23:41, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

How would I fix it to make it supported by reliable sources? 50.45.214.102 (talk) 03:14, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. To be pedantic, your draft was declined, not rejected; the former implies that if improved, the draft may eventually be accepted as an article, while the latter means that any further time spent on it would be wasted and you shouldn't bother. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 23:57, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello IP user. I corrected the formatting of your references. In addition, I did a few minutes of online research and added info about believed ancestors of the country’s people, and the English translation of Eamwit. I would suggest that, while waiting for the next review of your draft, you do additional research and add additional information about the Eamwit people. Can you find data on their education system, common means of earning a living, and if the tribe’s chief has others helping in governing the people? Since you are interested in publishing an article on Eamwit, it should not be much of a burden for you to do additional online research, using reliable references.

If you haven’t done so already I would suggest you read Help:Referencing for beginners and Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources for help in expanding your draft. Best wishes on your Wikipedia draft article. Karenthewriter (talk) 05:20, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

IP user, I'm not a reviewer, but I am impressed with the expansion you've done to your draft article. Good job! Karenthewriter (talk) 01:46, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank You! 50.45.214.102 (talk) 04:03, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

How to handle emotional responses?

Suppose in a talk page or notice board discussion when we come across emotional response, up to the extent expectations are withing policies and guideline we can support. But parts of expectations are not within policy or guidelines or time taking but our peer Wikipedian is overtly emotional, how to handle such emotional responses? also when they are experienced users of otherwise good standing.

As such my WP search for word 'emotional' found Essays: Wikipedia:Mostly negative, Wikipedia:Avoiding talk-page disruption, Wikipedia:Don't demand that editors solve the problems they identify, WP:JUSTDONTLIKEIT

Is there any useful essay to help, "How to handle emotional responses?" aspect or you can share own helpful tips and helpful experiences. 09:31, 12 July 2024 (UTC) Bookku (talk) 09:31, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Bookku. There is WP:CALM and WP:HOTHEADS. Also, not strictly about "emotional responses", but WP:STICK, Wikipedia:Just drop it, Wikipedia:Let it go are also good essays in this kind of situations. —⁠andrybak (talk) 20:17, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Deleted Edits Viewing

Hello! I would like to ask a question about Deleted Edits. Pardon my basic beginner knowledge about Wikipedia's permissions. Why am I not able to view my deleted edits, because if I am able to view them, I can correct my mistakes and not make such errors again.

Thanks for any help! Bunnypranav (talk) 14:00, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

If an edit is deleted, such as if a page you created or worked on was deleted, it's removed from public view and only available to admins. It's not that you made a mistake, more that the article in question did not meet our guidelines for publication. RickinBaltimore (talk) 14:03, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Oh ok, thanks for clearing my question about deleted edits, I was thinking deleted edits refer to reverted edits. Thanks again for the wonderful and quick help Bunnypranav (talk) 04:48, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Bunnypranav, and welcome to the Teahouse.

There are three circumstances you may be referring to, and it's not obvious which of the three applies.

1. If an edit of yours is reverted, it will still be there in the history of the article (and in your user contributions). But I haven't found any examples of this in your contributions.
2. Occasionally, material on a page may be oversighted, for reasons such as copyright or personal attacks, and it can happen that an innocent edit of your can get caught up in this. When revisions are oversighted, they still appear in the history of the page and your contributions, but with a line through them, and they can't be picked. Again, I don't see an example in your contributions.
3. If a page you have edited is deleted, then your edit is lost with the deleted page. If it was a page you created, or in your user space, the deleting admin will usually put a message on your user talk page, and I don't see such a messge on your user talk page; but I guess this could happen if it was a page that you happened to make an edit to, and then it was probably nothing to do with your edit that caused it to get deleted. If a page is deleted, it is possible that the deleting admin might be willing to send you the content: see WP:REFUND.

Does this help? If not, please clarify your question. ColinFine (talk) 14:34, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Yes, It does help, thanks for the clarification, I was thinking that reverted edits also count as deleted edits. Thanks you again for the help and quick clarification Bunnypranav (talk) 04:46, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

OK, I see in your edit count that you have made one deleted edit. This is presumably on a deleted page (my 3 above), but not being an admin, I can't tell which page. As RickinBaltimore indecated, it is very unlikely that you did anything wrong in your edit: the most likely case is that the article was unsatisfactory, and your edit brought it to somebody's notice. If you can remember what the name of the article was, you can look in Special:log/delete and see who deleted it and why. ColinFine (talk) 14:39, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

@Bunnypranav: You have one deleted edit, removing {{Orphan}} from List of 20th Century Masters: The Millennium Collection releases. The article was later deleted and all edits to it are therefore registered as deleted. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:46, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I do remember this edit, thanks for clearing my doubt about deleted edits. Bunnypranav (talk) 04:46, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Article about self

Hello. I am trying to draft an article about myself and it was declined for lacking note-worthiness.

I only included two external journalistic articles in which I am mentioned. Should I add more articles that I have published, and a narrative about their significance? I have over 70 articles, several book chapters, and have made methodological contributions to my field. Dashoham (talk) 15:06, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello Dashoham and welcome to the Teahouse! Per WP:YOURSELF, we very strongly discourage anyone writing about themselves. This is considered having a conflict of interest. The draft as I see it was rejected for not meeting our general notability guidelines as well. RickinBaltimore (talk) 15:09, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Also bear in mind that having an article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. Shantavira|^{feed me} 16:34, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

@Dashoham We have special criteria for determining the Wikinotability of academics. Please read that guideline to see whether you meet at least one of the conditions. If you do, base a draft solely on showing that, backed up by reliable sources that are independent of you. Don't add lengthy lists of your publications: perhaps just mention and cite any reviews which the best have received. Mike Turnbull (talk) 21:40, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Influence operation

Hello. This might be the increase in notoriety (with much of erroneous foreign reporting of a victory for Mélenchon), but, similar to an operation that was active in 2021 to promote Éric Zemmour on French Wikipedia, across all language Wikipedias, there seems to be an effort to describe Jean-Luc Mélenchon and La France Insoumise, sometimes even the entire left-wing alliance New Popular Front, as far or extreme left.

This happens in a context of recent elections, which saw a surprise semi-victory (first place, but no majority) for the center-left to far-left (social-liberal Place Publique to Trotskyist NPA) alliance. The campaign raised an important question: is the party LFI "equal" to far-right National Rally, and is it part of the "republican arc/front"? The answers were divers, with many journals going back on their previous line of labelling it "far-left". The ministry of the interior notably classifies LFI as "left" (instead of "far-left", attributed to Trotskyist formations) since it's founding, and National Rally as "far-right" (these classifications happen notably for "purposes of political analysis"). Therefore labeling any of these entities "far-left" exclusively isn't really a possibility. Many experienced users have supported the far-left label, especially on English Wikipedia, however the additions and changes were often made by new users. This is happening on English Wikipedia, German Wikipedia, Spanish Wikipedia, notably, as well marginally on Italian Wikipedia (and more, these are the ones I realized).

How do I proceed, or could an experienced user proceed in my place? 80.209.216.81 (talk) 15:17, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Taking a look at the edit history of Jean-Luc Mélenchon, there seems to be an ongoing discussion in the talk page. Either way, many other editors are currently aware of this and are reverting edits. guninvalid (talk) 17:59, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

How is anyone aware of this? I didn't see any discussions on this. In any case, this seems to be a concerted effort, though weirdly French Wikipedia is left out currently. 80.209.216.81 (talk) 11:39, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

How is anyone aware of this? Most articles about genuinely important subjects are on the Watchlists of many editors, who are alerted every time the article is edited, prompting them to check the validity of the edits. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.82.201 (talk) 18:02, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Ok, I guess? Reassuring? Not really. Let's hope this will resolve itself alone. I've never heard of 87.81 etc. 80.209.216.81 (talk) 23:53, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

The Zemmour-related influence effort was not across all Wikipedias afaik, but mainly at fr-wiki and en-wiki, and a bit at it-wiki. See details at WikiProject France. If you know of any other aspects of the WikiZedia controversy, please let me know. Mathglot (talk) 08:23, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello to all.

I just had a look to this article New Popular Front and it seems that a lot of positive work has been done. Especially, the translation are often excellent and the drawbacks of the French article have not been replicated here. Ex: unsourced list of political measures, long list of supporters, etc. If there was an influence, it would be in the French article, during the first week after the dissolution, with a pro-NFP bias. Concerning the left-wing or far-left discussion, this is on French pages an ongoing discussion between seasoned contributors. This is linked to Mélenchon himself or to the name of its party ("France insoumise") and there isn't anything new about it.

As you know, Wikizedia was about paid contributions, in favor of Zemmour's party. There's no proof that NFP or LFI has practised paid contributions on their side.

Please note that the French admins on last February have banned a contributor which could be linked to "Cheep". This contributor was also active on Joe Biden french page. A strange activity (imho) remains on that page [1]. You are welcome to watch this. Xavier Sylvestre (talk) 13:19, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Moving the page of an official government entity

I'm trying to correct the page name for Brinkhaven Ohio. It still shows up as "Gann" which has not been the name of the village since the 1800s.

I am Christopher Wyant, the mayor of the village, and I have updated some information on the page but I don't seem to be able to change the page name.

Our official website is https://www.brinkhaven.gov/

Can someone assist? BrinkhavenOhio (talk) 17:13, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi BrinkhavenOhio. I can help move the page. On another note, you're going to need to change your username to something that doesn't appear to represent a whole group/village. Use Wikipedia:Changing username/Simple, and let me know if you run into any issues. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 17:17, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

But it DOES represent the whole village. The email I use belongs to the office, not to me. As I said, I am the mayor presently, but I won't always be. The next person in this seat will own the profile. BrinkhavenOhio (talk) 19:38, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

I'm afraid not, Christopher. Wikipedia is not like other websites, where you can have "profiles", and shared accounts. A Wikipedia account is required to be owned by, and used by, an individual: role accounts are forbidden. You need to change your username to something that does not suggest that it is a role account, or editing on behalf of an organisation (even a community). You do not need to use your real name: I do, but many do not; and something like "Chris from Brinkhaven" would be quite acceptable.

When somebody replaces you as mayor, if they wish to edit Wikipedia, they should create their own personal account.

Your use of the word "profile" suggests that you think that that there is some connection between the account and the articles that you edit: there isn't. (Almost) anybody in the world may edit (almost) any article in Wikipedia.

However, as the mayor of the village, you have a conflict of interest in editing articles about the village, so you should not normally edit the article directly, but instead should place an edit request on the article's talk page. (See that link for how).

Firefangledfeathers has moved the article to Brinkhaven, Ohio (but the old name is still there as a redirect, so if somebody searches for Gann, Ohio, it will take them to the article). ColinFine (talk) 20:22, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Name change complete. Christopher from Brinkhaven (talk) 16:49, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

OK. That makes sense. But we've had a longstanding issue with the article being incorrect and outdated. I provided only publicly available information and easily verified data. I made no editorial additions. I added the type of government, the names and roles of village leaders, postal code, official URL, etc...

Apparently a local resident tried to correct the information in the past but it was removed for some reason.

At any rate, I have requested a name change for my account.

Thank you for your assistance. BrinkhavenOhio (talk) 15:57, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for helping move the page. Do you have an estimate on when that should be reflected? BrinkhavenOhio (talk) 19:40, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

@BrinkhavenOhio Moves take effect immediately. Hence you can now click on either the link Brinkhaven, Ohio or Gann, Ohio to reach the article under its new name. Mike Turnbull (talk) 21:30, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. BrinkhavenOhio (talk) 16:01, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

@Christopher from Brinkhaven: One thing you and your fellow citizens can help with is the lack of images of Brinkhaven (compare what we have at c:Category:Brinkhaven, Ohio with c:Category:Fredericktown, Ohio, for example). You should only upload images which you have taken yourselves, or that are so old that they are out of copyright (there are some other exceptions, but those are the main types). Mobile phone images are fine. There's an overview at Wikipedia:Uploading images. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 07:39, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Are you really just trying to humblebrag? Is this a Knox County thing? :-D

We haven't gotten to that level yet. As you can see, we literally just got the name corrected. Christopher from Brinkhaven (talk) 01:24, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

@Christopher from Brinkhaven: No, I'm trying to assist you. If I wanted to brag, I'd show you the pictures of my home city, Birmingham, England. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 08:33, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Re: WP article Template:Reqinfobox

Re: Hello everyone. Good day Teahouse Members and @Novem Linguae:. I joined the Wikify Project and also participate in Project Law. There's an article Re: Dimes V. Grand Junction Canal that an Infobox has been requested ... I submitted a talk page reference here. However, I was unable to create and submit the infobox section within the article. In the past I have on different article submitted an infobox. Uncertain why unable to complete addition of infoxbox here. Any further suggestions for improvement is greatly appreciated. Thanks! TriosLosDios (talk) 19:27, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello, TriosLosDios. When I looked at your discussion in the talk page, it seems like you forgot to add the final two curly brackets ( }} ) to complete the infobox template. I hope this helps you. Meltdown reverter (mail) 19:40, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

My wiki entry

Hello, please can you tell me why my long-held wikipedia entry has been deleted? Thanks Meedper (talk) 19:39, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Answered at Wikipedia:Help_desk#Hello,_please_can_you_explain_why_my_long_held_wikipedia_entry_has_been_deleted?_Thanks. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:42, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Leela Floyd shows deleted in 2022 for lack of notability references. David notMD (talk) 00:15, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Need help dealing with a Vandal

I noticed some vandalism on Incredibles 2 originating from a particular IP Address. Can I have some help reporting it/dealing with it? I've already reverted the edits, but I have a feeling they'll be back given how recent the vandalism is. I've never dealt with this before. Solitaire Wanderer (talk) 20:22, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello, @Solitaire Wanderer:. If the vandalism continues to happen, you can enable Twinkle by going to Gadgets in your preferences so you can revert edits more efficiently and restore revisions. Another option is that you can report the vandalism here: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Meltdown reverter (mail) 20:42, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Shouldn't vandalism be reported at WP:AIV instead? Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 20:47, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Yes. AIV is for clear-cut vandalism; AN/I is for more subtle and complicated editing problems. Cremastra (talk) 21:22, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Done! Solitaire Wanderer (talk) 22:10, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Article page continually denied, what am I doing wrong?

I am attempting to make a page on the first legally recognized invention from space, due to its historical precedent and research significance. It is not a commercial product and I have no financial or social incentive for this beyond my appreciation for the subject. Yet I have submitted twice, each time rejected due to "faulty citations," each by the same admin, whom has argued with me and I expect is biased and targeting me out of spite, despite claiming they have no interest in this page. The sources are primary, diverse, unbiased, and independent of the subject, originating from NASA, NatGeo, and the US Government Patent Office. I just cannot grasp why this is continually being denied. And it doesn't help that this admin fails to state specifics on which citations are even against the rules. Is the patent against the rules? I would appreciate any assistance in putting this through. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gspinty1 (talk • contribs) 02:05, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Courtesy links: Draft:Zero G coffee cup (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) (and Draft:Gspinty1 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)). Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 02:47, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Gspinty1: none of the sources cited is independent of the subject. The first is a video made by Pettit, the second is based on information provided by Pettit, the third is based on information provided by Weislogel, and the fourth is a patent written by Pettit, Weislogel, and their co-inventors. You accuse SafariScribe of being motivated by spite; but he is merely applying Wikipedia policy. To establish that the subject is notable, you need independent sources, not sources written or influenced by people associated with the subject (in this case, its inventors). Maproom (talk) 06:53, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

In the draft, the description as an issued U.S. patent is not correct. 20110101009A1 signifies a patent application submitted in 2011. This never proceeded to a patent. Upon further research at USPTO, the reference should be changed to issued patent #8074827. This still does not address the lack of independent references needed to confirm notability. David notMD (talk) 08:57, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

I also doubt that the image is your "Own work". However, https://www.space.com/31196-space-coffee-zero-gravity-cup-astronauts.html should qualify as an independent reference. David notMD (talk) 09:31, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Independent yes, but is it WP:BLOG-ish? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:42, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

I wouldn't say it is a blog really from my point of view. However, information on a blog should be verified for accuracy by seeing what other independent sources says. Soafy234 (talk) 13:30, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Ooop. An Administrator deleted the draft for G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion. Same reason the same Admin deleted a previous version. (The Declines were actions by Reviewers, who are not necessarily Admins; the draft deletions were by an Admin.) Having seen the most recent draft before it was deleted, I agree that it contained promotional wording about how important this invention is - all unreferenced. The Admin did not 'salt' the deletion, meaning you are able to try again, but content must be neutral point of view and independent ref verified. David notMD (talk) 13:57, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Size class dispute

Hello!

I've noticed that there's been a relatively long-time dispute about the size class of the Toyota Grand Highlander, specifically whether it's a mid-size or a full-size crossover. Based on the citations, its a mid-size, but there were a few users who believed it was a full-size. I feel that this might turn into a mild edit-warring scenario, so what's the best thing to do? Thanks in advance! LlabmuG (talk) 04:00, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

LlabmuG, you need to discuss it at Talk:Toyota Grand Highlander. Few people here at the Teahouse will even know what a "crossover SUV" is. Maproom (talk) 06:59, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

LlabmuG. This is a perfect textbook example of an utterly inconsequential content dispute that is not worth wasting electrons on. How about "some sources describe it as a mid-sized SUV ref ref ref while other sources describe it as a full-sized SUV ref ref ref" and leave it at that? These definitions are highly subjective, and trying to cram every topic into a narrow pigeonhole is not a good approach. In the spirit of full disclosure, I recently purchased a Toyota Corolla Cross Hybrid, a somewhat similar vehicle. Cullen328 (talk) 08:13, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you both for the suggestions. LlabmuG (talk) 20:10, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

is Susan Spaw listed?

Susan was my ex- wife. is she listed here? 70.119.26.190 (talk) 04:18, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

There is no article titled Susan Spaw. The fact that it's in red tells me that. Do you believe thee should be such such an article? HiLo48 (talk) 04:34, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia has a search facility. This is easy to find and easy to use. Try it! 126.253.240.102 (talk) 05:41, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Is your interest in creating an article about your ex-wife? Or was it about submitting an Articles for Deletion process, in the hope said article could be deleted? David notMD (talk) 09:01, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Something helpful

What's the longest audio recording you have at WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia? It kind of helps as background noise while I'm working on something. TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 05:50, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

How much is "sufficient" inline citations?

