Wikipedia:Teahouse

Welcome to the Teahouse...                        

A friendly place to learn about editing Wikipedia.

Click here to
ask a question

Stormy clouds, a Teahouse host

Question forum

Host profiles

Guest profiles

Experienced editor? Become a host!

Learn more about the Teahouse

Articles to improve

Question archive

Guest archive

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

Reading and correcting spelling/grammar

Hi.

I am interested for now in reading the articles and checking for spelling and grammatical errors. Is this type of task available?

Yes! Thanks for offering to help with this neverending task. See WP:TYPO to start. In the see also section there is a link to other projects related to cleanup like this. RudolfRed (talk)

Help with template

Moved to User:Xinbenlv/Help with template

Dear friendly editors.

Can anyone help me edit this Template:Inconsistent Birthday? Basically, the purpose is to allow pass in multiple (ideally, indefinite number of) entries of InterWikiLinks and Birthdays as variables of the template, and use it on Talk page.

It looks like this right now

{{Inconsistent Birthday}} Xinbenlv (talk) 07:26, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

Hi Xinbenlv. Because templates can affect lots of pages (sometimes in not so obvious ways) and the syntax involved can be a bit complicated, you might get better feedback from experienced template editors by asking at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Templates or even Wikipedia:Village Pump/Technical instead. Moreover, you should be aware that templates which have little encyclopedic value or are redundant to exisiting template can end up being nominated for deletion at WP:TFD if they don't comply with Wikipedia:Template namespace for some reason. I'm not saying that's the case here, but just pointing it out in case you weren't aware of it. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:42, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

Thank you that's very helpful. I will ask over there. Xinbenlv (talk) 07:45, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

How to find Categories

I don't mind saying that the process of how to find suitable Categories for an article bewilders me. Normally I try copying them from similar articles, changing as necessary - sometimes that works and sometimes it doesn't. But is there some way to search for suitable Categories? For example, I just published Marcello Costa. Most of my Category guesses were okay, but not Category:Fellows of the Australasian Academy of Science and Category:Alumni of the University of Turin. Those were modelled on categories used for other universities and follows of societies, but I just don't know how to find our what the right names are - if they indeed exist. Is there a searchable list of categories somewhere? Or some other way to find out what to use?--Gronk Oz (talk) 13:21, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

@Gronk Oz: You can go to Special:Search, clear all the namespaces selected by default, add 'Category' instead, and insert 'University Turin' in the search box. Result: Special:Search/Category:University Turin.

Similary Special:Search/Category:fellows academy science or Special:Search/Category:australasian fellows.

HTH. :) CiaPan (talk) 13:30, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

@CiaPan: that is just brilliant, thank you - it is exactly what I need! Now I can easily see that the one I want is Category:University of Turin alumni, and it's so easy. Thanks.--Gronk Oz (talk) 13:40, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

@Gronk Oz: Another method is to use HotCat, a gadget you enable in your preferences (Preferences --> Gadgets --> Enable HotCat). I find it quite useful. --bonadea contributions talk 13:43, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

(ec) Glad to help, Gronk Oz. Have a nice day. Or night ...well, have a nice time, whichever time it is at your side now. --CiaPan (talk) 13:46, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

@Gronk Oz: I've also found this helpful: Special:CategoryTree valereee (talk) 15:23, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, all - I will put these to good use.--Gronk Oz (talk) 21:50, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

No subject

can u review my draft??????????? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Debasmita_Bhattacharya

please help me — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bhikhurathee (talk • contribs) 15:32, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

@Bhikhurathee: Another editor has reviewed your draft. See the comments on your talk page and on the draft. RudolfRed (talk) 18:13, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

Хочу создать страницу одного талантливого, молодого футболиста, но не знаю как.

Помогите пожалуйста с созданием странички. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Manujoon (talk • contribs) 15:57, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

A rough translation from Russian:

== I want to publish a page of one talented, young football player, but I don't know how ==

Please help (me) with publishing the page.