I've been working on Geometric distribution for a little while now, and before I started, there was a template saying the article "lacks corresponding inline citations." After adding some citations, I think that it would be okay to remove the template but there's still more parts of the article that need citations. Is it okay to remove the template even if the whole article isn't properly sourced? Moon motif (talk) 07:07, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Moon motif, I do not know why you would want to do that. If you have partially solved the problem, then thank you very much for that. But if you have not yet fully solved the problem, as your question seems to acknowledge, then the tag should remain. In short, solve the problem and then remove the tag. Cullen328 (talk) 07:28, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

@Cullen328 Sorry, yeah, it's a bit late here and my brain is fried. I've been trying to find sources for the last bits for like a month now, and I genuinely don't know if I can. The biggest is the § Proof of expected value section, and I haven't found a text that uses similar proofs. Also, a bullet point in § General properties and a couple more in § Related distributions remain unsourced. I've been really tempted to ax them, but I don't know where the line between "I personally cannot find a source" and "There is no source" is. Moon motif (talk) 08:50, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

@Moon motif, this might be a time to tag those specific uncited bits with citation needed tags - use {{cn}} for this. If nothing else it will alert readers that these parts are not currently sourced, and best case scenario another editor will be able to supply sources. Don't fry your brain on a potentially impossible task, we need it for all the other uncited articles! StartGrammarTime (talk) 15:53, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, I probably should've remembered about the citation needed tags lol. Hoping that one day the article will be completely sourced! Moon motif (talk) 23:17, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

I've had a look at Geometric distribution, and removed the "more footnotes needed" as no longer applicable. Ok, the referencing is not perfect; it rarely is in any long article. But it's pretty good. Maproom (talk) 08:58, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

I have an obscure important document

Alan Dawson, the jazz drummer, was thought to have never published any material. Wrong. I possessed the only copy of "Cymbal Sounds in Jazz". It was a "White Paper" insert in the Zildian cymbal catalog. I sent the original to Berklee for safe keeping.I have copies of the original and would like to contribute to the Wiki page. Vincherry (talk) 08:47, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

@Vincherry Published means available to the general public. If it's the only copy, in what sense is it published? Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:17, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

The document exist nowhere on the internet so I consider that obscure.No one has so far claimed to have another copy.I contacted Zildjian and they have no record of it although they hold the copyright. Vincherry (talk) 17:35, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

If this was an insert in the Zildjian cymbal catalog (year? Avedis Zildjian Company), why do you think you are the only person with the document?

Vincherry What content are you wishing to add to the article Alan Dawson? Theroadislong (talk) 17:47, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

@Vincherry: One thing you could usefully do is upload a scan of the document to the Internet Archive; it can then - if suitable - be linked to from the article here, either under "External links", or as a citation. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 07:18, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Vincherry, archival material that is available to some members of the public, even if restricted or very difficult to access, may be used as a source. If Berklee has the original and they make either the original or a copy of it available, to scholars, for example, then it is considered published for the purposes of WP:Verifiability, and you may refer to it. If Berklee holds it, but provides access to no one outside their institution, then it can't be used. That said, the idea of uploading a copy to IA is a good one. Mathglot (talk) 07:06, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

How is the map in Läckö Castle made?

The map on Läckö Castle is great. How is it made? I opened the source code and found nothing. How is that map made? How to make one? Vino Italiano (talk) 09:09, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

@Vino Italiano: It's made outside Wikipedia. The article uses {{Infobox building}} which can pull data from Wikidata and OpenStreetMap. "Wikidata Item" under "Tools" in the article links to Läckö Castle (Q935973) where "OpenStreetMap relation ID" links to https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1619392. I don't know how OpenStreetMap makes maps. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:20, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you @PrimeHunter – Vino Italiano (talk) 08:02, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Assessment Article Chief Minister KP

Hy, can Someone please do Assessment (references) for chief secretary Khyber Pakhtunkhwa page.Draft:Nadeem Aslam Chaudhry many chief secretary are already have a wiki Chief Secretary of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa .. the article rejected because of Fails NPOL as well GNG by the reviewer. Janabanigu (talk) 09:13, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Thew fact that for some of the people listed at Chief Secretary of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa there exist articles does not mean that there should exist articles for every person, including Chaudhry. Appointed - as compared to elected - positions do not always qualify. David notMD (talk) 09:46, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

research say Chaudhry was on very high post including the Additional Secretary at the Prime Minister's Office. he has been on high posts since 2020 from covid time. Janabanigu (talk) 09:48, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Janabanigu. The question is not what high posts he has occupied, but whether there is enough independent reliably published information about him to base an article on. Nothing written, published, or or commissioned by him or his associates - including the government - will count, and neither will mere mentions (in a list, or in a newspaper item that says he has been appointed, but without at least several paragraphs about him and his career). Those are the sorts of sources that are a non-negotiable requirement to establish notability. ColinFine (talk) 15:31, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

article deletion

I'm new. There are a lot of obscure people on wikipedia that are not really notable. Can I just delete the articles? For example using the suggested edit widget on my home page it took me to this page Kent (Gillström) Isaacs. I can't find any secondary sources so I dropped a comment on the talk page but wondering if I should have just deleted the page. I think a lot of these pages are created by the people themselves for marketing. Here was another that I was tempted to delete: John A. Gauci-Maistre FunFactsFanatic (talk) 15:10, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello, FunFactsFanatic, and welcome to the Teahouse. As you are not an admin, you do not have the power to delete an article; but like anybody else, you can nominate it for deletion: see articles for deletion.

It is not enough that the article does not establish notability: you should make a genuine effort to find sources that establish notability: see WP:BEFORE - if you don't then your AFD is likely to get closed quickly as "keep".

But if you have looked, and not found the sources, then by all means launch an AFD. ColinFine (talk) 15:36, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. I already mentioned I've looked for secondary sources. Is there a listing of what articles have been deleted and why? FunFactsFanatic (talk) 15:45, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

@FunFactsFanatic, there sure is! Instructions and helpful info can be found at WP:AFD; you'll also be able to find archives there, as well as currently open discussions. WP:AFDSORT may help find ongoing discussions on specific subjects - try the 'biography' section for similar articles to the ones you're thinking of nominating for deletion. You can always watch some of the current discussions and see how they end up, if you'd like to observe for a little while before committing to the nominations. There's no rush. StartGrammarTime (talk) 16:05, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Several alternatives to deletion exist; that link also provides some helpful info on when deletion is not appropriate. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 15:45, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

See Deletionism and inclusionism in Wikipedia. David notMD (talk) 16:08, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

I have a related question, since we're here. Does anyone know of a database report, external tool, or maintenance category that catalogues articles with external links in body prose? Folly Mox (talk) 16:39, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

@Trappist the monk, do you have any advice how to search for articles with external links in body prose? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:55, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

None that I know of. Cirrus search is not really up to the task because its regex is limited. Someone once wrote a bot that added a bare url template but I don't know if that bot is still running and I don't know if it distinguished bare urls inside <ref>...</ref> tags from those that were outside.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 16:22, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Then WP:TECHPUMP may be the next place to ask. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:41, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Gråbergs Gråa Sång, does this search answer your question? Mathglot (talk) 06:46, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

@Mathglot Glancing at the bolded stuff at the first page, no. As I understand it, @Folly Mox wants a tool/search that can find stuff like "In 2024, Smith started a new political party with James McMurdock." I tried this [2] but that doesn't work. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:58, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Gråbergs Gråa Sång, Ah, right. You can search for those with this search, but it's slow, times out after finding ~500k results, and does not distinguish between links in citations and other kinds, but will get you part way there. With sufficient fiddling, you might be able to weed out some of the refs by restricting equal signs or pipes just before it, but there would be diminishing returns, probably some false negatives, and it still wouldn't be perfect. HTH anyway, Mathglot (talk) 07:24, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:33, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

@Mathglot Btw, where is the WP-guidance on writing searches like that? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:36, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

(edit conflict × 2) Gråbergs Gråa Sång, Here's one level of fiddly search, which cuts out a lot of refs (but not all of them) and may cut out some good results, too, but the general mix of results is a higher proportion of non-ref results than previously. If I knew what the results were going to be used for, it might be possible to tune it better for those goals. Maybe Folly Mox can answer that. Mathglot (talk) 07:38, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Fiddly search 2. Mathglot (talk) 08:07, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Gråbergs Gråa Sång you can start with Help:Searching, and then mw:Help:CirrusSearch#Regular expression searches; finally, this may help for some features, but Wikimedia doesn't implement all of that I don't think. Cirrus search regular expressions are a pain in the butt, because it lacks absolutely basic features of regular expressions like alternation (OR) which make a lot of things really difficult; it also lacks positive and negative lookaround, which would've been really helpful to exclude <ref> tags in the current situation, and there's no easy workaround for that. On top of that, the doc we do have is pretty poor. lately I finally got fed up enough to start writing my own crib sheet, and I'm finally getting a bit better at it. I mean to someday either redo the doc entirely, or else (more likely) just write up the crib sheet as a kind of quick-start box which may be useful to those who know some flavor of non-Cirrus regex, to get them going quickly. I'm still learning, though. Mathglot (talk) 08:00, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

@Mathglot Thanks again! I spot checked a few search results, ctrl-f-ing " [http" (with a space before the [, hoping that helps a little) in the wiki-text. Much is ref and EL-section, but I did find [3] and Town#Alabama. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:14, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

It seems to me that if we're after a "Hunt for bad WP:EL" search/tool, refs and EL-sections are big obstacles. Ping @Trappist the monk again if you want to add anything. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:26, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Yeah. Single, one-line advanced searches are limited in what they can do. A user script or Module could grab the article and exclude all refs fairly easily, and then search what's left for the pattern using Lua pattern matching. That would be a better approach to this imho, if you want good results. Mathglot (talk) 08:33, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Acceptable references for musicians

What are the acceptable references for musicians and songwriters to include in an article about them. Is there a “tier” ranking among various music publications and blogs? 2605:59C0:130:E210:C4E:A420:3D1:FC6A (talk) 16:16, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Not to my knowledge, but there is a list of reliable and unreliable sources available to check sources against. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 16:21, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Article page rejected for lack of resources despite citing The Atlantic, etc.

I'm new to Wiki-editing and would really appreciate some help here! My draft, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Andrew_J._Calis, "is not adequately supported by reliable sources" despite citing a number of legitimate journals and papers, including The Atlantic and America Magazine. I'm not sure what qualifies, then -- thanks for any help! It'sMeowOrNever (talk) 16:43, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello, It'sMeowOrNever, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid that you are having a very common experience of new editors who plunge straight into the challenging task of trying to create an article before spending time learning about Wikipedia's requirements.

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.

Of your Eight citations, only the last two come anywhere near meeting the requirements for sources to establish notability, in that they are the only two sources independent of Callis. Unfortunately, neither of them says very much about Callis himself: they (and the quotes you take from them) might well be appropriate for the article in addition to more substantial independent sources.

Writing an article begins with finding several sources that meet the criteria in the golden rule. If you cann't find these, then you know that there is no point in spending any more time on this, as the subject does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, and no article will be accepted.

If you find them, then the next step is to forget absolutely everything you know about the subject, and summarise what these independent sources say about it.

If that results in enough content to be an encyclopaedia article, then you can may add a selected bibliography, and some uncontroversial factual data (like dates and places) from non-indpendent published sources. ColinFine (talk) 21:18, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

That's a huge help -- thank you! This is exactly the sort of feedback I was missing. Thanks again for the clarification! It'sMeowOrNever (talk) 19:51, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Ramallah Friends Meeting (Quakers)

My draft at Draft:Ramallah Friends Meeting (Quakers) was declined due to:

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

The draft contains citations to University papers, reliable Books, and verifiable primary sources. What am I missing for this page to be deemed adequately supported? It is about the only Quaker Meeting in the Palestinian Territories and I have included most citations that are available outside of any possible newspapers in Arabic. Thank you in advance. InquisitiveALot (talk) 16:55, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello, InquisitiveALot, and welcome to the Teahosue. What you are missing is independent sources. 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. ColinFine (talk) 21:20, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for getting back and taking the time in your reply. Having sourced & cited Books and University papers & archives, would those count as independent sources for publication? InquisitiveALot (talk) 22:16, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

It would depend on exactly what those sources were and what they actually said. A chapter, or several paragraphs, in a book (not by the subject or someone associated with them/it) published by a university press would doubtless support Wikipedia:Notability, a passing mention or inclusion in a list in such a book would not, but could Verify a particular fact. Archives often contain material from or by the subject, which would not support Notability because they would not be Independent of the subject, though again they could be used to verify uncontroversial facts. The suitability of other papers, such as Doctoral theses, depends on how widely they are accessible (i.e. are they truly 'Published') and whether their author was or has become a recognised authority on the subject.

In short, it depends on the context of the subject in question, but if in doubt put them in and let the next reviewer judge them. Don't be discouraged, many drafts go through several rounds of submission before they become articles. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.82.201 (talk) 10:08, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Image add on Former Minister Article

Hi can some one please add a picture on Qazi Muhammad Asad Khan the image source link is https://www.facebook.com/share/u3kQycDRxSYrviKw/?mibextid=xfxF2i from his verified page. Janabanigu (talk) 18:56, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Sorry but we can't just take an image from Facebook. Please read the Wikipedia:Image use policy. Shantavira|^{feed me} 19:30, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Ashley Folashade Adegoke Ogunwusi

Hi Wikipedia Team,

I am reaching out in utter frustration regarding my article submission. Since the start of the year, I have been diligently re-drafting this article to meet all the requirements specified by your guidelines. It is outrageous that editor Johannes Maximilian has now reiterated the same feedback previously given by other editors, claiming the article lacks the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia and fails to adhere to a neutral point of view. I have meticulously revised the submission to eliminate any peacock terms and ensure it is written from a neutral perspective, as per your instructions.

Furthermore, the accusation that the submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources is simply untrue. I have invested countless hours referencing independent, reliable, published sources to verify every piece of information in the article. It is incredibly disheartening to have my efforts continuously dismissed by editors who seem to be trigger-happy in rejecting submissions without offering constructive feedback. This process is beginning to feel discriminatory and marginalizing. Wikipedia is supposed to be an open, free space for sharing knowledge, yet I am encountering constant obstacles and encountering editors who appear to be mean-spirited and resentful, rejecting my efforts without due consideration.

This cannot continue indefinitely. I have poured significant time and effort into ensuring my submission meets Wikipedia's standards, and it is unacceptable for it to be continually undermined by dismissive editorial behavior. I urge you to review my submission again, taking into account the extensive work I have done to comply with your requirements. Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Best regards,

Adefolarin

The article that was rejected:

"Princess Ashley Folashade Adegoke Ogunwusi Princess Ashley Folashade Adegoke Ogunwusi is a member of the royal family of Ile-Ife, married to Ooni Adeyeye Enitan Ogunwusi Ojaja II, the monarch of the Ife Kingdom. She is from the Lafogido ruling house of Ile-Ife and holds a Master's Degree in Accounting and Finance from the University of Greenwich. In addition to managing her businesses in the United Kingdom, she engages in philanthropic activities through her NGO, the Ashley Adegoke Foundation, which supports underprivileged children and widows. As one of the queens in the royal court of Oduduwa, she holds a notable position within the Ooni's household. Her marriage to Ooni Adeyeye Enitan Ogunwusi Ojaja II is part of his history of multiple marriages, including previous unions with Olori Elizabeth Opeoluwa Akinmuda, Tobi Phillips, Adebukola Bombata, Zainab-Otiti Obanor, and Olori Silekunola, with whom he shares a son. Insights from Olori Ashley Ogunwusi: Balancing Roles In an interview, Olori Ashley Ogunwusi discussed her life, her relationship with the Ooni of Ife, and her aspirations as a queen. She emphasized the spiritual connection she shares with her husband, rooted in their mutual spiritual awareness. She also reflected on her upbringing, highlighting the spiritual values instilled by her father. Despite their longstanding commitment, their official marriage was postponed to prioritize her daughter's well-being. As an accountant and entrepreneur based in the United Kingdom, Olori Ashley detailed the challenges of balancing her roles as a queen, mother, and businesswoman. She spoke about her fashion sense, philanthropic work, and dedication to promoting Yoruba culture and traditions. Addressing perceptions of polygamy within the palace, she expressed her vision for fostering unity and cultural appreciation in Ile Ife. Leadership in the Osara Festival Olori Ashley Ogunwusi led the celebration of the Osara Festival in Ile-Ife, demonstrating her leadership and dedication to Yoruba traditions. Before heading to the Osara Groove, she emphasized the festival's spiritual significance and historical relevance. The festival attracts devotees who seek blessings from Osara, a deity revered for granting children to those who pray to her. Oba Isoro Ishola Osunwusi, the Olosara of Ife, highlighted the importance of the annual celebration of the Osara Festival for all Yoruba people. He noted the historical and cultural significance of Osara as the mother of Okanbi, who bore seven notable children, including the Oba of Benin and other prominent Yoruba rulers. Olori Ashley's involvement in the festival underscores her commitment to preserving Yoruba culture and traditions. Participation in the Ayan Atayero Festival in New York Olori Ashley Ogunwusi participated in the "Ayan Atayero Festival" (Festival of Drums) organized by the Consulate-General of Nigeria in New York and the Royal Festival Inc. The event highlighted Nigeria's cultural heritage in the United States. Representing the Ooni of Ife, Olori Ashley conveyed royal greetings and emphasized the importance of Yoruba culture, particularly the significance of drum festivals. She articulated how such cultural expressions influence the broader African diaspora and global cultural diversity. Personal Insights and Cultural Promotion Princess Ashley Folashade Adegoke Ogunwusi, also known as Olori Ashley, shared insights into her life as a queen in a detailed interview. She explained that her official recognition was delayed to prioritize her daughter's safety and well-being. Living in the United Kingdom, she maintains respectful relationships with her sister wives in Nigeria. She highlighted her upbringing in a diverse religious background and her alignment with traditional worship alongside her husband. Olori Ashley expressed confidence in her appearance and emphasized the importance of balancing her roles as a queen, mother, and entrepreneur. She remains committed to supporting her husband in preserving Ile Ife's traditions and fostering cultural heritage. She attributes her ability to manage her responsibilities to divine guidance and the wisdom instilled by her family."

Adefolarin1 (talk) 19:39, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Note to Teahouse hosts: also asked at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk#19:32, 13 July 2024 review of submission by Adefolarin1. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 20:29, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

@Adefolarin1 This has been answered at that link. Forum shopping is poor etiquette, please do not do it. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 21:09, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Fails on tone, lack of NPOV, and flawed references. David notMD (talk) 22:02, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

The notion that utterly non-neutral prose like She expressed confidence in her appearance and emphasised the importance of balancing her roles as a queen, mother, and entrepreneur. She remains committed to supporting her husband in preserving Ile Ife's traditions and fostering cultural heritage. She attributes her ability to manage her responsibilities to divine guidance and the wisdom instilled by her family belongs in an encyclopedia is bizarre to me. That's press release writing, not encyclopedia writing. Cullen328 (talk) 08:31, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Adefolarin1, it may be that you have immersed yourself so deeply into this topic that you have lost sight of what an Encyclopedia is. It is nothing like promotional Social media. Please read Wikipedia: What Wikipedia is not, particularly Section 2.3, and Wikipedia:Neutral point of view.

Try to imagine how your Draft would read if it was written by someone with no personal connection to the subject and no particular like or dislike for them, presenting only published facts in a dry, non-judgemental (positive or negative) style. That is what Wikipedia articles require. Hope this helps. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.82.201 (talk) 10:24, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Ashley is one of six wives of Adeyeye Enitan Ogunwusi, ruler of Ile Ife. All married him in the fall of 2022. Any attempt to create an article about her must rest on references to what people have written about her. Wikipedia policy is that published interviews do not count toward eastablishing notability. David notMD (talk) 12:10, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Entering "depicts" information - painting title

Hi. I have been entering some "depicts" information for paintings on Wikimedia. Most of these paintings have the title already there as a "depicts" entry, but nothing else. Should I avoid repeating words from the title (redundant)? Or does the entry just refer to the specific painting itself and not the subjects within the painting? I hope I am making sense. Thank you! Artfann (talk) 20:18, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Artfann. I think what you are doing is way outside the purview of Wikipedia (specifically), and you should ask at either Commons, or Wikidata: I'm not sure which. You are editing a file in Commons, but applying the Wikidata property "depicts".

To me it seems that entering a theme like "poverty" and "charity" is original research, and should not be done without a reference; but of course I'm thinking from Wikipedialand, and it might be different in Commons. ColinFine (talk) 20:48, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Copyvio on Draft:Sandbox

Is it okay to put {{copyvio-revdel}} on the sandbox. As per WP:COPYSAND , copyrighted material is not allowed in the sandbox.

Courtesy link:

• revision history
• copyvio checker
• taken from here

Thanks Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 05:22, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

@Miminity Welcome to the Teahouse, and thanks for your question. I have revdel-ed the relevant content, as it was a clear copyright violation. I've also warned the editor concerned. I don't see why that template should not be used, though I'd want to check back to ensure it wasn't removed automatically when the sandbox is cleared for the next editor. I'd not thought about that before, so might consider using the talk page if the template was lost each time the page is blanked. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 10:36, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 11:02, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Adding promotional Text on Lanka Tiles by its creator

Hi all, i found an article Lanka Tiles sense of promotional content, puffery and peacock words. I tried to clean the page but its creator reverted my edits. I also smell like COI or paid contribution. I did this assuming good faiths. Please also have a look at other articles created by Chanakal. Capital Alliance, Heritance Tea Factory, Hunas Falls Hotel, Heritance Ahungalla, Jetwing Vil Uyana, Dankotuwa Porcelain, Sierra Cables and many more like these. I have a strong feeling of paid COI now. Bakhtar40 (talk) 07:08, 14 July 2024 (UTC) Bakhtar40 (talk) 07:08, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

You are diverging the discussion by creating a tea house discussion. I am willing to discuss and agree on a consensus. Chanaka L (talk) 07:14, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

The creator also removed COI tag. It seems a clear indication of COI and paid contribution here. I would like to hear from other experienced editor on Wikipedia. Bakhtar40 (talk) 07:24, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

@Bakhtar40 as I said you are only accusing, not discussing. You removed perfectly well cited facts as well as removed summary from the lead section. Chanaka L (talk) 07:30, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

I removed only promotional and repeated text but you already reverted my edits. Bakhtar40 (talk) 07:32, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

You need to read WP:LEAD. Providing a summary of info is the point of the lead section. The fact that Lanka Tiles is one of the most valuable brand is not promotional, it is a fact am afraid. Chanaka L (talk) 07:37, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

@Bakhtar40@Chanakal If you want to discuss the article, do so on the article talk page, please. The Teahouse is for answering questions, not for angry content disputes. Cremastra (talk) 07:40, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

I started a discussion on their talk page, it is them who diverge the discussion. But I welcome your opinion on the matter as an uninvolved party. Chanaka L (talk) 07:46, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

You are both edit warring. I will look at the actual details after I have requested page protection. Cremastra (talk) 07:37, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure how having the history of the company in the lead is problematic, per, yes, WP:LEAD. That text doesn't look promotional to me. Ceylon Theatres acquired Lanka Ceramic from the government of Sri Lanka. In 2013, Royal Ceramics acquired 80% of the stake in Lanka Ceramic, thus bringing Lanka Tiles under the umbrella of the Vallibel One Group. That sounds like neutral wording to me.

Having "awards and accolades" in a separate section makes more sense than lumping it in "operations". Mentioning that in the lead is, again, summarizing the body and seems fairly neutrally-worded. Cremastra (talk) 07:46, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks @Cremastra for looking into the matter and providing a feed back. Cheers Chanaka L (talk) 08:02, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Requesting deletion

I would like to request deletion for Draft:Riley Strain due to WP:BLP1E, notable for one event. Cwater1 (talk) 13:10, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

@Cwater1 since you are the draft's creator and main author, you can request deletion using the {{db-g7}} template. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 13:13, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. Got it. Hopefully I can remember next time. Cwater1 (talk) 13:17, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

How to protect content from bots

Hey! I've written a list page of historical plaques and include the text of the plaques in the page (List of Blackburn Historical Plaques).

I've noticed Wikipedia bots making alterations to the plaque text to meet Wikipedia standard, but this makes the information inaccurate. Is there a way to indicate that the text should be protected as is so that automated tools don't alter it? Scooby359 (talk) 17:22, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

@Scooby359: You can put {{Nobots}} on the page; or better still discuss the matter with the bot operator (in this case User:Sdkb) on their talk page, so that they can understand and remedy the issue. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:53, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Brilliant, thanks for the help! Scooby359 (talk) 17:57, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Scooby359 Do not place {{nobots}} on the page, as that blocks all sorts of beneficial edits, so please do not do that. Instead, use the template {{as written}} only around the section of text that should remain the same. In your case, that would look like this:

blah blah blah {{as written|on 15th August 1842}}, blah blah blah...

Then the bots should leave it alone, but are still available to fix other problems in the article. Mathglot (talk) 06:20, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

@Mathglot Ace, I've updated with {{as written}} so hopefully sorted now. Thanks for your help! Scooby359 (talk) 18:32, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Review required

I would request senior editors and admins to have a look at the contributions of User:HingWahStreet of engaged in writing jounals/magazines → The Wikimedia Journal of Hong Kong Transport. See (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/User:HingWahStreet). Thank you. Agent 007 (talk) 18:48, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

There's no such thing as a senior editor, but even I can tell this is a blatant misuse of userpages. I've tagged them as such. -- D'n'B-t -- 20:10, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Sentence syntax

Hi! I was hoping for some help with a particular sentence. It's part of the plot summary on the Spider-Man (2002 film) page. Below is the first paragraph of the plot summary, with the sentence in question in bold:

On a high school field trip, teenager Peter Parker visits a Columbia University genetics laboratory with his friend, Harry Osborn, and his love interest, Mary Jane Watson. There, Peter is bitten by a genetically engineered spider, and falls ill upon returning home. Meanwhile, Harry's father and Oscorp founder, Norman Osborn, bids for an important military contract. He tests a performance-enhancing chemical on himself and goes insane, killing his assistant in the process.

The syntax feels off to me. Here is a version I proposed:

Meanwhile, Harry's father, Norman Osborn, tries to secure an important military contract for Oscorp, the company he founded.

We don't have to use either version if another better version exists. Please let me know your thoughts. We've tried various versions and discussed on the talk page, but haven't come to a consensus. Wafflewombat (talk) 20:34, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Either is OK; the second (yours) is preferable. (I might simplify that to "Meanwhile, Harry's father Norman tries [...]".) -- Hoary (talk) 21:41, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

How can I change a company's logo to the updated one?

Ryman Healthcare's logo is outdated and we would like to update it to the current one. Rutheavh2 (talk) 21:11, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Rutheavh2 hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You said "we" – do you mean that a group of people is using this account?

As to your question – new users aren't allowed to upload files. You can bring this question up on Talk:Ryman Healthcare. —⁠andrybak (talk) 21:20, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

No i'm the only user. thanks do i just create a new topic? under companies? Rutheavh2 (talk) 21:23, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Rutheavh2, click "Add topic" at the top, next to "View history". A form, which you've already used here after clicking the "Ask a question" button, will appear. When you're ready to publish the message, click button "Add topic" at the bottom. —⁠andrybak (talk) 21:31, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Archiving using one click archiver

Hello. Can someone help me with an archiving issue? I tried archiving sections from this talk page but instead of archiving it to the linked Archive 1 from the talk page, the bot archived it here which doesn't show up when you access the Archive 1 from the talk page itself. Griboski (talk) 21:39, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Griboski, hello! OneClickArchiver uses the configuration of the automatic bot archival to find out where the archive page is. This configuration was broken and caused incorrect archival by OneClickArchiver. The configuration has been fixed. —⁠andrybak (talk) 21:48, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

andrybak Thank you! I knew I screwed something up. Question is what to do with this erroneous archive that it created? --Griboski (talk) 21:52, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

You can mark Talk:Vasojevići (tribe)/Archive 1 with template {{db-author}}, and an admin will delete it. —⁠andrybak (talk) 21:56, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Withdrawal my request

Is there way I can withdraw my request at Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Pending changes reviewer. I don't think I'm ready yet. I like to have better experience and plus I might take a wiki break. Cwater1 (talk) 22:24, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Yep. I've marked it as withdrawn for you. Elli (talk | contribs) 22:29, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Questions about Detail level and Review

I haven't been editing here for long, but I recently overhauled the Quintus Sertorius page. I understand the points about summary style, but how much should I cut it down? It stands a bit above 9,000 words as of now (which the size page notes is worthy of cutting down), and Sertorius is not a 'major' figure in Roman history like Caesar that can really justify such a large article. I just have a passionate interest in him and thus wrote that much. I would appreciate some recommendations! Should I merge my writings into that of the Sertorian War, perhaps?

As well, what is the process for getting an article reviewed for its content? Sertorius was C-level when I began editing, and I would be interested in seeing what grade it is now after my edits. I admittedly have a lot to learn, but I think I have improved the article from its earlier state. Thank you! Harren the Red (talk) 22:32, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

@Harren the Red: Well, one thing is that the "Sertorian War" section is far too long. It's supposed to be a relatively brief summary (maybe a couple of paragraphs) of the main article Sertorian War, not a separate full treatment of the war. If any of the sourced information there is not already in the main article, you can move it into that article. Deor (talk) 00:20, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the information! I'll start cross-referencing and seeing what I can port over. Harren the Red (talk) 00:26, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi, Harren the Red! The Classical Greece and Rome WikiProject is fairly active, so you can ask its participants at the WikProject's talk for better recommendations on trim the article or on a possible merge, or for an updated class assessment.

As a side note, class assessments are rather informal in my experience, unless taking the article through a formal review process like Good Articles and above (i.e. Featured Article). That may be why the WikiProject's requests for assessments hasn't been meaningfully updated since 2022. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 00:22, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for letting me know! I'll get in touch with that project specifically :) Harren the Red (talk) 00:26, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

@Harren the Red, you might want to take this one to WP:PR - tell them you're new, interested in taking this article through WP:GA if possible, and aware that you need to cut things down but not sure what needs the most cutting. You obviously have the interest and skills to be able to take this to Good Article status, and some targetted advice from editors who are used to the content review processes will probably be very helpful for you. Of course, read the GA guidelines first and do what you can to clean it up with them in mind first. Good luck and welcome! -- asilvering (talk) 00:30, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

User box

How do i put user box in my membership page like many member .Thank you Junurita (talk) 00:06, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

. . . in what's called your "user page", Junurita. Please see Wikipedia:Userboxes#Using existing userboxes. -- Hoary (talk) 02:20, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

I dont understand what you said.I only want to create user boxes in my membership page😄. Junurita (talk) 08:43, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello Junurita. We do not have anything called a "membership page". I'm guessing (and Hoary was guessing) that you mean what we call your "user page" User:Junurita. ColinFine (talk) 09:35, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

You're right.Thamk you. Junurita (talk) 10:33, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

😅 Junurita (talk) 10:34, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Redirect disclaimer

How do I write a message that says "_____ redirects here. For the _______, see _______."? TrevortniDesserpedx (talk) 01:51, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

@Trevortnidesserped: {{Redirect}} Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 02:14, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Changing draft title

How can I do such a task? As my title possesses a spelling error. WikiPhil012 (talk) 02:44, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

@WikiPhil012 renaming a draft is usually not necessary, as the reviewer will choose a suitable title if the draft is accepted. However, if you would still like to do it, follow the directions at Help:How to move a page. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 02:58, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the useful response. WikiPhil012 (talk) 03:15, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Done. -- Hoary (talk) 05:19, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

how to write in wikipedia

how to write in wikipedia JAYDEEPNIMAVAT1518 (talk) 04:14, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

@JAYDEEPNIMAVAT1518 Welcome to wikipedia! For detailed instructions on how to write articles, check out Help:Your first article and Wikipedia:The perfect article. Hope this helps! Sir MemeGod ._. (talk - contribs - created articles) 04:31, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

More generally, see WP:TUTORIAL. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:43, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

To add to what GGS said: My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft.. ColinFine (talk) 09:37, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Remove a redirect

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 - I'm trying to create a separate Wiki page for Elitechrome, a brand of Kodak 35mm film. At present there is a redirect from Ektachrome so I can't just set up Elitechrome as it's own product page (it is a separate product). So any time I search for Elitechrome it just redirects to Ektachrome. How do I remove the redirect so that I can write a new page and put some pictures up for Elitechrome? Thanks. SnarkyDragon (talk) 06:44, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi @SnarkyDragon, when you open the page Elitechrome you will be redirected as you mentioned, but a notice will appear at the top of the page:

(Redirected from Elitechrome)

Click on the link and you will be sent to the origin of the redirect, which you can then edit.

Before editing, please make sure the product fulfills the notability requirements for products. Broc (talk) 06:49, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks Broc - I got as far as that but couldn't see where the redirect was in the source - the words Elite Chrome don't seem to have any code next to them. SnarkyDragon (talk) 06:52, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Replace the text "#REDIRECT [[Ektachrome]]" with your new article. Meters (talk) 06:57, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks v much! SnarkyDragon (talk) 06:58, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Ah no I've tried and failed. May have to give up on this one and just edit the main Ektachrome page with details of Elitechrome. Trying to remove or bypass the redirect has me stumped. SnarkyDragon (talk) 07:07, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello SnarkyDragon, and welcome to the Teahouse. What you are trying to do is precisely to create a new article, which is a very challenging task - the fact that the page already exists as a redirect does not change that. I would very strongly advise that, as a newish editor, you do not attempt to create the article in the existing redirect page,but create a draft and submit it in the normal way.

My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft. ColinFine (talk) 09:43, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, I do understand that but it still doesn’t allow me to create a new article as the title I want to create is linked as a redirect so I can’t physically create a new article and I don’t want to waste the time and energy drafting something only to find I can’t actually create a page because nobody has explained how to remove the redirect. SnarkyDragon (talk) 09:46, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

And I am very strongly advising you not to attempt to create a new article at this stage without going through the WP:AFC drafting process. If you use that, you won't have to worry about the redirect, because the reviewer who accepts the draft will sort out the redirect.

The "waste of time" that you are imagining is a chimera - the existence of a redirection will not affect the creation of an article about Elitechrome. But the waste of time - yours and others' - in try to write an article when you have not (as far as we can tell) found the sources essential to establish that Elitechrome meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability may be significant.

If you have already found those sources, it may be a different matter: I would still advise a relatively new editor such as yourself to use AFC. But you could try going ahead and editing the redirect. ColinFine (talk) 10:42, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

You have a bizarre attitude.

My original comment was around redirects and barriers to creating a new article.

Now you're saying that if I don't do things in a certain way it's a waste of my time and others time. You mention about a WP:AFC drafting process in your latest comment, but not in your earlier comment (and nobody else commenting mentions this process) - so how exactly am I supposed to contribute to Wikipedia if the mods are gatekeepers and don't actually answer things specifically or in an accessible way?

Do please show me where I have written that I won't do anything in a way that's advised? But yes you dive straight in and tell me I'm wasting my and others time? I mean if that's the attitude of Wiki then literally why should I bother?

I do object to people acting high and mighty when I am asking simple questions about processes which could have been answered very simply and in a more accessible and less high and mighty way. SnarkyDragon (talk) 10:49, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Also Colin - 'you have not (as far as we can tell) found the sources essential to establish that Elitechrome meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability may be significant'

I was not aware that not providing evidence for an article I am considering writing constitutes evidence not existing? Also, who exactly is 'we'? And why does my original question not matter? You're bothered about 'evidence' and fixated on that rather than just answering my actual question. Why?

Are you now saying that when I have an idea for an article I need to produce a dossier of evidence to appease you (why you?) and prove that I am not wasting time?

What you're doing is acting in an extremely toxic way and I don't particularly understand why.

What is wrong with just answering the question I asked and trusting that maybe (just maybe) There IS a separate product which someone had considered writing about to improve knowledge on a subject.

https://www.kodak.com/global/plugins/acrobat/en/consumer/products/techInfo/e7014/e7014.pdf SnarkyDragon (talk) 11:15, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

@SnarkyDragon I don't see any edits to the redirect page. If you are using the Visual Editor, a pop-up will appear when you click "edit", you just need to deselect "Redirect this page to..." and press "Apply changes". If you are using the source code editor, as Meters suggested above, you only need to remove the text #REDIRECT [[Ektachrome]]. Broc (talk) 09:47, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

That’s because I haven’t made any yet, I don’t want to invest time and energy only to not be able to actually create the page I want to. SnarkyDragon (talk) 09:48, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

@SnarkyDragon You can create a draft (by using the Wikipedia:Article wizard for instance), then a page mover will be able to replace the redirect with your draft at a later point. Replacing a redirect is a routine procedure so don't let it be an obstacle to your contribution. Broc (talk) 09:53, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Ah ok - so are page movers actual human mods or wiki automated processes? And how do I flag that I’ve made a draft and it’s ready for review? Thanks SnarkyDragon (talk) 09:57, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

@SnarkyDragon Yes to your first question. As for the review process: you will find a button "Submit draft for review" on the draft page you create via the article wizard. An experienced editor will then review it and, if it fulfills verifiability and notability criteria, will move it to mainspace. Broc (talk) 10:56, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for your suggestions but now with Colins response I have a deeper understanding of the type of people who run and moderate Wikipedia and I'm not sure I want to invest any more of my time or energy - I'll be picking this up elsewhere. SnarkyDragon (talk) 10:58, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

@SnarkyDragon for what it's worth, neither ColinFine nor I "run and moderate Wikipedia". There is no such thing as a moderator here. There is a community who built policies using consensus, and there are a few elected members, called administrators, who usually take responsibility of interpreting the outcome of discussions and implementing it (they can block users, delete pages, etc.).

ColinFine's suggestion was simple: creating a new, well written article is difficult. That's why we have the WP:AFC (Articles for Creation) process, where you can take the time to edit a draft article, get feedback from reviewers, and only get the article published once it's ready. This way, you can take all the time you need, and readers of the encyclopedia will get to enjoy a good article. The AFC process was devised to help new editors with drafting their very first article, and I agree with the recommendation of using it.

If you think writing a new article is a difficult task you are not yet ready to take on, Wikipedia:Task Center has many simpler, but not less useful, tasks that can also be performed by inexperienced users. Broc (talk) 11:16, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Please read my comment and you may have some understanding as to why I viewed Colins comment as purely and simply toxic - and there are some outstanding questions I have asked in my comment relating to that toxicity. SnarkyDragon (talk) 11:17, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

And I wish to write an article - I wish not to be gaslighted into being told I cannot. I thought that the Teahouse was somewhere supportive but clearly it is not and I am now gaining an understanding of the gatekeeping and control of knowledge on wikipedia. SnarkyDragon (talk) 11:18, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

@SnarkyDragon I'm pinging ColinFine just to make sure he reads the discussion.