User:Manujoon

(transl. by CiaPan (talk) 16:57, 22 February 2019 (UTC))

Based on the user's sandbox I suppose it's about https://ru-ru.facebook.com/kimatsho.muminshoev --CiaPan (talk) 17:01, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

I have posted a request for help at Wikipedia talk:Embassy#Help needed for a Russian-speaking newbie. In case that is not the best place, please copy or link it elsewhere. --CiaPan (talk) 17:23, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

Also copied to Wikipedia talk:Local Embassy#Help needed for a Russian-speaking newbie. --CiaPan (talk) 21:17, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

QUESTION

How do you become an administrator on Wikipedia?

Thanks, Badsaad10 (talk

@Badsaad10: Once an editor has demonstrated that their competence and trustworthiness over many years and thousands of edits, someone can nominate them for adminship. Then the community discusses the nomination and the Arbitration Committee decides on the community's consensus. Ian.thomson (talk) 17:18, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

@Ian.thomson: Oh, I see. Thank you very much!

@Ian.thomson and Badsaad10: This is mostly correct. The Arbitration Committee has nothing to do with RFAs, which are closed by Bureaucrats. 100.2.120.74 (talk) 19:28, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

@Badsaad10: You can read all about it here: Wikipedia:Administrators. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 20:09, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

Picture on Satyagraha

Hello! I am new to the english Wikipedia and I drew a picture on Gandhi's Satyagraha. A german version is already used in the german Article w:de:Satyagraha. You can also look on the Talk page of the article for my reasons Talk:Satyagraha#Picture_on_Satyagraha.

My question is: Is the picture good enough for the english article? :-)

Friendly greetings, Quark48 (talk) 20:58, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Quark48 and a friendly welcome to the Teahouse to you, too. The answer I was just about to give you has already been supplied to you on the talk page of that article. There you were advised by Ronz to raise the issue at Wikipedia talk:Image use policy, which I think was a good suggestion. Instead you chose to ask here, and my view is that, assuming you translated it into English, there would probably be far too much original research inherent within your flow diagram that it probably would be rejected as unacceptable. (Neither my knowledge of the topic, nor knowledge of the German language are sufficient for me to give firm advice). If you were to proceed, you should ensure that any chart followed content given in cited references, and not just your own personal understanding and interpretation of this particular concept of non-violent resistance. But, you are to be applauded for taking the initiative to ask first, so thank you for your concerns to ensure that English wikipedia stays as neutral and unbiased as is possible. I hope you get the results you seek at the Image use forum. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 01:19, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Okay, I'll ask there! Thank you. :-) Quark48 (talk) 09:49, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Found a biased article

Hello. I am new to Wikipedia so I don't think I should be responsible for editing this article. Rather, I should have someone else fix the article, and then I observe how it was fixed and I'll learn from that. The article is Tyler Morris and it is so biased that it seems like it was written by a publicist. I posted on the Talk Page but I'm not sure if anyone will ever see my post.

To get the article improved, what would be my best move here? Jasongarb (talk) 21:57, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

@Jasongarb: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I kind of see what you are saying, some of the language could be toned down a bit. If you don't feel comfortable doing it yourself, you can make your talk page comment into a formal edit request (click that link for more information) which will eventually draw the attention of another editor. 331dot (talk) 00:04, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Article shortened by more than half. Separate problem is that the first ref goes nowhere related to TM and the other two are to his website. David notMD (talk) 03:16, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

@Jasongarb:The article has now been nominated for deletion.--Gronk Oz (talk) 08:44, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Tennis Edit

Is this where I can inquire about making an edit to an article? I have some information to add to in the Wikipedia "tennis" page and would like to add some information to the section talking about tennis balls and racket dampeners. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chambersbrand (talk • contribs) 23:34, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

@Chambersbrand: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse! This is a place for newer or inexperienced users to ask any questions they have about using or editing Wikipedia. That includes questions about editing articles; feel free to pose your question and others (not necessarily me) will do their best to help. 331dot (talk) 23:57, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

You also may not be aware that every article has an associated 'talk page', which is meant for discussing changes to or the makeup of the article. In the case of tennis that would be Talk:Tennis. You may also ask your question there; it is likely that many editors follow the tennis article and will see your question. 331dot (talk) 23:59, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

Closing discussion problem

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.