I'd like to mention that Teahouse hosts are only here to help new users in good faith. We don't want to discourage new users, so I'm sorry if you felt that way! That being said, I don't see any personal attack in ColinFine's message, only a suggestion to use a process (WP:AFC) that, as I said already, was meant to help new users in drafting their first article.

So please, if you do wish to write an article, go ahead and start a draft! Feel free to drop me a message if you ever have any questions: I am a new page reviewer, so I can provide you with some guidance on what we are looking for in new articles.

If you want to learn more on Wikipedia's guidelines on writing articles, you can also read Help:Your first article. Broc (talk) 11:25, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

I’ve also emailed various stakeholders about this, I’m not a child and will not be treated as such. SnarkyDragon (talk) 11:27, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Colin’s message was toxic and I require an answer to each and every point that I have reasonably made in my reply to him. He needs to be accountable and answer fully especially the questions I have posed asking ‘why’. SnarkyDragon (talk) 11:29, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia is a volunteer service, nobody is "required" to answer you. We are all spending our time to help other editors as much and as far as we decide to, with no further obligations. Broc (talk) 11:39, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

And I can say the same about trying to contribute when people aren't especially helpful - all I ultimately wanted was to contribute to Wikipedia and wanted some advice on that. SnarkyDragon (talk) 11:48, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

I think I gave abundant support in my messages above. If you decide to contribute (and I hope you will), you are more than welcome to reach out for guidance.

Fighting with fellow editors, on the other hand, will not be constructive for anyone and it will certainly not help improve the encyclopedia. Broc (talk) 11:58, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

I'm not trying to fight at all - but it was reasonable to ask for justification why I was being spoken to like that - there were some exceptionally unhelpful things said to me. Yes, you did give support and for that I am thankful. SnarkyDragon (talk) 12:07, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

SnarkyDragon, I'm sorry if I came over as toxic: that was not at all my intention.

My intention was to warn you against a path which my experience of helping hundreds of new editors tells me is likely to result in pain and frustration, both for those new editors and sometimes for those who try to help them.

I certainly did not intend to dissuade you from contributing, and I'm sorry if I came over that way. ColinFine (talk) 12:25, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

@SnarkyDragon: I don't think this explicitly came up yet, but articles that don't cite sources meeting Wikipedia's notability guidelines are deleted. I think this is something understood by active editors but confusing for new editors. If you start out by editing Ektachrome, you can gather the sources for your new article in the process. There's no technical problem with converting a redirect into an article; it happens all the time. Feel free to reach out if you have questions, Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 04:54, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks SnarkyDragon (talk) 05:07, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

back to the original question

SnarkyDragon, this seems to have gone astray from your original help request, so let's see if we can do a reset to get it back on track. Broc's original explanation at the top (@ 06:44) is the way I always do it also, but if that doesn't work for you, the click this link and it will take you to the redirect page. You are welcome to edit it and change it into an article, but that's an involved procedure even for a very short article, and your idea of expanding the section about it at Ektachrome is a better (and easier) idea. I would go that route for starters. Once that section hits critical mass—which is around a couple of paragraphs and a minimum of three very solid citations to reliable, independent, secondary sources—then come back here and ask about how to spin off an article section into a new article. "Reliable" in the Wikipedia sense means a lot of things, but no blogs or social media or sketchy websites for starters; a book chapter or an article in a reputable magazine like Popular Photography devoted to it would be a good start. "Independent" means mostly not from Kodak websites, but follow the link for more detail. Do you need help finding reliable sources, or writing citations, or do you know how to do that already? Help:Referencing for beginners might help for the latter. Mathglot (talk) 19:48, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, that is very helpful and I will have a think SnarkyDragon (talk) 04:01, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

I’ve decided to give up with wiki. See my other comments. I can’t be bothered with the toxicity. But thank you for commenting. SnarkyDragon (talk) 19:41, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello - I just ran into this problem for my Patch management draft. There is already an existing redirect at Patch management. Luckily you can just follow the steps at Article wizard using your intended article name as Broc suggested, and automated software (/admins?) will take care of the redirect page once your article is accepted. Tule-hog (talk) 01:13, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you SnarkyDragon (talk) 04:02, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

I’ve decided to give up with wiki after your admin Michael has behaved in a toxic way and reverted another article as retribution for calling this behaviour out. I have contacted the wiki team but doubt they will do anything. It is clear that wiki only wants to work with it’s closed network and not encourage new people to edit for free in their own time and provide true content. SnarkyDragon (talk) 19:40, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

SnarkyDragon, thats fine, and you are of course free to give up on Wikipedia if that is your choice, but I am trying to follow your reasoning, and I wasn't able to. Help me out, here: there are no edits to Elitechrome or Ektachrome since your first post here, nobody named Michael has posted in this thread afaict, and we don't have an admin named Michael. (There is a user account for a "Michael", but they were banned in 2003.) I see no reverts to any of your edits since this one on June 26. So, who is Michael? Mathglot (talk) 20:09, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

I have literally screenshotted David NotMD saying in his edit that unreferenced facts has been removed, yet he actually deleted everything including my references which had been present! How is that reasonable/ethical/defensible?

The Michael is Michael D.Turnbull who literally admitted that I was responded to based on my username and has not at all addressed the issues of toxicity on wiki which I have raised - here is a link to an article which resonates with me more having actually experienced the behaviours/tactics here.

https://academic.oup.com/pnasnexus/article/2/12/pgad385/7457939 SnarkyDragon (talk) 20:13, 17 July 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.

Expand Article

Hi, this is a political party in pakistan please help to expand more things Hazara Quami Mahaz Pakistan Janabanigu (talk) 08:10, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello. What help is it that you are seeking? 331dot (talk) 08:14, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

actually article needs more detailing and there is also an incident which should be added.https://www.dawn.com/news/1401278 Janabanigu (talk) 08:16, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Janabanigu, is your idea that you (i) think of a subject that doesn't have an article, (ii) create a stub about the subject, and then (iii) hope that other people will do the hard work of turning this stub into an article worth reading? Most people at the "teahouse" know little about the politics of X (where X is almost any nation, such as Pakistan), have no particular interest in the matter, and are likely to be unenthusiastic about reading up on it. Suggestion: You might create fewer but better articles. (The good quality of such an article might inspire other editors to read up on the subject and make improvements.) -- Hoary (talk) 08:23, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your feedback @Hoary I understand your concern and will aim to create fewer , but higher quality articles in the future. In hopes of inspiring more engagement and contributions from other editors Janabanigu (talk) 08:27, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Since creating your account on 10 July you have been busy creating short drafts and submitting to AfC, with some accepted (as stubs and orphans) and some declined as not qualifying for WP:NPOL or general notability. I concur that quality needs more attention. David notMD (talk) 11:45, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Trouble submitting an article

Hello everyone,

I have trouble successfully uploading the article of the artist "Jeewi Lee". Apparently the submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. Jeewi Lee is an artist, who had international exhibitions, has galleries representing her in Dakar, Berlin and New York. She has been exhibited in well known institutions such as "Gropius Bau" and "Hamburger Bahnhof". Further, a book about her works has been published by publisher Hatje Cantz (https://www.hatjecantz.de/products/65857-jeewi-lee). Why does she not qualify for a Wikipedia Article? I added many referenced to proof the information stated in the wikipedia-article. What else can I do so the article is published?

It would be great to receive feedback and help from you.

Thank you in advance!

Best wishes 123creativeuser 123creativeuser (talk) 13:12, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

@123creativeuser I think that the main problem is that your sources are websites like Sexauer, which are galleries trying to promote the artist and, ultimately, make money from her. Thus they are not independent. What we need to be convinced that Lee is Wikinotable is to read that people who have no connection to her have noted her work and commented on it without prompting by her or her agents. A long list of her exhibitions doesn't help: that's what her own website would cover, not Wikipedia. So, cut all that and focus on material about her meeting these criteria. You may find this essay helpful. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:33, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Can I make my own page?

I don't know how to :/ SillyBilly13 (talk) 14:45, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

@SillyBilly13 Welcome to the Teahouse. If you wish to create a page about your involvement with editing Wikipedia, click on your red username above and create the page. Pease ensure it conforms to the user page policy. If you are thinking that Wikipedia is the ideal place for your autobiography, it is probably not. Please see WP:AUTO. Shantavira|^{feed me} 15:13, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

@SillyBilly13 If you want to create an article, I recommend that you first edit a few already-existing articles to get the hang of editing Wikipedia. Then you may check out Help:Your first article! Apmh (talk) 15:28, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

I need help to edit a new timeline can you help?

Timeline of presidents of USA 2607:FEA8:3FE1:D900:3888:5E6B:161A:4AF (talk) 15:37, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. Could you elaborate on your question? If you're trying to make a new article, you may be looking for List of presidents of the United States or History of the United States. — Amph (my talk page, my contributions) 15:48, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Advice on new page

Hi,

Could I get recommendations/advice on how I can further improve this page?:

Extended content

Teahouse Jeremie Luong at Vietnam National Championship Personal information Full name Luong Jérémie Loïc Nino National team Vietnam Born (2000-07-25) July 25, 2000 Châtenay-Malabry, France Height 1.94 m (6 ft 4 in) Weight 83 kg (183 lb) Sport Sport Swimming Strokes Butterfly, freestyle Club Cercle Paul Bert Rennes, France College team Michigan Wolverines swimming and diving Coach Mathieu Burban Medal record Men's swimming Representing Vietnam ASEAN School Games 2017 Vietnam 200 m individual medley 2017 Vietnam 400 m individual medley 2017 Vietnam 50 m backstroke Southeast Asian Games 2021 Vietnam 4 x 100 m freestyle 2021 Vietnam 4 x 100 m medley 2021 Vietnam 100 m freestyle 2021 Vietnam 50 m freestyle 2023 Cambodia 4 x 100 m freestyle 2023 Cambodia 100 m freestyle 2023 Cambodia 50 m freestyle Luong Jérémie Loïc Nino (born 25 July 2000) is a male athlete of the Vietnam national swimming team. Having won the Gold Medal for team Vietnam at the 31st Southeast Asian Games in the 4x100 m freestyle Relay and silver in the 100 m freestyle, Luong holds multiple national records. Career Early life Luong was born on July 25, 2000, in Châtenay-Malabry, France to a Vietnamese mother and a French father. Growing up in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam, he attended the British International School Ho Chi Minh City. Luong started swimming in 2009 at the Yết Kiêu Aquatics Center, and joined the Vietnamese national swimming team in 2018. He later committed to swim for the University of Michigan, starting with the class of 2022. Swimming career In 2020, Luong transferred to Cercle Paul Bert in Rennes where he trains with his coach Mathieu Burban. In 2023, he qualified and participated in the 50 m freestyle, 100 m freestyle, and 50 m butterfly at the 2023 World Aquatics Championships in Fukuoka, Japan. Honors and awards Victorix Ludorum (Overall Player of the Year), awarded by British International school HCMC: 2018 Bằng khen của Thủ tướng chính phủ nước Việt Nam (Certificate of Merite from the Prime Minister of Viet Nam): 2022 Philanthropy Luong organized a toothpaste collection drive at the British International school in Ho Chi Minh city, which resulted in over 3,000 toothpastes collected for a medical expedition to Quảng Nam province. References

 Luong.alois (talk) 17:38, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Luong.alois I don't think editors here at the Teahouse will give you inputs on how to improve the content of the page, as most of us are likely not experts in Vietnamese swimming. The page seems well-written and sourced. As you declared a COI with the subject, you must go through the Articles for Creation process, where an experienced editor will review the page before approving it for mainspace. Go to Wikipedia:Articles for creation, click the blue button "Click here to start a new article" and follow the procedure. Broc (talk) 20:34, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Table column header caption

I have added a column to a table, but the column header cell does not take style (background color, font boldness) and is not like the other columns. Please see the table https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raptor_Lake#Raptor%20Lake-U%20Refresh

I added the column "Release date" but it is not bold and the background is not as in the other column headers.

How can I have done that properly?

Can you please do the modification so I could see what you done to know what should I have done? Maxim Masiutin (talk) 17:49, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi Maxim Masiutin. Header cells have ! instead of |.[4] Header cells and normal cells can be anywhere in a table. It's not something automatic for the first row. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:06, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! These two characters look very similar and are easy to miss, that's what happened in my case. Thank you for your help. Now I will know. Maxim Masiutin (talk) 11:42, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

how to put an article about a music group as the artist

hi, I am new and unsure how to get information about our music duo on to wikipedia? Theresa.bentley (talk) 18:49, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi; writing about yourself isn't what Wikipedia is for. AntiDionysius (talk) 18:50, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Draft:The Bentley Project - Music Duo was Speedy deleted as being advertising/promotional. See WP:NMUSIC for criteria for music notability. In theory, your group will in time be so famous and written about that someone with no personal or paid connection will craft an article. David notMD (talk) 22:23, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Help to fix a declined page

Hello dear editors, I meticulously worked to create a draft of my page but it got deleted. Could anyone please help me fix the issues? I am pasting the link here.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Dessy_Ocean Sehar Awais (talk) 19:52, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

If Draft:Dessy Ocean had been deleted, you wouldn't be able to see it. It hasn't been deleted, or even rejected. If the subject is notable, you're welcome to improve the draft and to resubmit it. But I struggle to see any sign of notability. -- Hoary (talk) 20:26, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

thank you for your feedback.I will try to find some more reliable sources to get it approved Sehar Awais (talk) 12:06, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Sehar Awais, the draft did not get deleted, but only declined. The reasons are explained at the top of the page: the draft you wrote does not show the subject's notability because it does not contain reliable, independent, secondary sources providing significant coverage of the subject. You can add such sources to the article, if they exist, and then resubmit it.

Have a look at Help:Your first article where all of this is explained in detail, and let me know if you have further questions. Broc (talk) 20:27, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Looking to make article a neutral point of view

I am looking to make this article CLNS a neutral point of view, as it got declined. I thought it was all neutral, and I'm not sure what parts of the article don't seem neutral. I think I need to work on my references as it probably refers to having primary references instead of secondary but unsure on which ones to change.

Any help would be greatly appreciated Richielemay29 (talk) 20:27, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your candor about being paid, Richielemay29. As just one sample, Draft:CLNS Media tells us "CLNS Media has played a role in covering significant Boston sports events over the past decade". Has it covered them? If so, then "CLNS Media covered...". If not, then what was this "role"? We can assume that what's insignificant goes without mention, so cut "significant". "Over the past decade" has built-in obsolescence. The humdrum section within which this sentence appears has no reference. Et cetera. -- Hoary (talk) 20:47, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the help, I fixed that line. Would you recommend I remove any references that seem to be primary? Richielemay29 (talk) 21:03, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

I think you'd better put this draft aside for a moment while you attend to more pressing matters. Is c:File:URX5Gm55 400x400.jpg (the company logo) really your own work, so that you, personally, are in a position to copyleft it? -- Hoary (talk) 21:12, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

it's the companys work yes, which I stated I am apart of Richielemay29 (talk) 22:13, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

The reason we're asking, @Richielemay29, is that when you upload something to Wikimedia Commons (as you've done with the logo), you are giving permission for anyone to use it for anything, including editing it however they want and slapping it on whatever they like. This is usually something companies really don't like, because they want their logo to belong to them and only be on things they approve. Besides that, if you are not the artist who originally designed it, you most likely do not own the copyright to it - and the artist may also have some opinions on what people can do with their work. W're trying to make sure you and your company (and the original artist, if that's not you) don't get a very unpleasant surprise someday if someone does decide to have fun with the logo - which they can, under the terms it's currently uploaded under.

There are other options for uploading the logo that don't involve allowing it to be reused, and you might want to use those options instead. For those you would need to wait until the draft is accepted, but I promise that having the company logo or not having it won't make any difference to whether it's accepted or not! The draft stage is to get the article's bones looking good; once it's been accepted you can enjoy adding frills like infoboxes and logos and whatnot. Right now the text and sources are what's important. StartGrammarTime (talk) 23:50, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

A complete outsider's observations here - The lead is ALL jargon. It tells me almost nothing. "Media Talent" sounds wanky. HiLo48 (talk) 00:00, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

I think the lead is trying to say that the subject is a web site. Most, maybe all, of the site's content is about the Boston Celtics basketball team, though this isn't mentioned in the lead. Maproom (talk) 08:07, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Richielemay. The mistake you are making with the content - as many new editors do, especially ones who have a connection with the subject - is that you are writing what the company wants people to know - even when you are thinking you are writing bald facts.

Wikipedia does not care in the slightest what the company wants people to know - its own website or Facebook page is the place for that, not Wikipedia.

What Wikipedia cares about, almost exclusively, is what other people, wholly unconnected with the company, have chosen to publish about it - even if the company really doesn't like what they've said. Every single claim in the article should be citable to a reliable published source, and the great majority of them to sources wholly unconnected with the company; and those sources must not be cherry-picked for favorable presentation. (I'm not saying that there are sources which are critical of CLNS: I have no idea, and I haven't looked. But it is the duty of a Wikipedia editor writing an article to look for and use such sources if they exist). ColinFine (talk) 09:22, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

No stashed content found

I have tried repeatedly today to publish after an edit on an article. I get this: No stashed content found for 1228854049/e4392273-3ffd-11ef-a418-cd2fe938f0ef. What does that mean? Beingherenow2 (talk) 20:39, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Beingherenow2. Unfortunately that means the visual editor has been open for too long, and the cache has emptied. Any work you had in the editor has not been saved and cannot be recovered.

To avoid this, make sure to "Publish Changes" often, backup your text in another application, or use the source editor which doesn't seem to have this issue. Qcne (talk) 20:51, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

THANK YOU! That explains it. Fortunately it was just some minor things. Beingherenow2 (talk) 21:06, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

removing links and source flags.

Hi There, a couple questions on the biography page for Jessie Henderson that I wrote. I got a notification that I may not have the proper sources for the page. Is there a way I can know which cited links might be causing the flag? I tried removing some sources but it won't let me remove only update the information of the source. How can I delete a source? As a back up is there a way for me to delete the biography page if I am not able to get this clarified? Nenarodz (talk) 22:09, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

So, Nenarodz, in this little series of edits you added a three-minute interview on Youtube as the reference for, for, for -- uh, you don't say what it's for, and you deleted the "notability" flag. For a start, attach that (rather dubious) reference to this or that assertion or a number of them. Putting aside the propriety of removing bits of an article, you ought to be able to delete any part of an article: what exactly is the problem you face when you attempt to do so? -- Hoary (talk) 23:16, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi there, appreciate your response but was simply asking for assistance as I am very new to this platform, I didn't ask for the sarcasm that was added to your message. Very unneeded. I didn't realize the source didn't properly load, will make sure it is adjusted properly. I figured out how to remove the flag after I posted this, but happy to make any further adjustments to references. When I go to edit references it doesn't give me the option to completely remove any references it only allows me to make edits to the pre-existing ones. I can remove any part of article minus references for some reason, unless I'm doing it wrong or missing something. Nenarodz (talk) 23:25, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

I'm still mystified, Nenarodz. But perhaps you're using the "visual editor" or even the "app": I've never used either, because (after a rather mystified first ten minutes or so) I've never had trouble with the "source editor". Perhaps somebody accustomed to the "visual editor" will recognize and understand the problem you're facing, and give useful advice. ¶ Youtube references tend to be frowned on, for copyright-related reasons. That doesn't seem to be an issue here. What's likely to be an issue is that this Youtube video is an interview (or similar). A person isn't a disinterested source about herself or what she has done; what Wikipedia wants is commentary about the subject from reliable, disinterested sources. -- Hoary (talk) 23:57, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Nenarodz! So Wikipedia is a little bit tricky here - it got me too when I was starting out - the references are in the body of the article, not the reference section. If you click the little up arrow thing (^) next to the reference you're trying to change/remove, it will take you to the part of the article where the reference is used. You then edit that part of the article, specifically the bit that starts with <ref> (after the sentence the reference is attached to). Does that help at all? StartGrammarTime (talk) 23:59, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

@Nenarodz: Regarding, "When I go to edit references it doesn't give me the option to completely remove any references it only allows me to make edits to the pre-existing ones." On the Visual Editor, you'll need to edit the text where the inline citation's superscript callout is located.^{[this bit]} You just delete it like you'd delete text. If you click down in the references section, you can modify a reference but not add, remove, or replace one. It's a software limitation. The ability to modify the references from the reference section was only added last year. It has to do with how and where the references are defined in the wikitext source. The Visual Editor is a lot easier to get started with, but it has a lot of little limitations like this. Feel free to ask questions if that's not clear, Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 04:35, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Blacklisted sites

Hello! My understanding is that there's a list somewhere of websites we are not allowed to link to, or cite, in articles. Can someone tell me where to find the list? Thanks! Wafflewombat (talk) 22:39, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

@Wafflewombat: See m:Spam_blacklist. Fabrickator (talk) 23:10, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

@Wafflewombat: There is both the global meta:Spam blacklist for all Wikimedia wikis and the local MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist for the English Wikipedia. The software prevents saving of edits which try to link a blacklisted site. We also have Wikipedia:Deprecated sources which may not be blocked from saving but generally shouldn't be used as sources in articles. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:52, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

@Wafflewombat, you may also be looking for WP:RSPSS which tells you whether certain sources are considered reliable or otherwise. Between the three of us hopefully you've found it! StartGrammarTime (talk) 00:02, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia front page - specifically the "On this day" article

Do the events shown in the "On this day" article on the front page of Wikipedia (Main Page) repeat every year? Or do you change them out with different facts and events? 159.196.168.46 (talk) 00:20, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia! You can learn about how the "On this day" section is developed at WP:OTD. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email) 01:42, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Need help improving Biography for Henry Beach Needham

Hi, I posted my first bio Draft:Henry Beach Needham and it said it would take 4 months to publish. I would like help with edits and approval. It is for muckraking investigative journalist, Henry Beach Needham. Logger67 (talk) 00:34, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Er, not quite, Logger67. You're told that it may take four months or longer merely to be reviewed (whereupon it will be accepted, declined or rejected). But underline the "may" within that. I've a hunch that it will be gratefully accepted, and that the process will take very much less than four months. In the meantime, a note:

• "Charivari" is an odd word. -- OK.
• Charivari is an odd word. -- OK.
• "Charivari" is an odd word. -- Strange: italicizing shouldn't merely duplicate quotation marks (or vice versa).

I suggest that you deitalicize the numerous long quotations. (Of course, newspaper titles and the like constituting mere parts of those quotations can remain italicized.) HTH. -- Hoary (talk) 01:10, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

The backlog of drafts is not a queue, so could be days, weeks, or (sadly) months before it is reviewed. David notMD (talk) 01:33, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! I updated the page and in the actual citations for the parts of the article that I cited, I removed the "italics" and just made it italics. I wasn't able to figure out how to remove the Find a Grave citation from the main reference list. I did remove [better source] citations in the text body by deleting them - was a little confused there. Thanks again for the help and info. Logger67 (talk) 02:55, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

serious {trout}

I am wondering if there is a standard template similar to

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

except it is to be taken seriously - preferably with a modifiable message. That is, a template for an important critique (but maintaining a little levity). Tule-hog (talk) 01:04, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

The lower half of Template:Like/doc has a dizzying number of templates; see also Wikipedia:Template index/User talk namespace and Wikipedia:Template index/Talk namespace. -- Hoary (talk) 01:16, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Perfect! Thanks for all the links. {{subst:uw:minor}} was exactly what I was looking for. Tule-hog (talk) 01:32, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

@Tule-hog: If you use Twinkle, it has a number of standardised templates. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:22, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

How do I request for an article to be expanded?

I went to the joint article to find information about the individual parts of a joint, but there isn't any, there aren't even links to articles for those parts. Considering that I am there exactly to find the missing information, I feel unqualified to be the one adding that.

In any case, now I find myself wandering through different forums to search for a place for requesting expansion, yet I can't seem to locate one. I would appreciate some pointers, thank you.

(Edit:there were links in the category section, but still, a summary would be nice)—Mint Keyphase (Did I mess up? What have I done?) 03:12, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! I would normally start by asking a question on the article talk page, but if it looks a bit quiet there, the next step might be the talk page for WikiProject Anatomy. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email) 03:20, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Okay, I will head there now, thanks. —Mint Keyphase (Did I mess up? What have I done?) 03:22, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

How do i get this revision oversighted

It appears to have some personal info in it, and I can't email the oversight team right now due to screen time limits. BombCraft8 (talk) 04:32, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi BombCraft8. I've requested oversight. There are many methods to contact the OS team listed at WP:RFO. Thank you for noticing and reaching out, but please do not link to oversightable material. The goal is to spread it as little as possible while getting OS attention. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 04:48, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

ok thx

will be sure to remember

i think this is streisand effect but unsure BombCraft8 (talk) 04:50, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Pretty much. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 04:52, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

List AfC in WikiProject

Following the instructions to add WikiProject tags to a new article draft only seems to add the article's talk page to be tracked in 'Recent changes', but does not list the article in the WikiProject's homepage Articles for creation subheader under article alerts. Is there a way to be automatically added to those lists, or is it done manually? Tule-hog (talk) 04:52, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

@Tule-hog: It is done automatically by the bot, AAlertBot, but not immediately. Check the pages later today. It looks like they should be updated a little over 2 hours from now. Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 05:04, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

i figured it might be a delayed refresh. thanks for linking the bot as well :) Tule-hog (talk) 06:05, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Citation formatting question

I don't know where to start formatting my citation in the page for SEATO. It's a declassified US military document called United States – Vietnam Relations, 1945–1967: A Study Prepared by the Department of Defense with a subsection NATO AND SEATO: A COMPARISON.

I first found a scan copy on https://nara-media-001.s3.amazonaws.com/arcmedia/research/pentagon-papers/Pentagon-Papers-Part-IV-A-1.pdf, but there is also a text version on WikiSource. Assistance much appreciated and sort of needed. RFNirmala (talk) 05:24, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Make sure to click 'Ask a question' at the top of the page to start a new topic. You currently have asked a question on an unrelated question above yours! The 'unsubscribe'/'subscribe' button exists for each topic. Tule-hog (talk) 05:51, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello RFNirmala,

* {{Cite report |url=https://nara-media-001.s3.amazonaws.com/arcmedia/research/pentagon-papers/Pentagon-Papers-Part-IV-A-1.pdf |title=United States – Vietnam Relations, 1945–1967 |publisher=Department of Defense |volume=IV. A. 1. |language=en |quote=it is interesting that Dulles was so concerned with avoiding a public identification of SEATO with NATO that he tried to have the new treaty called 'MANPAC,' for 'Manila Pact.' |quote-page=A-14 |section=NATO and SEATO: A Comparison |section-url=https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/United_States_–_Vietnam_Relations,_1945–1967:_A_Study_Prepared_by_the_Department_of_Defense/IV._A._1._U.S._MAP_for_Diem:_The_Eisenhower_Commitments,_1954–1960}}

Generates:

• "NATO and SEATO: A Comparison". United States – Vietnam Relations, 1945–1967 (PDF) (Report). Vol. IV. A. 1. Department of Defense. p. A-14: it is interesting that Dulles was so concerned with avoiding a public identification of SEATO with NATO that he tried to have the new treaty called 'MANPAC,' for 'Manila Pact.'

Hope that helps. |archive-url= is for online webpage archive services. |section-url= lets you give a second URL to link a |section= within a larger work. Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 06:02, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Already added your citation in the article, also added a new sentence for the quoted information. Thanks for cleaning my new topic mishap! RFNirmala (talk) 06:47, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Edit Request Other Language Wikipedia

I have a small edit request for the Hebrew Wikipedia because I'm not sure how to do it myself. Do they have a teahouse there where I can ask? Can I make the request here? Thank you. MaskedSinger (talk) 09:01, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

The Hebrew Wikipedia(as well as any other language Wikipedia) is a separate project, so you will need to ask about editing its articles there. The best place is probably article talk pages; I'm not sure if they have a Teahouse, but they have a Help Desk. 331dot (talk) 09:20, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. Ill go there. MaskedSinger (talk) 09:20, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

@MaskedSinger: Wikipedia:Local Embassy#Hebrew suggests asking User:Amire80. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:18, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks MaskedSinger (talk) 16:22, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

I see that you've already got a reply. Did you need anything else? Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 18:53, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Yes thanks @Amire80

If the 3rd link (his english website) in the external links section could please be edited to https://liorsuchard.com/

I thought I could do it myself but it seems far trickier than I imagined. Thanks. MaskedSinger (talk) 06:17, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

@MaskedSinger: You apparently refer to he:ליאור סושרד#קישורים חיצוניים. It's hard to navigate a wiki in a script I don't know and right-to-left scripts confuse the hell out of me but the article appears to use a template which pulls data from the Wikidata item Lior Suchard (Q6795350). PrimeHunter (talk) 22:48, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

I think it's OK now. Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 00:44, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

@Amire80 It's almost there. If the www could please be removed. Thanks! MaskedSinger (talk) 06:26, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Why is it needed? It works with the www just as well. Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 11:43, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

@PrimeHunterme too! Hence I thought it best not to touch it and ask someone else to do it. MaskedSinger (talk) 06:27, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

I have removed www. at the Wikidata item. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:47, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Strange occurrence

I added a Further reading section, with two books, to Mona Lisa. The two books come out on the same line. Why? Maurice Magnus (talk) 10:26, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

You forgot to add a "space", fixed. Lectonar (talk) 10:38, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi Maurice Magnus. The normal formatting is a leading asterisk to make a bulleted list.[5] A single newline in wikitext is treated like a space unless there is something else causing a line break in the rendering. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:14, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. I am actually a long-time editor, and I knew to use an asterisk; I was merely careless in this case. But I didn't know that the asterisk prevented there being a space between the two lines, and I was wondering why there was a space between the two lines. I'm glad to have learned that. Maurice Magnus (talk) 12:21, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Old version of Teahouse content

An hour or so ago, I was viewing this page on my smartphone (Android, Chrome, configured to use desktop format), and noticed that all the postings were from February 2024. Now I'm back home using a computer, it's back to normal. I'd assume I'd been dreaming, but it's still like that on my smartphone – correct URL, February content. How can this happen? Maproom (talk) 11:36, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

@Maproom: What does it say at "This page was last edited on" at the bottom of the window? Is it possible the smartphone cached the page in February and you just have to reload the page? PrimeHunter (talk) 12:06, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi, have you tried bypassing your cache? Broc (talk) 12:07, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

It said "Last updated 24 February 2024". I'm sure I've read it on my smartphone mre recently than that. Anyway, I went from the Teahouse to another page, then to the Teahouse again, and it was fixed. It seems harmless, I'll stop worrying about it. Maproom (talk) 14:02, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Citation bundle confuses me

Can someone help me bundle the 4 citations in the first sentence of 1st paragraph and 2nd paragraph of the article Ada Wong? I cannot bundle a source that is already used; it's kinda tough. Many thanks. 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 12:53, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

What can I do better to add my company to Wikipedia?

• snipped* at User:GGCOMM/sandbox

Hello GGCOMM, try having a read of WP:BOSS. That should give you all the info you need. -- D'n'B-t -- 15:22, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Your account now blocked for multiple reasons. Follow the process for appealing your block. David notMD (talk) 21:06, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Help with substitution template Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of permanent Ambisonic playback systems

I have no idea what is going on, but the substitution on this page Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of permanent Ambisonic playback systems is not actually creating the discussion page. Can someone please assist? VViking_TalkEdits 14:13, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you Victor Schmidt mobil for helping with this.--VViking_TalkEdits 14:55, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi Viewmont Viking. In case it wasn't clear from the diff [6], [[WP:PROMOTION|a means of promotion]] was missing the ending ]]. A transclusion would also have failed. When the code of a template call is displayed instead of the output, the reason is usually a missing ]] or }} somewhere. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:26, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Incorrect Word Origin Help

Hi there! I need help with the Wikipedia page for the Tanawha Trail. I edited out this line:

"Tanawha, the Cherokee word for fabulous hawk or eagle is an appropriate name for this trail that offers hikers views of distant mountains."

It has since been reinstated. Tanawha is not a Cherokee word. Eagle is ᎤᏬᎭᎵ (uwohali.) Hawk is ᏔᏬᏗ (tawodi.) It's likely the person who wrote this got it from the National Park Service page about the trail, which is also wrong. The NPS person in charge of info about the Blue Ridge Parkway area is checking into it also. Now, this error may have originated with the NPS site, it shouldn't be perpetuated on Wikipedia. If you look at the page for Tanawha, Queensland, the word is sourced as a Maori word for a water guardian. That is the correct origin of the word.

I tried posting this on the Talk page, and also on the talk page of the user who reinstated the sentence, but I haven't gotten any responses. I'm new to the "backstage" area of Wikipedia, so I'm not sure where to go from here. What's next? Lostcheerio (talk) 15:11, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. If the sources provided in an article are in error, you will need to provide more current sources that provide better information, as well as address that with the existing sources(as you already are working on in this case). You should discuss this on the article talk page with other editors to decide how best to change the article. 331dot (talk) 15:19, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the response. I did post on the article's Talk page, ten days ago. The person who reinstated the incorrect information did so within 24 hours, but so far no response from him on the follow-up. As I understand the rules, it's the responsibility of the person who reinstates the false information to provide sources to back up that decision. Lostcheerio (talk) 15:59, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

@Lostcheerio, the source seems to be unverifiable, so I've removed and pinged the other editor to the talk. Valereee (talk) 16:38, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

That article reads like a brochure guide to the trail. In fact, there seems to be just one source, the US NPS brochure guide to the trail. My guess is, it more or less repeats the brochure. Yes, US Government, so in the public domain. But it's a brochure guide text, not an encyclopedia article. Uporządnicki (talk) 16:59, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Yes, it's basically a copy of the brochure, which is public domain and noted as such in the edit summary for the creation. It could use a copyedit for encyclopedic language. Valereee (talk) 17:05, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

OK, you agree, then, that there isn't a copyright concern--as I noted. It's still a travel brochure and hiking guide rather than an encyclopedia article. Uporządnicki (talk) 17:09, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Yep. That's why it needs a copyedit. Valereee (talk) 18:00, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you Valereee. Lostcheerio (talk) 17:12, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Policy on Doping? Neutrality/due weight.

I got two questions. If a swimmer hasn't been found guilty of doping. And Wada has stated that the swimmer is not found guilty of doping. Is it okay to name and shame and make an entire chapter dedicated to claiming that the swimmer is supposedly guilty and claiming they tested positive to doping despite nobody claims that? I think that's just libel to claim they are guilty of doping when Wada has not labelled them as guilty. It's undue and libel do I removed it. I also want to start a new talk discussion (on this topic) on this swimmer's page [7] but have no clue how to do that. Can you help me? 49.186.109.79 (talk) 17:55, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

ZenChen0, is there a reason you added this information to this article? Valereee (talk) 18:03, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

IP 49, I started a talk page section, and you should be able to use the reply button to respond. Since this is a relatively public venue, I'll say that ZenChen0's version is not definitely "libel", though this is a WP:BLP-sensitive matter and experienced voices would be welcome. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 18:25, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Most recent version of published draft

I cannot find the most recent version of my draft on the B Reactor Museum Association. I was working on it just 15 minutes ago when my browser crashed, and now I can only see the version from a few weeks ago. Is there any way I can get back all of my recent work? IImostwanted (talk) 18:59, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello, IImostwanted. I'm afraid that if you didn't "publish" (i.e. save) your changes, then Wikipedia hasn't got them. Your last saved edit to your sandbox was on 25 June. This is why many editors recommend saving your work reasonably often. ColinFine (talk) 20:11, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

@IImostwanted: Special:Contributions/IImostwanted shows no saved edits since June except your post here. If "Enable the Edit Recovery feature" is already enabled at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-editing then you may be able to recover unsaved text by using the same device and browser to edit the same page or going to Special:EditRecovery. If this doesn't work then your work is lost. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:20, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Alright, thank you! Didn't know I had to continuously publish. Will do. IImostwanted (talk) 20:54, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

"Continuously", no. But if you leave an edit window open for +24 hours, it may refuse to save your work. DS (talk) 01:46, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

I see! Thank you IImostwanted (talk) 04:32, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Put my edit back.

Dear Wikipedia Adminstrators,

Hello Teahouse community, I recently made an edit to the Bottlenose Dolphin Anatomy article, intending to enhance the comprehensive coverage of the dolphin's anatomy. I added information about various anatomical features such as the dorsal fin, fluke, belly, melon, blowhole, eye, beak, and median notch, supported by reliable sources. However, my edit was reverted, and I'm seeking guidance on how to proceed. Could someone please review my edit and provide feedback on why it might have been reverted? I want to ensure my contributions align with Wikipedia's guidelines and improve the article effectively. Thank you for your assistance! —Moosebag10 (chatter) 20:04, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Have you tried either posting on the article's talk page, or leaving a message on the talk page of the person who reverted you, asking why? DS (talk) 20:08, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Oh, and just so you know - this - is not acceptable. DS (talk) 20:12, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

@Moosebag10 Looking at the edit summary you put, "Leave this darn text here, add citations to it by time.", and the edit itself I can tell you right now that that's not going to be allowed on the page.

The burden of providing citations is on you, not on everyone else. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 20:13, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Moosebag10, and welcome to the Teahouse. This is exactly how disagreements between editors are supposed to be resolved: you Boldly make a change, somebody Reverts your change, and then you Discuss the issue on the talk page, and try to reach consensus: see WP:BRD.

Without looking in detail at your edit, I see that you added a significant amount of information , with no citations. That is probably why @Helpful Raccoon reverted it. ColinFine (talk) 20:14, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

(edit conflict) This is the exact reason why I also reverted Moosebag10's edit to the article, as I explained on their user talk page immediately afterwards. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:16, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

There is a source. Not a vexillological false edit.