---

For some reason, whenever I am using {{atop|''note'' + ~~~~}}, it is not displayed once published. However, when I remove my signature (~~~~) it's displayed normal. Any ideas on why this is happening with me? I don't see this a problem with other users. THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 01:33, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

ImmortalWizard — It is because you have a bare span tag — <span style="color:orange">'''THE NEW'''</span>. Try removing it from your signature and it will be fixed. ―Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk • contribs) 01:42, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

@ImmortalWizard and Abelmoschus Esculentus: No, it is because your signature contains equals signs and you don't say {{atop|result=''note'' + ~~~~}} as documented at Template:atop. Without a named parameter like result=, everything to the left of the first equals sign is interpreted as a parameter name being assigned everything to the right of the equals sign. It's fine to have equals signs in your signature but it means that any signature in a template parameter must use a parameter name. If the parameter has no name then say |1= for the first unnamed parameter, |2= for the second and so on. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:43, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Abelmoschus Esculentus may be partially right. If an equals sign in an unnamed parameter is inside a wikilink then it appears it will not be interpreted as a parameter assignment, so it would work to eliminate the first equals sign in this signature. But you can keep the signature if you just say |reason= or |1=. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:50, 23 February 2019 (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.

Inc or Inc.?

Which is consonant with Wiki usage: 'Inc' or 'Inc.'?- AWCzarnik (talk) 05:29, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

In an article title, usually neither, see WP:Naming conventions (companies). --David Biddulph (talk) 05:35, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. That generates another question. The title of Czarnik v. Illumina is given as, 'Czarnik v. Illumina, Inc'. Based on WP:Naming conventions (companies), the 'Inc' should not be in the title. I don't know how to edit the title. Would appreciate advice.- AWCzarnik (talk) 06:02, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

@AWCzarnik: Legal cases are different—in that case, Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Legal#In_the_United_States applies. I'm not sure what the "Bluebook" style referred to is, but it seems from the examples and other articles about legal cases that we do include the "Inc." For future reference, if you hover over the "More" text (next to Read, Edit, etc) there should be a "Move" link. Click that to rename an article. Gaelan 💬✏️ 06:26, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, AWCzarnik. The problem with your analysis is that Czarnik v. Illumina, Inc is not an article about a company, but rather an article about a court case involving that company. Therefore, a guideline about naming articles about companies is not relevant and is off point. Instead, we name articles about court cases the way that the preponderance of reliable sources about the court case (not the company) refer to the case. And almost all reliable sources describing the court case use "Inc" as discussed by the court itself. And therefore, Wikipedia will title its article about the case that way. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:30, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Thank you both. If the suffix is to remain, I assume it should be, "Inc.". Are either of you able to help me edit the title to add the period?- AWCzarnik (talk) 06:45, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

I figured out the solution to my own question, thanks to the advice of Gaelan. Appreciate both of your assistance.- AWCzarnik (talk) 07:08, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

GA/DYK count

Hey there, I was wondering if there was a way to check a user's GA and DYK count. So, could you kindly let me know if there is any? Thank you! Adityavagarwal (talk) 07:55, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Adityavagarwal. That's a great question, and one I tried to answer about 24 hours ago for you - but I was using a smartphone and right at the end managed to lose all my edits! Anyway, I gave up, but am now on a desktop, so welcome to the Teahouse. The answer is necessarily in two parts , as they need to be considered differently:

1. DYK This is a fairly easy one to answer as anyone submitting a DYK nomination has to create a DYK nomination template. Thus, you need to use this page creation analysis tool to list all the pages they have created in the Template namespace, and look for and count those with "Template:Did you know nomination" in the title. This is my list of 11 DYK nominations out of 13 new templates created in total, and this is your list of 22 nominations. (Great work there!) I must highlight that nominating an article for DYK isn't the same as it actually getting it accepted at DYK. (My count includes one currently active DYK nomination, so would want to count that one, or not, I wonder? So, to be really accurate, you would have to manually check each article to check it got through OK. I see you have 24 DYK's listed on your userpage, not 22. My guess is that you might have co-nominated two other articles, but that another user actually created the nomination template page? (I'd be interested to know.)
2. GA count. This subject to interpretation as to what actually constitutes a "GA count". This could mean:

• a page that you created that has subsequently become a Good Article, irrespective of whether it was your own input that took it there.
• a page someone else created, which you subsequently worked on considerably, and which you nominated and took through to Good Article review
• a page someone else created, which you subsequently worked on considerably, but which another editor took through to Good Article review
• a page some else created, for which you acted as the GA reviewer

Because it is such a movable feast, I doubt there is a way to analyse editor data to produce a simple breakdown as for DYK. The only workaround I could suggest is to list all the users contributions on one page and do a word search for the string "/GA1". But this would yield multiple results for multiple page edits. For example, this is a list of every one of your 7,000+ edits, with 515 edits (spread over two pages of results) made to talk pages with /GA1 in them, such as Talk:Frank Dux/GA1.

But if all you wanted to know was how many articles other people created that you had done a GA review of yourself, then that's much easier: Just go and analyse how many Talk pages you have created in the Talk namespace, and then search for "/GA1". In your case, it's 26. See here. Does any of this give you the answers you sought? If not, maybe this question is one best asked at Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations? Hope this helps a bit, and sorry for the long wait for an answer. Please let me know if you find a better one!Nick Moyes (talk) 03:22, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Hey Nick Moyes, thank you very, very much for your detailed and invaluable response, and for taking the time and effort to re-write your answer! For the DYK count, I have 22 in addition to two hooks those had two articles each. So, there are 20 articles with a separate DYK hook for each and 4 articles with 2 hooks only (Bar-tailed cuckoo-dove and Mackinlay's cuckoo-dove; Barred cuckoo-dove and Little cuckoo-dove). So, it might be that as only 2 templates for the 4 DYK articles were created, it shows two fewer DYKs. Also, the Philippine cuckoo-dove and ruddy cuckoo-dove had a solitary hook, although due to some bot error at the time, the credit was only given for the Philippine cuckoo-dove and not for the ruddy cuckoo-dove (again, only 1 template created for two DYK articles). So, that makes it 25. For the GA count, I was asking for the number of articles a user had promoted to a GA status. The technique that you have mentioned to check for "/GA1" in the edit summary is wonderful. What I could do is just check for those edits opposed to checking all the edits of a user. Also, thanks for the bonus answer of checking a person's GA review count. For me, yes, 26 is accurate! Adityavagarwal (talk) 03:55, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

You're very welcome, Adityavagarwal. That explanation of DYK count makes sense. Keep up the great work you're doing. Nick Moyes (talk) 08:46, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Nick Moyes You too, keep doing the amazing work you have been doing! Adityavagarwal (talk) 08:54, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

How can I add the twilight zone (2019) logo picture in wikipedia ?

Excuse me but I am not good at adding images in wikipedia,So I need step by step instructions on how will I add the twilight zone (2019) logo in the wikipedia article ? : https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c7/Twilight_zone_2019_logo.jpg --Belrien12 (talk) 07:57, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Hi Belrien12. That image is already in use at The Twilight Zone (2019 TV series). Are you thinking of using the image in another article? Please understand that because that logo is being used under a claim of fair use, it can only be used in very specific locations, and the image page would have to be changed to make out a fair use rationale for any separate, additonal display. Can you provide some details on where you wanted to use this?--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 08:46, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

misinformation and factual errors

i have come across mistakes and factually wrong information. tell me how to correct and edit it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spmenon33 (talk • contribs) 12:30, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

@Spmenon33: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Does this refer to your attempts to edit Shweta Menon? If yes, your changes were reverted because they were made without explanation. When you make an edit, it is helpful to briefly explain your changes in the edit summary(a bar below the edit window when you are typing your edit) or on the article talk page(in this case Talk:Shweta Menon). You will also need to have reliable sources to support your changes. As you are a new user, I would suggest that you use the new user tutorial which will help you to learn about how Wikipedia operates. 331dot (talk) 12:56, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Hello Spmenon33, if you come across those, I would say check the reliability of the sources, if there is any, and verify them (i.e. to check whether the content is properly established in the source). If you think it fails, feel free to tag beside the inline citation {{unreliable source?}}. Also, whenever you tag anything, it is important to say your reasoning on the talk page, even if it's obvious.