Urs Truly and Please,

—Moosebag10 (chatter) 20:36, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Please put the thing back.

URS TRULY AND ONE MORE TIME I AM TYING YOU ON A PIÑATA,

—Moosebag10 (chatter) 20:41, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Now you made me angry… Moosebag10.exe (die) 20:42, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

I understand there may be concerns regarding his contributions. I want to clarify that He used AI tools like ChatGPT to assist in drafting content, with the intent of enhancing the Bottlenose Dolphin article. He apologized if there has been any confusion or upset caused by this.

He values the input and expertise of the Wikipedia community and am committed to adhering to Wikipedia's guidelines and policies. He kindly request a respectful dialogue to address any concerns and work together to improve the article collaboratively.

Thank you for your understanding. Moosebag10.helper (help him) 20:46, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello again, Moosebag10. I don't know what vexillology has to do with it. Nobody is arguing about whether the content you added is correct or not: that is not the point. All information in a Wikipedia article must be available in a reliable published source; and while the rules do not insist that everything actually be cited, if it is not, other editors are entitled to remove it.

The information you added is still there in the article's history. You are welcome to restore it as long as you cite a reliable source for it.

In any case, I would always advise adding information in smaller chunks than you did.

I get that you are frustrated. I'm afraid that that is what often happens when people attempt major edits to Wikipedia articles without first understanding Wikipedia's requirements. Please take the feedback you are getting as intended to help you understand how we work. ColinFine (talk) 20:44, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Dear ColinFine,

Thank you for your message and for clarifying the expectations regarding sourcing and editing on Wikipedia. I appreciate your guidance on ensuring all information is supported by reliable sources.

I apologize for any confusion or frustration caused by my recent edits. I understand the importance of adhering to Wikipedia's policies and will take your advice to heart moving forward. I will ensure that any restored content is properly sourced from reliable published sources.

If you have any further suggestions or specific guidelines for adding information in smaller chunks, I would appreciate your advice.

Thank you again for your help and understanding.

Best regards,

—Moosebag10 (chatter) 20:51, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

I have temporarily blocked Moosebag10 for disruptive editing. I advise the editor to stop using ChatGPT or similar software to compose their replies. We need to hear from the human being, not a robot. Cullen328 (talk) 21:00, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Sounds about right. I put this in the "using AI in the WP-context is probably evil" category. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:03, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Please don't use ChatGPT when you talk to people on WP either. It doesn't help. When you write in WP-articles, animals are not "captivating" or "physiological marvels"[8]. If that's how you want to write, or copypaste ChatGPT-stuff, do it somewhere else. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:01, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Indef blocked. David notMD (talk) 02:04, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Possible misuse of the "citation needed" tag?

In the article Libya–Vietnam relations, an IP user made a claim: "Currently, the relations between Libya and Vietnam is relatively warm, and There [sic] is a good cooperation between the current Libyan transitional government and the Vietnamese government in various political and economic fields."

They then added the citation needed tag to their own statement. Is this allowed? I don't think the information page makes it clear. Cheers. LucasR muteacc (talk) 23:58, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

I'd just delete it, with the comment "Unreferenced addition" or similar. Additional problems: "Currently" becomes meaningless (if it isn't already); "relations" is plural; "relatively" relative to which bilateral relations (or to the same bilateral relations at what time)? -- Hoary (talk) 00:51, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

How to find new users

I am looking on how to find new accounts on Wikipedia so I can welcome them. GamrrOverDue (talk) 00:29, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

GamrrOverDue, you could just click on the link to "Recent changes" that should appear somewhere on your screen, and look there for "[name] ( talk | contribs )"; I mean, entries for which both the username and "talk" appear in red. These are (mostly) new users who are attempting to do something. The user creation log gives you a vast number of new user ID creations; but surely many of these have no intention of contributing anything. -- Hoary (talk) 01:16, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello, GamerrOverDue, and welcome to the Teahouse. If you are thinking about this, it would be well to have a look at the reasons for and against doing this automatically at WP:PEREN#Use a bot to welcome new users. I realise that you are talking about welcoming users personally, which is great; but please be aware of the arguments in that section. ColinFine (talk) 09:46, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Renaming an RCB

Hello fellow Wikipedians. I’m a new participant in WikiProject Perth. One of the railway lines, the Yanchep line has been recently renamed (from the ‘Joondalup line’). None of the railway stations that I have checked (an example being this) have an updated RCB. Does anyone know how to move the template name from Joondalup Line to Yanchep Line, or alternatively another easier solution? Thanks in advance. TigerTask3 (talk) 02:18, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

@TigerTask3: I used to take the Joondalup line back in the day! That is a pretty tough question for this desk, you are talking about {{rcb}}. @Steelkamp: may know, you could ask on the most relvant WikiProject, or wait for a response here. I will try to take a look, but it could be too complicated for me to fix. Commander Keane (talk) 06:20, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

@TigerTask3: The data seems to lie in Module:Adjacent stations/Transperth but it is too risky for me to change. We need backup! I am sure someone is working on it, just not sure who. Commander Keane (talk) 06:28, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

And it's fixed. Commander Keane (talk) 08:17, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

User warnings

Hello! I've been going back and reviewing all the recent changes, and reverting the vandalism that hasn't been reverted yet. I have wondered, what is the threshold in which the vandalism goes "stale" and warnings are not necessary anymore? Cyclonical (talk) 02:26, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Cyclonical, thanks for doing that work! I am assuming you have read Wikipedia:Vandalism#How_to_respond_to_vandalism, but it doesn't really explain what to do with stale vandalism. I think it is a judgement call. Do you think it is likely they will vandalise again? If it has been a few days, IP addresses can change so no point in warning them. If it is a registered account, will they benefit from a note about the revert? Maybe it was a test and they need help. Will a passing user/admin find the warning a useful tip off? Lots to consider, but use your common sense. Commander Keane (talk) 06:06, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

I mostly refrain from warning the user if the vandalism is more than a day old and that they haven't made such edits since then. By that time, they could have reconsidered their life choices and moved on, or in rare cases become a constructive editor. Thank you for your help! Cyclonical (talk) 06:14, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Old problems of WP:3TOPE table

The problem of WP:3TOPE table gives incorrect number of polyhedral articles, and it does not work when trying to center align nor break using code <br>. Is there any way to include it in WikiWork factors, or WikiProject 1.0, or whatever the name is? Dedhert.Jr (talk) 02:31, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Underwater wrecks from WW2

I am a scuba diver diving closed circuit rebreather and my passion is diving wrecks from the first and second world wars. i am in my 70's so i no longer dive cold water. i just returned this year from a trip to Bikini atoll where i dove a few of the wrecks sunk during operation crossroad with the nuclear explosions of "Able" and "Baker" respectively one bomb in air and one underwater. this was for the benefit of the US navy to test the damage these weapons could be capable of on ships.

I do underwater videos on these wrecks for my own pleasure and post them on YouTube for all to enjoy. I often run into situations where information on the vessels is lacking. today i am looking for information on propulsion of the USS Lamson DD destroyer. What type engine: electric/boiler/turbine/steam, fuel type, power generated, etc....most times i can pretty much find the answer on Wikipedia or when i dive and see the boiler and the turbine, although other times it may be too risky to penetrate deep into the wreck especially machine rooms on old wrecks where everything was built tight.

if you can help me with this, id be glad to help with something else if i can. Thank you very much.

Ddafg (talk) 03:44, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

@Ddafg, the editors at WP:RD/M might be able to find the answer to your question. -- asilvering (talk) 05:15, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Help in drafting an appeal

Some editors are objecting to the addition of a sentence even with attribution to a reputed Islamic theologian (Azzam) and a professor of Islamic studies (Ayoub) here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Divisions_of_the_world_in_Islam#Removal_of_sourced_content How best can I draft an appeal to post on the Dispute resolution noticeboard? Please help!-Ganeemath (talk) 05:05, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

@Ganeemath, I would suggest first trying to engage with the criticisms of the other editors. They have brought up concerns regarding WP:FRINGE and WP:DUE. You do not appear to have addressed those concerns. -- asilvering (talk) 05:12, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

The truth is, I don't know how to respond to that. I thought Azzam and Ayoub are reputed and since they quote from the hadith, the sentence would be acceptable. I need someone experienced to respond. Kaalakaa has been blocked from Islam related articles for, "POV pushing" and I don't want that to happen to me (I think he is not allowed to reply here also, since we are discussing Islam related stuff but I would have loved to get his viewpoint).-Ganeemath (talk) 08:21, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

IntGrah has removed this sourced content from the Abdullah Azzam article. Abdullah Azzam has really written that (Kuffaar had provided the source for it and I used the same source) . What am I supposed to do about that?-Ganeemath (talk) 08:37, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Removal of sourced content

IntGrah has removed this sourced content from the Abdullah Azzam article. Abdullah Azzam has really written that (Kuffaar had provided the source for it and I used the same source). What am I supposed to do about that?-Ganeemath (talk) 12:40, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Ganeemath. As always, in case of disagreement between editors, your first step is to open a discussion with the other editor or editors, usually on the article's talk page. Remember to assume good faith, and that our common purpose is to collaborate on making Wikipedia as good as we can. If you are unable to reach consensus in discussion, then dispute resolution lays out the subsequent steps to take. ColinFine (talk) 12:59, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Moved similar question by same user under existing section. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 14:47, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

help regarding publishing a page

Hello, I made an wikipedia article and I want to publish it ( I tried two times without any problems but they were declined because of writing style), when I click "publish changes" it says: "No stashed content found for 1233814434/10cc3dcf-3f23-11ef-8b3d-01e0acf07608"- what should I do? I really need your help. this is a link of my page: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:EUt%2B&action=edit&section=1 Tamar Chkhartishvili (talk) 07:35, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

@Tamar Chkhartishvili Your problem is one I am unable to reproduce. Please proceed with your editing 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 07:42, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

I am really confused, I tried everything. Tamar Chkhartishvili (talk) 07:48, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

What do you mean to proceed with my editing? Should I make a new page and copy my material there? Tamar Chkhartishvili (talk) 08:01, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

the problem is your end, I suggest you clear your browser's cache and try again. Theroadislong (talk) 08:14, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

That error messages usually means you have left the edit window open for too long. Go to Draft:EUt+ and start again, saving (i.e. publishing) your work at least once every 20 minutes. Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:20, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Can someone help me with composing an article/list of Spike Lee collaborators?

I've been composing an article on a list of actors who have worked with Spike Lee just like the list for Tim Burton, Quentin Tarantino and Coen Brothers. The problem is that I don't know how to make a table and I could use some help on info if anyone has any. Can someone help? Brigando (talk) 08:50, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi Brigando and welcome to the Teahouse. As with any big content change I would recommend asking on the article's talk page, Talk:Spike Lee to get some input. Wikipedia:Summary style would suggest having a section in the article, then if that gets too big splitting it into a separate list. With Tim Burton, Quentin Tarantino and Coen Brothers you will notice they have some prose and then possibly a table. Don't forget sources.

As to the technical side of things, see Help:Table. You may like to copy an existing table and practice in your sandbox. I know this is a lot of info, please don't get discouraged, just ask here if you get stuck. Commander Keane (talk) 09:13, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Apparently I missed Draft:List of frequent Spike Lee collaborators. User has posted on Help desk about formatting issue. Commander Keane (talk) 10:06, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

@Brigando: I have fixed the table.[9] PrimeHunter (talk) 10:13, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks bro! Your lifesaver! Brigando (talk) 04:03, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Regarding a redirect from an article to draft article

I'm totally stuck in process of redirecting the article. There was one user that already created an article a few hours ago while I was editing the draft article with the same title that I created about two days ago and submitted it a couple of minutes ago. Is it possible that I should redirect an article to a draft article? JRGuevarra (talk) 09:10, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi JRGuevarra, what a sticky situation! I think I recommend that you work on Saving Grace (Philippine TV series) with User:Tyamutz. Stop working on Draft:Saving Grace (Philippine TV series) for now. If the article space version needs to get draftified, an admin will delete your draft and move the new one there. Hopefully another Teahouse helper can give some additional or alternative advice. Commander Keane (talk) 09:26, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

@Commander Keane I think that's the best case scenario, for now. Thanks for the recommendation. JRGuevarra (talk) 09:37, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

JRGuevarra, I've linked this conversation at the Afc review. In the meantime, I can tell you that a redirect from mainspace to Draft space is forbidden, and will be deleted (by bot, I think) if created. If you meant a move of the article to Draftspace, that is a very different question. Mathglot (talk) 06:07, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

@Mathglot I was thinking about moving the article to draftspace as well, but I guess it may be a different topic. I'll be holding off editing the draft. JRGuevarra (talk) 06:26, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

A lot users don't follow the WP:TVSPLIT guideline which causes problem creating episode list in new page?

I know some users saying that episode list in new page should have more than 50 episodes to have a new page based on the articles. But I have seen 24 episodes into new page and sometimes they separate the episode list into two pages with only 12 episodes per page which goes against WP:TVSPLIT guideline. Do they know this guideline. Anime9000 (talk) 10:05, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi Anime9000, welcome to the Teahouse. {{Episode table}} is used in 20,000 pages with probably thousands of editors. You will have to be more specific. Some users don't know or follow a given guideline, and it's a guideline and not a policy so they may have valid arguments. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:25, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

There is anime that has 24 episodes in the main article but someone wants to create a new article that will have the 24 episodes and remove the episode table from main article to new page which goes against WP:TVSPLIT guideline. Some users think guidelines are policies. Do you think most users are using WP:IAR even though they don't mention it. Anime9000 (talk) 10:52, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Anime9000, people who know a lot can choose to ignore guidelines since guidelines are for the general case and sometimes not following them could be the better option. On the other hand, people who don't know much at all are likely to not know many guidelines. Finally, it's possible for even the most knowledgeable editor to have missed any particular guideline or policy completely, since there's a whole lot of them and no one sets out to learn every one of them in an organised manner. Ultimately guidelines are not hard rules. If you are not sure what to do, look up and follow the guidelines. Otherwise, defer to WP:CONSENSUS. Sometimes, that means everyone will agree to not follow a guideline. Sometimes, all you have to do is inform them about the guidelines they're violating and they'll immediately agree to stop. And so on. Best, — Usedtobecool ☎️ 10:46, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Redundant content fork, I think

I found two Category pages that are basically the same thing (list of different breeds of shepherd dogs). I searched and searched and can't figure out for the life of me how to go about either fixing it or submitting it somewhere for someone's attention. So here I am.

The Category pages in question: https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kategoria:Psy_pasterskie https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kategoria:Owczarki FuturSimple (talk) 12:44, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

We can't tell you anything about Polish Wikipedia, as that is an entirely separate project. I suggest you ask at pl:Pomoc:Pytania nowicjuszy.

However, I can tell you that articles are placed in categories by editing the articles, not the category, so you would need to edit the various articles. ColinFine (talk) 13:02, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi FuturSimple, welcome to the Teahuse. I don't know Polish but they appear to be part of different category trees for Dog types and Dog breeds. There can be large overlaps. But as ColinFine says, this is not a question for the English Wikipedia. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:21, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Add and remove page protection

How can I add and remove page protection in wikipedia articles? Richie1509 (talk) 12:52, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi, Richie1509, welcome to the Teahouse! That functionality is restricted to administrators, but you can request protection or unprotection by visiting WP:RFPP; be sure to read the instructions at the top of that page for more information. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 12:55, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

OK, thanks Richie1509 (talk) 12:57, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Help regarding templates and userboxes

Hi, I need some help regarding templates and userboxes:

Basically, I want to convert this

This user participates in
WikiProject Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.

into this

This user participates in
WikiProject Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.

(I want both of them to look the same, the former one doesn't match other userboxes in the same category)

I want to make minor changes/fixes to the WikiProject Khyber Pakhtunkhwa template but I need a hint in the right direction.

Thank you for reading, I'd greatly appreciate any help. ExoField (talk) 14:52, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi @ExoField, have you checked Wikipedia:Userboxes? There are some instructions there. Broc (talk) 15:12, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

I've read and understood it, but something seems wrong with this specific instance, I think someone has modified the template and I can't find the modification (I've been at it for hours). ExoField (talk) 17:54, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

This is the original template, where everything starts: Template:User Khyber Pakhtunkhwa/doc1. Now I cannot figure out what changed between Template:User Khyber Pakhtunkhwa/doc1 and Template:User WP Khyber Pakhtunkhwa/doc ExoField (talk) 17:58, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

I have figured it out, thank you. ExoField (talk) 18:40, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

How to deal with problematic actions by user?

Sai Baba of Shirdi seems to get a lot of attention from user(s) intending to reinsert a few hagiographical-looking paragraphs that were first unsourced, then after some administrator intervention, were readded with unreliable primary sources. This user keeps reinserting the paragraphs between multiple other users removing them. I don't know a lot about how to report this kind of behavior or where to go - does this count as 3RR on that user's part? I don't want to point it to the wrong place or put a warning on their talk page for the wrong reason. Thank you. Crystalespeon (talk) 16:35, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

@Crystalespeon the reverts are quite spaced apart, so WP:3RR does not apply (3 reverts within 24 hours). I would suggest starting a discussion in talk page and strongly recommending the involved editors to discuss there before reverting again. Broc (talk) 16:42, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, I'll try that. Crystalespeon (talk) 19:03, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Still waiting on review 4 months later! help

Draft:Lucy Heavens

Draft talk:Nic Smal

Hello, I've made pages for Lucy Heavens and Nic Smal bc I'm a big fan of the show Kiff that they created. I believe I've tagged them in relative topics to further along their review but it's been four months. Lucy's drafted wasn't approved several months ago bc all my sources were Kiff-focused, so their notability wasn't inherited but I believe I've changed that now and added more sources etc. Would love some help. I'm trying to be patient but would love to see it live! Thank you. I'm a first time contributor. Brooklyn315 (talk) 17:33, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Brooklyn315! Unfortunately, sometimes it takes a while for drafts to get reviewed - that's just the way it is. There's not really much you can do to speed it up except keep improving it. Drafts sit in a pool rather than a queue, so there's no expected timeline for acceptance or otherwise. Ones that are obviously great or obviously terrible tend to rush through the process, because they're easy decisions; the rest take longer. We currently have a massive backlog, as you've probably seen on your draft page notices, which sucks for everyone involved. Sorry I can't give you a more encouraging answer. I do encourage you to keep looking for good sources and tinkering with the drafts until you think they're as good as they can be, and hopefully that will at least pass the time. Or of course there's millions of other articles you might be interested in improving! Good luck and happy editing :) StartGrammarTime (talk) 02:06, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Hierarchy of Reasons for Declining an Article

Hello!