If there is no inline citation that is supporting the content that you think is controversial, tag {{citation needed}} and follow the same procedure. And of course, you can alter/remove the content if you are able to justify properly. I hope this helps. THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 13:00, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Grammar and Spelling check

Is there a grammar and spelling checker for writing and editing content on Wikipedia?, like the Grammarly Ad On for Mozilla. If yes please tell me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prashantmore209 (talk • contribs) 12:57, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Prashantmore209. I don't believe there is. But note that Wikipedia is not a browser like Mozilla Firefox: it is a *(huge) website, which you can acceess via any browser (including Firefox). I'm not familiar with how Grammarly works, but I would have expected that if you edit Wikipedia with a browser to which you have added Grammarly, it would report on the spelling and grammar. --ColinFine (talk) 22:03, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

Editing

Hi,

I have recently edited two person's personal details. One is under talk. What is the procedure you do next? Is it review? Thanks /JV — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr. Jyovijay (talk • contribs) 14:43, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

All of your edits (to one article, to another article's Talk Talk:Sukumari) were published right after you clicked on Publish changes. Is there more you wanted to accomplish? David notMD (talk) 16:43, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Anyone willing to mentor me?

Is there anyone who could mentor me on being an effective editor for a controversial subject (one prone to edit warring because neither side can ever see the other's viewpoint)? One side is making pages that are (a) not notable and (b) criticisms only; adding citations that are either not English or are irrelevant to the page-topic (in order to introduce yet more controversial information to any potential reader); changing back things that are edited (and well documented as to why things were changed that way and how it matches WP editor guidelines). In other words, they are engaging in a propaganda war using Wikipedia. They started it; I'm trying to fix it. I've tried everything "by the book" and I'm losing the war. What's a newbie to do? I've read a heap of Wiki editor policies and it's so much information with no sense of how to go about this. (Every article is equal to every other article with no heirarchy or sequence.) Is there anyone willing to mentor through email to help me understand the framework where I need to start and a path to travel? I need the "crash course"! Nomopbs (talk) 16:51, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Hello Nomopbs, check out this list of mentors. Here, you will find experienced editors who are looking for mentees and are willing to effortlessly train them. At the bottom of that page, there is a box where you can click to request one for yourself with preferences. I hope this helps. If you have any specific queestions, you can ask anyone. THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 17:42, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, ImmortalWizard. That was a tool I didn't know was available until you mentioned it. Thanks! Nomopbs (talk) 19:47, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

You appear to be editing at Dogsbite.org and Talk:Dogsbite.org. Is this where you are finding conflict? From a quick look, appears you and other editors are correctly discussing differences of opinion (and perhaps of fact) at the Talk page. Keep calm, and carry on. David notMD (talk) 17:45, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the pat on the back, David notMD. I'm trying. The others aren't playing per guidelines. Nomopbs (talk) 19:47, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

When are only general references appropriate?

I am having a hard time understanding when it is accepted to use general sources without inline citations in high-profiled articles (except for really common knowledge of course). The guideline on when to use inline citations is quite vague and does not really explain what's sufficient enough. I looked through the explanation on what information should be treated as challenging, but still unable to have a clear understanding. I hope that I have properly tagged George Santayana (which has sections without citations). This whole thing is confusing for me and may confuse several newcomers as well. Please help be understand this. Thanks! THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 18:30, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, ImmortalWizard. As this encyclopedia has developed and matured over the years, the trend is very much in favor of inline citations, although they are only required by policy in certain cases. As a practical matter, speaking as an editor who has written about a hundred new articles and expanded many hundreds more, I use inline citations extensively and never use general sources. Sometimes, I may add a "further reading" link but sparingly. In 2019, I feel safe in saying that almost all experienced editors use inline citations very extensively. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:09, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