My article was declined for insufficient references which is understandable, and I will be working on improving the draft. However, I wanted to make sure there weren't other changes to take into consideration. There are multiple criterion for whether a Wikipedia is worth publishing- sufficient references, notability, etc. If my page were not notable enough, would that be the first listed reason for declining? Would other reasons for declining be noted if they existed? Thank you! Proudcatmom (talk) 17:58, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello Proudcatmom. Volunteer Articles for Creation reviewers are extremely busy and there is a big backlog. Accordingly, it is understandable that they give the most obvious reason of what may be many reasons for declining a draft. Vast swathes of your draft are unreferenced, violating the core content policy Verifiability, which is glaringly obvious to any reviewer in a few seconds. But even if you add a lot more references, your draft is overtly promotional, which violates another core content policy, the Neutral point of view. Promotional content is forbidden on Wikipedia. Onto another matter, I see that you are a paid editor. Wikipedia is a volunteer run project, and many volunteers have long years of experience. I have been editing regularly for 15 years. Paid editors are permitted to contribute, with restrictions, but it is expected that they are fully conversant with our policies and guidelines, and create excellent, policy compliant work. Please do not submit any more poorly referenced promotional content. It wastes the precious time of unpaid volunteers. Cullen328 (talk) 18:26, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your swift and harsh feedback. It is not my intention to waste anyone's time. I am a human learning something new. This project happens to be a paid edit, but I do believe Leslie to be a notable figure in the Climate Psychology discipline. Obviously, there are many issues with the article which I intend to fix in future drafts and make it worthy of Wikipedia's standards. Thank you again for your time. Proudcatmom (talk) 18:47, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

@Proudcatmom: for technical reasons, an AfC reviewer can decline a draft for only 1-2 reasons. Sometimes there are 5+ possible reasons, but one must choose two (and, as Cullen328 said, one can choose any two). If those issues are subsequently resolved, and the draft is resubmitted, it may then be declined for entirely different reasons. At that point we sometimes get authors asking "why are you moving the goalposts", or words to that effect. We're not, we're just saying that there are still reasons to decline the draft, even if they're different from the previous set of reasons. And no, there is no fixed 'hierarchy' for declining, some reviewers pick the most fundamental reason; others, the one they first ascertain. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 19:23, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

This makes a lot of sense. Thank you very much for further clarification. Proudcatmom (talk) 19:39, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

I see that you made six edits to articles before you created your draft - and in two cases, added a reference: well done, that is more than many new editors do before they leap into reating an carticle. But how far do you understand Wikipedia's core principles?

My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft.

I realise that if you are being paid to create an article, you may be unwilling to do this. However, given that writing for Wikipedia is different from almost all other kinds of writing, why would you expect to be able to take on this task without taking appropriate training ColinFine (talk) 20:51, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

This is really good advice, thank you. I should have taken much more time to learn the ins and outs of Wikipedia before attempting to make this article. During this process, I found I really enjoy contributing and will continue to do so outside of the project I am paid for, but I made many mistakes that could have been avoided had I not rushed. I am taking all this feedback to heart. Big fumble today, but I go on. Proudcatmom (talk) 21:53, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Proudcatmom, welcome to Wikipedia! You're already much further along than many paid editors - you're willing to listen to feedback and learn about Wikipedia rather than just trying to ram your draft through. That's a fantastic start. Everyone makes mistakes here; the good thing is if you learn from the mistakes, everyone's happy to forget them.

Editors are sometimes harsher to paid editors because we are all volunteers, learning and editing on our own free time, and it can get very frustrating if a paid editor demands help from volunteers. I'm not saying that's what you're doing at all, but many paid editors get very huffy and demanding when their drafts or edits get declined or removed. Asking for help and clarification is of course totally fine! It's just when paid editors expect volunteers to do their work for free that everyone gets pretty annoyed - and you'd be amazed how often that happens.

There is a lot to learn but listening, discussing, and being willing to find consensus with other editors will take you a long way. If you'd like a quick analysis of your sources at some point, feel free to hit me up on my talk page. And in the meantime, good luck with your draft and happy editing! StartGrammarTime (talk) 02:19, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

I appreciate the warm welcome. I very much understand the feelings toward paid editors. And I will be taking a lot of time to listen and learn. Thank you for your offer! Proudcatmom (talk) 02:50, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

I have a different concern. On your User page you identify that you are paid to edit three existing articles in addition to creating a draft about LD. The rules for paid - at WP:PAID - are that for existing articles you are limited to making edit requests on the Talk pages of those articles rather than edit directly. Instead, you have added a reference to each article for a book authored by LD. For paid editing, this is considered reference spamming, and is forbidden. An editor has reverted your ref additions. Please do not do this again. David notMD (talk) 02:47, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi David, Thank you for bringing this to my attention, and reverting them. It has become very clear to me that I bit off far more than I could chew in taking on this paid editor project. I apologize for the way I bumbled into this. This is my first and will be my only paid interaction with Wikipedia. Any edits from now on are under my own free time. Thank you for your guidance. Proudcatmom (talk) 02:58, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Bringing an article to FA (or at least GA) status

I am trying to bring Algeria, which is a B-class Vital Article, to GA status. How would I do that? First of all, what type of edits should I do to increase the article's level? Secondly, how would I request the article to be reviewed so that someone can see if it should be a GA? I would really appreciate an answer. Also, how much time would it take to improve the quality of the article, and would I need to add even more references too? Apollogetticax|^talk 19:48, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

@Apollogetticax: Welcome to the Teahouse! Have you already reviewed examples of what GA- and FA-class articles look like? In my opinion, that's the best place to start if you want to understand the quality and depth needed at each of those levels. In addition, I'll direct your attention to the criteria for good articles and featured articles. Once you have a good grasp of these through some examples, you can take a look at the process for nominating a good article. I hope this helps a bit! Bsoyka (t • c • g) 20:19, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Apollogetticax, you could start by searching on page for citation needed, reading the unsourced content in the article preceding those notices, finding at least one reliable source for the content, writing a citation that verifies the content, and adding the citation to the article in place of the cn notices. Mathglot (talk) 01:37, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

You might also check the existing references for Algeria to confirm still functional and are in support of the text the refs are supposed to be verifying. After you nominate the article for a GA review, in time (which sadly, could be months), a GA reviewer will identify everything that in their experienced opinion, is not good enough. You are then responsible for fixing everything. I have spent many hours improving an article before submitting, and then many hours responding to the reviewer. David notMD (talk) 02:36, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

P.S. Content in the Lead (the initial four paragraphs) does not need to be referenced there as long as content in the Lead is elaborated upon in the body of the article and referenced there. David notMD (talk) 02:40, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Giving up with wiki

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.

---

I've now got evidence of a toxic environment and admins lying about reasons for reverting articles - but also no way to challenge this because of the way wiki works. There's no point in trying to contribute when all you want to do is control and gatekeep information and toxicly stop any discussion or challenge to your tactics. SnarkyDragon (talk) 20:00, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

@SnarkyDragon: Respectfully, your talk page shows that you went against one of our more essential policies. When this was brought to your attention, you began attacking other volunteers rather than focusing on the policy issue at hand. At its core, Wikipedia is meant to be an encyclopedia with information verifiable by its readers. I urge you to consider the feedback already provided on your talk page if you consider returning to Wikipedia. Thank you for the spirit behind your contributions—wishing you the best in your future endeavors. Bsoyka (t • c • g) 20:14, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

And I provided references and have proof of this but yet was still lied to that I had not referenced SnarkyDragon (talk) 20:15, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Nothing was brought to my attention in a constructive way and one of your admins admitted in a comment that my user name had influenced their response SnarkyDragon (talk) 20:16, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

If you're talking about Mike Turnbull in this edit, they aren't an admin. That doesn't mean you shouldn't take their advice into account; you should take the advice of any well-intentioned experienced editor into account. But it's possible you may not realize who is and isn't an admin and what an admin does here on WP. Valereee (talk) 20:20, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

@SnarkyDragon, if you have evidence/proof of wrongdoing, provide it to us in the form of diffs, which are the edits someone made. To find a diff, you go to the article or talk history, click on the date for the relevant version, and copy the URL. Bring it back here and show us. Valereee (talk) 20:18, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

I'm trying to but nobody seems to take ownership or provide a place for me to do so. SnarkyDragon (talk) 20:19, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

I cant post a screenshot but these were all in the article I posted - they are links

Community Website

Skipness Official tourist website

Skipness

Skipness Castle

Historic Scotland: Skipness Castle

Parish History

Skipness Observation Tower

WW2 History of Skipness Bombing Range SnarkyDragon (talk) 20:21, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

So, those aren't diffs. To find a diff, you go to the article or talk history, click on the date for the relevant version, and copy the URL. Paste it here. Valereee (talk) 20:22, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

The article is 'skipness' it may be easier to look at the edit history as I'm getting really tired of trying to give my own time and energy to contribute here with all the bother it is causing for literally nothing SnarkyDragon (talk) 20:23, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Okay, so what I see at Skipness is that you added what sounds like it might have been copied from a tourism guide, and didn't provide sources. What you need for adding content to any WP article is a reliable, independent source. Then you need to write those additions in your own words. Valereee (talk) 20:33, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Where have you tried to bring a diff back here? Valereee (talk) 20:21, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

I think I see part of the issue here. You added your sources as external links, not as references. Please take a look at Help:Referencing for beginners for the basics of how to properly create inline citations, which would better clarify what is and isn't cited/verifiable. Bsoyka (t • c • g) 20:23, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

but yet people jumped on it and deleted/reverted without notice - even people who are supposed to be mentors and work on teahouse? how is that at all helpful! SnarkyDragon (talk) 20:24, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

@SnarkyDragon, I can see you're upset. I'm sorry about that. No one here is trying to be obstructionist, but it's possible you didn't receive the mentorship you were expecting at Teahouse. Wikipedia has a very steep learning curve, and it can be frustrating at first. Valereee (talk) 20:29, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

I didnt get any mentorship or offer of such I was jumped upon and spoken to like I was a child. I've even called out one of your supposed mentors for such. It's really not the environment I expected of wiki at all and it's really really disappointing. SnarkyDragon (talk) 20:30, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

I can't help if you can't show me what you're talking about. I don't see anything like that at Skipness. Valereee (talk) 20:36, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

@Valereee: it seems like others are assisting below, but if you're still interested, I believe SnarkyDragon is referring to #Remove a redirect above, here at the Teahouse. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 20:55, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

I'm referring more to an article I wrote on Skipness where a 'mentor' reverted without discussion. SnarkyDragon (talk) 21:01, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

I have to concur with Valereee. However, your repeated statements attacking other editors are not conducive to a collaborative environment. I understand that some people around here aren't as friendly as we'd like to hope, but that's often just the way Wikipedia is. As Valereee mentioned above, there's a steep learning curve and some are more aggressive toward those who don't climb it "fast enough" for them. Now, many of us try to be positive mentors whenever possible, but personal attacks on character make that difficult to do. For example, I just suggested how to improve your changes so the community may accept them, and you responded by further attacking the people you've interacted with. Would you like to focus on how you can contribute to that article and others more effectively, or would you like to continue calling those around you out for their minor mistakes? Bsoyka (t • c • g) 20:32, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

It isnt an attack at all - I'm not being supported and feel jumped upon when all I'm trying to do is add content here for free in good faith and I dont see those who are deleting/reverting it offering assistance - they are just acting rather than supporting and that is what I have an issue with. A mentor/teahouse host should try to help rather than just reverting something without talking surely? SnarkyDragon (talk) 20:37, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Again, right here, I just tried again to help you, and you are deflecting to comments about the other people you've interacted with. I would prefer to focus on your content, not other contributors. Have you taken a look at Help:Referencing for beginners yet? Bsoyka (t • c • g) 20:39, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

I appreciate that. I'm not deflecting I'm genuinely trying to process why things are being deleted without discussion by those who also call themselves mentors - to me that isn't compatible with calling onself a mentor.

I do appreciate your advice - but I also want to understand why some people are acting like this and that doesn't make me automatically attacking or deflecting. SnarkyDragon (talk) 20:42, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

And I do appreciate advice, genuinely SnarkyDragon (talk) 20:43, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Glad to hear we're getting closer to a right track. This is actually pretty common practice in Wikipedia editing. See Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. Often, reverting comes right before discussion. Now that we've gotten the "revert" part of the cycle out of the way, this right here (along with the multiple editors on your talk page) is the discussion portion. Bsoyka (t • c • g) 20:45, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

As I pointed out in our exchange on my Talk page and your Talk page (covering same ground as above) External links are not "references." Some of the external links are websites that may qualify as references, and thus content could be restored with those as references, but in my opinion, a lot of what you added to Skipness was either tour guide content (verbatim or paraphrased) or your own observations on the interesting sites and amenities of Skipness. None of that belongs in the article. Not cottages to rent. Not the types of fish that may be caught. Not stores in Skipness or the potential to shop in neighboring towns. I chose to revert the article to before your first edit because in my opinion none of your changes were worth salvaging. David notMD (talk) 20:44, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

I really don't understand why you would make this conclusion as a mentor/teahouse host and act in that way rather than discussing and working with me to improve/educate. It's a very bizarre way to act. SnarkyDragon (talk) 20:47, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

This thread right here is us collectively discussing and working with [you] to improve/educate. Bsoyka (t • c • g) 20:49, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

after the event and with no constructive discussion from the person who reverted it and calls themself a mentor - so it feels somewhat hollow - although appreciated SnarkyDragon (talk) 20:51, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

As I mentioned above, discussion after reversion is typical for Wikipedia. That's just how we do things around here. Can you now move on from what's already happened to see if we can improve your contributions? At this point, we seem to be going in circles where you ignore constructive feedback to comment on editors' behavior. I ask yet again, have you read Help:Referencing for beginners? Bsoyka (t • c • g) 20:54, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

I still would like to understand why someone who calls themself a mentor would act in this way, and it is entirely valid for me to question this without being told to move on - I mean that respectfully but it is important - mentoring isn't about deleting without discussion - what that person did wasn't mentoring it was deletion.

In terms of other aspects that's something I need to give some thought to - and I do appreciate the helpful/constructive comments and advice. SnarkyDragon (talk) 20:59, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Deletion and mentoring are not in any way mutually exclusive. The characterization that David notMD, the user who reverted your changes, hasn't tried to mentor you is wrong. He explained why he did what he did (which appears to completely follow Wikipedia's policies, guidelines, and procedures), and even conveniently shared your now-removed content on your talk page in an effort to help you share it again correctly.

It may be valid for you to ask questions about the behavior of the editors you've interacted with, but I personally will no longer be responding to them. If you would like to discuss how to properly reference material for Wikipedia, or any other content-related questions, feel free to reach out at my talk page or here.

Happy editing, if you choose to continue contributing. Bsoyka (t • c • g) 21:08, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

And that's an issue I see with wiki - these people are unaccountable and seem to be able to act without question or discussion and that isn't really something I feel comfortable with. Of course it's reasonable for you to not want to comment on such but I feel it important to raise that view.

I will have a think about content and if I would like to contribute going forwards and I appreciate the constructive advice. SnarkyDragon (talk) 21:11, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

I would say that David notMD didn't act in a constructive way with how he responded to me (criticising but not guiding) but again appreciate that you may not want to comment on that. SnarkyDragon (talk) 21:13, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

On this note, @SnarkyDragon, you may even be interested in contributing to Wikivoyage rather than Wikipedia. There, they not only accept tourism-related content but encourage and focus on it. There are still requirements for referencing and such, but your type of content may be better suited there overall. Bsoyka (t • c • g) 20:48, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

This is one article which was the first I had written - so I still don't understand why it was jumped on this way and called inappropriate without discussion/guidance etc that's what I object to. I dont particularly want to write tour guides I just wanted to provide some accurate information about somewhere I know well. SnarkyDragon (talk) 20:49, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

@SnarkyDragon, so, a couple of things here.

1. I just wanted to provide some accurate information about somewhere I know well. We can't add to the article content from your own personal knowledge. We can only use what reliable independent sources say. We need those sources to be cited inline; otherwise the assertions look unsourced and will likely be removed. That's what appears to have happened at Skipness. You can learn more about assessing sources at WP:RS and about how to cite those sources inline at WP:CITING.
2. Again, I'm sorry you felt jumped on. I'm sorry you weren't given the guidance you were expecting from someone you believed was supposed to be mentoring you. There's really nothing more anyone can say about that; we're all volunteers here, every last one of us. But we'd like to offer guidance, and we're trying to.

Valereee (talk) 00:21, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

But the person who reverted the content and only ever justified their own position and ignored mine has remained silent when challenged and that is really not at all consistent with a community that it trying to help. SnarkyDragon (talk) 00:24, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

@SnarkyDragon, David has responded here. Mike has responded on your talk. Who is remaining silent? I don't see anyone ignoring you. I feel like what I'm seeing is you don't think people are giving you what you think they should. We're all volunteers, here. Literally every one of us is a volunteer, there are no paid employees, there are no bosses. We are all doing our level best. I'm sorry that isn't good enough for you, but if it's not, I guess it's not. Valereee (talk) 00:43, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

And I’m not paid either and what my contribution is worth is to be removed without the person who removes it being accountable or talking to me or being courteous - I’ve had to challenge him and all he wants to portray is his own fixed view. All I want is for the people who criticise other people’s efforts to be accountable and to actually communicate and advise rather than just unilaterally removing content without giving notice or support - I had to find my hard work had been removed and (not Mike) the person who reverted it hasn’t been at all respectful or courteous he has just removed it and said repeatedly he os right without caring at all about my view point SnarkyDragon (talk) 01:00, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm not sure this is the right hobby for you. Best to you. Valereee (talk) 01:06, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

It would be if the community was more supportive but there’s no point in trying to add to something only to have people swoop on it and not then be willing to work with me - some people have been supportive but ultimately I’m now pretty disappointed with wiki. SnarkyDragon (talk) 06:33, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

@SnarkyDragon Just for the record, it was not me who reverted your contribution to Skipness. See this diff. You may wish to WP:STRIKE my name from the comment above where you made some assertions about me. Mike Turnbull (talk) 09:50, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Noted - I'm not sure how to strike through and feel assertions were also made about me which is much of the issue. SnarkyDragon (talk) 09:59, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

@SnarkyDragon You strike through as described at the link I provided. One way is to add <s> before the part to be struck and </s> at the end. This renders as bit I want to strike out. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:04, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

The community is trying to help. I see at least a couple of different tracks here that are going on simultaneously which should be disentangled, because they have different audiences, and different possible solutions. One track I see is your wishing to be mentored at Wikipedia so you can learn the rules and be a more effective editor, and not get your work undone. The other track I see, is calling another editor on the carpet because in your opinion, their reaction to you was toxic. Both of these tracks can be handled at Wikipedia, but they are separate tracks, and the WP:Tea house is not the right venue to deal with either of them, although it is the right place to start to find out *where* to deal with them.

Here at the Tea house, numerous editors have heard you and understand that your frustration is about someone reverting you rather than mentoring and trying to explain. I get that also, and I have the impression that from your point of view, a much better approach would have been to leave your stuff in the article alone, spend some time mentoring you, and then maybe some time later after it had all been explained and you got it, you could have adjusted the content accordingly. But they didn't do that, they just swooped in, and undid all your hard work. Is that approximately what has been bothering you?