@Cullen328: Thanks for your valuable response. For the time being, I will follow what currently best in practice. However, I would suggest an amendment for strengthing the use of sources in wiki policy. I am planning to publish essay(s) regarding citing and verifying sources once I gather enough knowledge and experience, since I believe this aspect of editing had often been overlooked. THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 23:39, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

I would also like to add that today we are leaning more towards footnotes rather than traditional bibliography. I think if we emphasize to create what's best for the readers, I believe it will enhance Wikipedia's credibility as an online encyclopedia. THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 23:47, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

I am new to Wikipedia. Please guide me

My article on an actor was rejected because of the following reasons 'This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.' Can you simplify the statement? Also, my counter argument on notability was that I have seen pages of actors and actress of less significance and hence choose this topic. I could even name a few actors in Malayalam field example Drishya Raghunath, who has acted in two films and has not achieved any award to be a significant notability. So why is a piece on the young and upcoming actor Adwaith rejected?'. I have also given references to the statements in the article I posted about the actor from various sites and newspaper articles. Do help me out here. Thank you Anjana T S (talk) 18:56, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Anjana T S, First, many of the references don't link to a specific article. That needs to be fixed. The refs that do work (I.E. the IMDB one) are not reliable sources, nor do they show that the subject is notable. WelpThatWorked (talk) 19:03, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Anjana T S. There are many substandard articles in Wikipedia - often because they were created before we became as careful about notability, or because somebody somehow got an article through without being noticed. If you find an article which does not establish the subject's notability, you are encouraged to do something about it. You could nominate the article for deletion (though the process is a little tricky, and you should really search for sources before doing so; or you could add the template {{notability}} to the top of the article, which will draw people's attention to the fact that you think its notability is questionable. If you do this, please make sure you put something sensible in the edit summary, so that it will not look like vandalism. Please see Other stuff exists. --ColinFine (talk) 22:14, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

Article

Hi, I am sorry if this is a noob question but I would like to take a stab at making my first article. I study the music industry a lot so something in that realm would be awesome to create. Can I find something to write about or should a topic be proposed to me? Thank you! Grimothy29 (talk) 19:17, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Hi and welcome to Wikipedia. We were all noobs once. Take a look at Wikipedia:Most-wanted_articles the music section of Wikipedia:Requested_articles. Suggest looking at Wikipedia:Your_first_article to ensure it goes through smoothly. Also I'd recommend editing a few articles to get a taste for how things work, before jumping in and creating a new one. --Cornellier (talk) 21:07, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

My advice is take a look WP:GNG and try to think of something (without article) that would pass that without problem, the easier the better. Or find some articles on stuff you like and improve them. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 22:35, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

There are lots of Category:Musician stubs (and other stub categories about music), you could expand an existing stub for somebody you know. You could also look for bands you like, and (example) import w:de:X-Rx, if Industrial music is your thing. Or find an existing draft about music and help to get it in shape for a proper article. Or find an existing redirect not really covered on the target page, and convert it to a proper article (that's actually rather advanced, so maybe try that later :-) –84.46.53.3 (talk) 23:08, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

2 Questions

Question 1:
MsFredd said this on my talk page. I don't quite understand what this editor is saying. Could you clarify what they said and how I should reply to it?
Question 2:
I understand that signatures on Wikipedia have the timestamp in UTC format. However, my local time in Eastern Time in North America. It causes ambiguity when converting between time zones. Is it possible to change the Wikipedia timestamps to my local time zone instead of UTC or should I change the time zone on my computer to match Wikipedia's time even though it is not my local time? Mstrojny (talk) 22:18, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Q2: Go to your Preferences (upper right, right after the link to your Sandbox), click Gadgets, scroll down to Appearance, and select Change UTC-based times and dates, such as those used in signatures, to be relative to local time, then save. For Q1, it sounds like MsFredd is inviting you to work on improving an article together. Schazjmd (talk) 23:12, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Adding a ping @Mstrojny: Schazjmd (talk) 23:14, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

How do you change a Redirect

Ok so I want to add the English language to this wiki page https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Speedrunner_Assembly but when I do it tells me "Could not save due to an error. The save has failed. The link enwiki:Speedrun is already used by Item Q1500337. You may remove it from Q1500337 if it does not belong there or merge the Items if they are about the exact same topic."