If I am anywhere close with that, then it is equally important for you to understand that experienced editors here have to apply the rules of Wikipedia, which in some cases really tie our hands. When an experienced editor removed your stuff without discussing it first, it was because what you wrote was not in accord with the rules, it's not about fighting with you, or being toxic, or shooting first and asking questions later. It is about applying the rules, and we don't really have a choice about that. If we had to explain first, a lot of stuff would remain in articles for an unknown length of time, until the new editor felt sufficiently mentored about it to understand and accept, but that is an untenable situation. (Even so, a minimal explanation is often offered by the reverting editor in the edit summary field, but that is only about 500 characters, and sometimes is enough, and sometimes it is not.)

If you don't understand why your work was undone, or don't agree with the reason given, it's fine to ask for an explanation, and almost any experienced editor (or someone else) will be happy to give you one. But the fact that they reverted first, and you had to ask why after, is not toxic, it is normal, routine procedure here. You can disagree about the removal and contest it—that is one of the main functions of the Talk page which exists alongside of every article. One of our standard procedures to contest reverts is called WP:BRD—Bold, Revert, Discuss. You can read about that, and then contest the removed content, if you wish, by going to the Talk page and starting a discussion there. But it's unfair to accuse an editor of being toxic when they are simply following the rules of Wikipedia in the best way they know how; you Boldly added some content, they Reverted. So far, everything is completely routine. But calling them toxic for their rapid revert is not the right way; the ball is in your court after the revert, and if you want to discuss or contest the removal, you should go to the article Talk page and Discuss it.

Every new editor (and every experienced editor) gets reverted sometimes, so we all know what that's like, and while it can ruffle one's feathers, it's important to understand that there is no dictator sitting at the top of Wikipedia deciding who is right about some disagreement about article content; we all decide that, collectively, by consensus, through various procedures for dispute resolution, starting with discussing disagreements at the article Talk page. If you have a bone to pick about an editor's behavior here, the proper venue to start with is the editor's Talk page. Those venues will be the best bet for you to get satisfaction on either of these two separate tracks. Further questions about how to edit Wikipedia are welcome on this Tea house page. HTH, (edit conflict) Mathglot (talk) 01:09, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

I really don’t think it’s unfair to call out toxic behaviours and it is very much members of the community but not the person who rapid reverted who are trying to help. The issue I have is that the person who rapid reverted was condescending and simply defended their own position without assuming any good will or at all acknowledging my intent to try and provide good and true content. As a mentor I wouldn’t expect them to act like that. I do see and appreciate that other members of the community are trying to provide some good quality advice and throughout I have said I appreciate that. SnarkyDragon (talk) 06:28, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

No one, I believe, has said it is unfair, and you have called it out several times, but what I am trying to indicate, roughly, is "No one (with the power to do anything about it) will hear you here"; hence, my comment about "wrong venue". About the mentoring, yes you have said you appreciated it, and I am glad. My question to you now, as this thread is quite long here, and if I am correct about this being the wrong venue for both of your concerns, what are your plans for this conversation now? Should it be dropped, left to go stale and get archived, get split into one or two conversations at the right venue? Because to me, it seems to be about have lived out its usefulness. But if you still have things to say in this thread, the floor is yours. If you would like me to close it, either with, or without a pointer to some new conversation, just ask and I am happy to do so for you. Mathglot (talk) 07:04, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you - I don't really know how to proceed and need to have a think about a few things. I'm also finding it difficult to know who is an admin vs an editor and who is going to be helpful/constructive vs just shooting things down and that isn't helping me to feel comfortable when trying to contribute to wiki. I really do appreciate your insights though. SnarkyDragon (talk) 07:11, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

@SnarkyDragon, if you go to Preferences>Gadgets, you can enable Navigation Popups. That will allow you to hover over someone's username and see information about them, including how experienced they are and what permissions they have, such as admin. Please realize that admins don't have any more control over content than non-admin editors.

But I have to say, I haven't seen any toxic behavior. What I've seen is a dozen people trying to help, here and at your user talk, and your every response seems to be some version of "you aren't doing enough to help/mentor me" and accusing people of being toxic/not assuming good faith. "Helping you" doesn't mean "never revert your edits". "Mentoring you" doesn't mean "never tell you you're wrong". "Assuming good faith" doesn't mean "leave well-intentioned but incorrect edits in place". You seem to be quite fixated on what you believe mentoring should look like. Perhaps we could discuss that at your user talk? I kind of feel like we're going around in circles here and should let this discussion archive. Valereee (talk) 09:49, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

The ultimate issue is how content was just reverted without discussion and in a condescending way. The discussion has only continued because that hasn't been acknowledged. As you'll see I have acknowledged those who have provided support and I don't have any particular desire to expend more energy on these discussions because it isn't helping anyone. I do understand that there are people trying to support here and I appreciate that and have said that already many times. I just feel like something I put effort into was discarded without a care in a condescending way. SnarkyDragon (talk) 10:04, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

But yes - I do see and appreciate the support offered by the community and need to have a think about that and what to do with the content I’ve been trying to create and that is ultimately why I started using wiki. I also know who has offered support and how to approach them which has been helpful. SnarkyDragon (talk) 10:33, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

I am sorry that you feel that way, but I, for one, given all that I have read and seen, I cannot agree that you were reverted in anything but a normal, routine way per the rules of Wikipedia. If what you are looking for now is an apology or or an acknowledgement that you were treated in a condescending or toxic way, such an apology or acknowledgement is not merited and imho, will not be forthcoming. In my view, this thread is going around in circles; you have been afforded much more attention and far greater care by a great many more editors than is usual here, and it now seems unlikely that you will receive satisfaction here, but then, it is not a requirement that Wikipedia editors satisfy your requirements after having done their best to answer your questions and comments. You have been advised about other venues in which you can pursue your issues; I hope you will take advantage of them. In my humble opinion, it is now well past time to end this thread, and close it. (edit conflict) Best wishes, Mathglot (talk) 10:48, 18 July 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.

I am seeking a Wikipedia editor to create a wikipedia page for a Jewish organization

 Stanleydiamond (talk) 20:17, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

If you're willing to pay for the service, prepare for the complete waste of your payment. If you're not willing to do so, it's very unlikely to happen. Instead, people do things themselves (once they've understood policies and guidelines, and have done a lot of preparatory work). -- Hoary (talk) 20:25, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Agreed, if someone contacts you, it's probably a scam. See WP:SCAM for more info. Ca ^{talk to me!} 00:52, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

@Stanleydiamond, the minimum criteria for an article is that the subject be WP:notable. To assess notability we ideally want to see three instances of significant coverage in independent reliable sources, at least two of which are from outside the local area and outside of niche publications. Can you provide these sources? Valereee (talk) 20:25, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Stanleydiamond, quick question: can you find three or more solidly reliable sources, like books, magazines, or very reputable websites that have a significant amount of material—like a book chapter, a magazine article, news article, documentary film, lengthy broadcast interview, or a web page entirely or mostly about the organization that is completely independent of the organization? The website of the org itself does not count, and neither do blogs, social media of any kind, or press releases, even if published in reputable sources. Can you list three such sources below? (Minimally, author, title, and pub. date; any other publication data such as url, isbn, or publisher are helpful.) If you can provide that below, editors here will be better able to answer your question. Mathglot (talk) 01:21, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

How long to get Rollback permissions?

I have submitted a request to get Rollback user rights, and I meet all the criteria. I was wondering how long it would take for me to recieve an answer and maybe get the rights. Apollogetticax|^talk 23:43, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Requests for Permission are processed by any admin whose willing, so there isn't really a set schedule. RfP can get backlogged at times, so I recommend waiting a bit longer. Ca ^{talk to me!} 00:56, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Since I submitted it, three hours have passed (as of the time of writing of this post). There are very few requests, you can go see yourself. How much longer should I wait?

Though, thanks for your answer. Apollogetticax|^talk 01:51, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

@Apollogetticax, you'll notice if you look at the other requests that there's about a day between request and reponse - and that's very fast in Wikipedia terms. Wait at least that long, and don't forget that admins are volunteers too. Good luck with your request! StartGrammarTime (talk) 02:42, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. I was very nervous when submitting, but I realized there was no reason to be, as I finally met the criteria, and was ready for it. I guess I can handle the wait for Huggle ;) Apollogetticax|^talk 02:46, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Might also help if OP remembers that it's weekday evening in the U.S., the small hours in Europe, lunchtime in Australia, and a weekday morning in Asia. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 02:44, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Very, very true. Based on their contribution times, my CVUA mentor was in Australia, over half a day ahead (or behind, I'm not sure) of me, and I had to be awake at two A.M. to catch them grading my work. So yeah, I guess I should wait. I'll give it twenty four hours. Apollogetticax|^talk 02:49, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

@Apollogetticax I think you should "give it" a few weeks rather than 24 hours. Requests for permissions usually take a while to be examined. Wikipedia processes are generally rather "slow" so I would not be worried if it takes a few days. Remember that permissions are forever (or until revoked), so there needs to be thorough vetting prior to approval. Broc (talk) 06:36, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Well, for the three requests currently on the page, one reached final consensus after a week (and got the user right)

[In detail, the user made the request on June 10, on June 11 the admin said the user was not warning vandals enough, on the same day the user replied, saying he doesn't warn IPs often, on June 13 the admin replied, and there was a same-day response from the user, and on June 14 the admin asked the user to prove his continuousness in warning vandals by doing a session of RC patrol. The user replied on June 15, and on June 17 the admin saw that he was ready to become a rollbacker.]

Both remaining users were declined in one day.

So basically, the evidence says you're right. If I am to get the right, I should wait for some time. But since I noticed a pattern in the timing of the admin's edits, I think I am to get an answer in five hours. If I did something wrong in my counter-vandalism, I would give it two more days (per the evidence), and that would be more than enough. So yeah, maybe not a week (and definitely not many weeks), but I guess I should give it more time than I expected. Apollogetticax|^talk 06:52, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

@Apollogetticax my request earlier this year took seven days. I suggest not to think too much about it, just keep editing as usual in the meanwhile. If you fulfill the requirements, you will soon receive the permission. Broc (talk) 07:44, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Ok. Yeah, just thinking about it stresses me out. Thanks for the advice. Apollogetticax|^talk 07:46, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Policy on listing awards/accolades?

The Scandinavian Airlines article lists awards, and in April 2024, someone marked this section as an advertisement. They haven't edited since that day (and edited with an IP), so I don't think it would be possible to discuss with them. I've made some edits to the section, and removed the {{advert}} template.

I was wondering if there was a policy on listing awards, and how to make sure it stays neutral? LucasR muteacc (talk) 03:39, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi @LucasR muteacc, all the awards are sourced to press releases of SAS, and I can barely find any information with a web search for most of those. So yes, I agree with the judgment of the IP user, the section sounds promotional. I suggest you use reliable sources that are independent of the subject as references for the section (e.g.: coverage of the award in the press). If there are no such sources available, then you should rather remove the content. Broc (talk) 06:32, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

LucasR muteacc, that list of non-notable awards won't increase anyone's respect for the airline. I suggest that you delete it. Maproom (talk) 08:02, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

My article proposal was declined and I disagree with the arguments of the reviewing editors

This is the draft Draft:Paul Maxym Sembaliuk. Dmytro Simon (talk) 05:04, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Your draft was correctly declined it needs editing for neutral tone and it's unclear how they pass WP:NARTIST? Theroadislong (talk) 05:57, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks Theroadislong. I noticed that the editor has added more sources. Let me take a look, though David notMD made a good point that the UCC source would not be an independent source since it was written by the subject's daughter. Let me try to do some rewrites. Bkissin (talk) 15:40, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

@Dmytro Simon welcome to Wikipedia! I have a couple suggestions for you:

1. If you disagree with an editor, your best approach is to reach out to them directly to understand the reason behind their edit. Courtesy ping to @SafariScribe and @Bkissin who reviewed the draft.
2. Not everyone can have a page on Wikipedia. Wikipedia's golden rule, to simplify the requirements to the extreme basics, is that articles require significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the topic. I do not see this coverage in the sources you added.

Broc (talk) 06:02, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

For example, an obituary written by his daughter (ref #7) is not independent. David notMD (talk) 13:11, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

I didn't realize that this source was written by the subject's daughter. Good catch David notMD. Bkissin (talk) 15:37, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Translation: IP Range Blocked

How to gain proper access to ro.wikipedia.org? I've created this account solely for page translations, yet my ip range is blocked from using this account there. Lunar Dynamite (talk) 07:41, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

You'll need to address that on that version of Wikipedia; each language version of Wikipedia is separate. They should have some sort of process for you to challenge the block, just as we do here. 331dot (talk) 09:27, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

W.E.T.

Up until now, Wikipedia has written about the band W.E.T. (Work Of Art, Eclipse, Talisman) in English, but now I can't find it. Only in German. What is the reason for this? 46.139.144.117 (talk) 09:46, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

The article W.E.T. (band) was deleted on 20 February 2017, the reason being (A7: Article about an eligible subject, which does not credibly indicate the importance or significance of the subject) - That deletion was over 7 years ago, so hardly "up until now", but I can't find it under any other title. Arjayay (talk) 09:51, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

I remember that even this year they wrote about them in English. I thought about them:

https://kepkuldes.com/image/TIGIc0

If they had been deleted 7 years ago, they would not have been written about this year. 46.139.144.117 (talk) 10:29, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Well, we have Eclipse (band), but this isn't the article about W.E.T. which has indeed been deleted 7 years ago. Lectonar (talk) 10:36, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

"I was thinking of the band W.E.T., which has Jeff Scott Soto as the lead singer." 46.139.144.117 (talk) 10:43, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

I see no relation between your link and Wikipedia. W.E.T. (Q4016784) has links to articles in German, Italian and Portuguese but no English link since W.E.T. (band) was deleted in 2017. If you used a browser with machine translation to English then it's possible you actually saw one of the three non-English Wikipedia articles. Wikipedia itself does not offer machine translation. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:39, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

W.E.T. seems to have been a side project of Eclipse, as is mentioned in the article I linked to. Lectonar (talk) 10:41, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

I thought of them.:

https://assets.blabbermouth.net/media/wetband2018_638.jpg 46.139.144.117 (talk) 10:46, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

That is not what Lectonar and PrimeHunter are trying to say. I believe they are talking about how the Wikipedia article has been deleted, but the band still exists. Regards — 48JCL 11:56, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

I found it in German, but not in English. They even wrote about them in English this year. Is it possible that it was deleted because it is being edited as the new album might be coming out which is still no news? 46.139.144.117 (talk) 13:39, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

https://assets.blabbermouth.net/media/wetband2018_638.jpg gives an access denied error for me. You have still given no evidence of an English Wikipedia article since 2017 and nobody can find any signs of such an article. Maybe you saw a copy of the old deleted article at a website with no affiliation to Wikipedia. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:05, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

There was no copy, because wikipedia also wrote this in the "discography": "Yet to be titled (2024)" 46.139.144.117 (talk) 15:01, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

That's a quote from Jeff Scott Soto#with W.E.T. The article has a few mentions of W.E.T. but it's a biography of a specific musician who has done many other things. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:28, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

This was posted sometime:

https://m.facebook.com/ 46.139.144.117 (talk) 15:37, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

That's the front page of Facebook. The content is tailored to the viewer. You keep posting links where nobody else can find anything related to Wikipedia. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:45, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Top tips for a new user

Apart from the links in the welcome section of the talk page - what are your top tips for using/editing Wikipedia? What has saved you most time and frustration? Do you have any positive anecdotes about Wikipedia? SnarkyDragon (talk) 11:54, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

SnarkyDragon, going to Special:Homepage lets you choose topics you are interested in and gives you suggestions on articles you can help. If you're interested in sports, you can choose the "Sports" button, and it might pop out results like the "Tunisian Football Federation". If you're interested in European sports, then you may choose "Europe" and "Sports". Regards, — 48JCL 12:00, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Thats an awesome feature! SnarkyDragon (talk) 12:05, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

@SnarkyDragon, this self-guided tutoring series will help you save time and frustration. Valereee (talk) 12:11, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

For a quick look, I still use it from time to time, see Wikipedia:Glossary and Wikipedia:Wikipedia abbreviations. Lectonar (talk) 12:13, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

And for some humour, although it might require a little amount of wikiknowledge, see Wikipedia:Village stocks and WP:LIGHTBULB. Lectonar (talk) 12:16, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Seeing your editing history and the problems you have had, I would highly recommend Wikipedia:Citing sources, you cannot add content supported by your own knowledge, it has to be supported by a published source. Theroadislong (talk) 15:33, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Article Publication

I did revised the article named "Parich Khel, Utmanzai", I did improved the content and added authentic links. Kindly review my article and give me feedback of it. Thanks KhushalKhan01 (talk) 13:53, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

If you want the draft to be reviewed, KhushalKhan01, you should resubmit it for review through the AfC process. For future reference, please don't remove past AfC reviews, as you did in this edit. Cordless Larry (talk) 14:06, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

How to resubmit it according to the said process ? Kindly guide. Thank you KhushalKhan01 (talk) 14:08, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

I've restored the template that you deleted; there's a resubmit button on it. Cordless Larry (talk) 14:12, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

From where can I resubmit it ? KhushalKhan01 (talk) 14:15, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

I doubt if fixing this one point will bring your article up to speed (I'm sorry to say), but when I read the article, I had to get to the last sentence to find out that you're talking about somewhere in Pakistan. This is the English language Wikipedia, so probably most of the readers are going to be American, Canadian, British, Australian, or New Zealanders. I don't know how well know the places you name are in Pakistan, but most of the readers I've mentioned will not have heard of any of them. Uporządnicki (talk) 14:18, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Yes, this is a place in Pakistan. This article will help Pakistani people as many of Pakistani use Wikipedia as a helping source. So this article should be published for the convenience of people. KhushalKhan01 (talk) 14:21, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

I have add information that are available. For the time being, this article should be published as it provide History, Notables members of the "Parich Khel, Utmanzai". So this will help the people. KhushalKhan01 (talk) 14:24, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Sir how much time will it take to be published ? KhushalKhan01 (talk) 14:31, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

@KhushalKhan01: Hey! As the message on your draft says, This may take 4 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are thousands of submissions waiting to be reviewed, and it may take some time. Bsoyka (t • c • g) 15:57, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

can you review it now ? 39.44.144.240 (talk) 15:59, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

About sources stating other sources

Some sentence is marked with a citation. The citation says it has taken the information from some other source. That other original source is found. Should that original source be added and that second hand source be removed? Also in another case, you have two sources, one is original non English source, and another is English source which cites the non English one, which should be used? Assume all sources mentioned to be reliable and equivalent in other factors. Thanks, ExclusiveEditor _{Notify Me!} 14:42, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

@ExclusiveEditor: It's difficult to give a general answer to these questions as they're both very situational. As a starting point, you should cite the source that you took the information from. If your source got the information from another source, and they're otherwise completely equivalent, there's no reason to replace it. But if for example one is primary and one is secondary, or one provides more useful context to readers than the other, the situation is different. If the statement is controversial or exceptional it may be appropriate to cite both; if not, it's probably overkill. English vs. non-English sources is a special case: per WP:NONENG, if there is an English source and a non-English source of equal quality, we should prefer the English one on the English Wikipedia. – Joe (talk) 15:58, 18 July 2024 (UTC)