And when I looked deeper it says "Speedrun From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 (Redirected from European Speedrunner Assembly)"

So I was wondering how do I get rid of the redirect(I know there is a redirect page but I was unsure if this fell under it), is there a way for me to get here through mobile, and can you add the language on mobile? Thanks for looking at this sorry if this isn't in format I'm new to this asking page --Zebrazach20062 (talk) 23:39, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

You are actually talking about d:Q19605481 on WikiData. I found it by going to the svwiki page linked by you, and clicking on Wikidataobjekt on the left sidebar. There is in fact only it + sv on d:Q19605481, and maybe you try to add Speedrunner.
That's a disambiguation page, for d:Q19605481 you need an exactly matching page (same topic European Speedrunner Assembly ), everything else belongs to other Wikidata items (= other weird Q-number).
If you are sure that d:Q19605481 and d:Q1500337 (for Speedrun) are the same thing you can ask for a merge on the d:Wikidata:Project chat, use {{Q|Q19605481}} and {{Q|Q1500337}} when talking about it on Wikidata. –84.46.53.3 (talk) 01:01, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

They aren't the same thing though and also what do you mean by "try to add Speedrunner"?

All I did was put En into the gray box then put European Speedrunner Assembly next to it, then clicked accept and it errored me

I would attempt to do it again but it's not the same on mobile as it is on computer when I try to edit it.

Sorry if I'm confusing at all

Also can you ping me when you talk, so I can know that someone has responded to this :P Zebrazach20062 (talk) 17:42, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

@Zebrazach20062: Check out Help:Interlanguage_links#Adding_a_new_link, the last statement in this section could be what you are looking for, the complete help page explains how it works.
As long as svwiki has nothing in the direction of w:en:Speedrun and enwiki has nothing in the direction of w:sv:European Speedrunner Assembly you're stuck. –84.46.53.3 (talk) 22:50, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

Ok thank you for helping me I was on that article and I must have skipped over that section by accident, if I decide to try that again I will use that information :) Zebrazach20062 (talk) 23:03, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

Looking for academic metrics

Can anybody suggest a reliable way to get a count of how many papers an academic has published? And ideally how many citations of those papers? I'm looking for something I can put in their article along the lines of: "X has published Y academic papers, which have been cited Z times." If I could have all my wishes it would be great to have something like the h-index as well because it gives an indication of how influential they are in their field. Or is there a risk that some of this may count as original research? --Gronk Oz (talk) 01:11, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

For scholar.google.com results need human review (mixing up unrelated authors in unrelated fields with the same name, etc.), and it's never complete. I don't know CiteSeerX apart from the name. No, you won't get what you want in a form suited for enwiki, but you can get fresh ideas for a bibliography section on a WP:BLP.
Apart from WP:OR it's also against WP:STATS and, broadly construed, WP:NUMFRIENDS, there's an US-centric bias in those metrics, it will constitute racism and violate the WikiMedia TOS (terms of use) no matter what you do, so clearly no, unless it's a very simple field with exact numbers like "RFCs published". –84.46.53.3 (talk) 01:32, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

@84.46.53.3: Thanks for your reply, though I would to clarify if I may. It sounds like you're arguing against the relevance of citations, but WP: ACADEMIC says that "The most typical way of satisfying Criterion 1 (for notability) is to show that the academic has been an author of highly cited academic work." My question is about where are the best sources for that information. Gronk Oz (talk) 07:20, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

@Gronk Oz: Yes, sorry if that was unclear, relevant publications you put in a bibliography section of a BLP are good. If you find a reliable, relevant, independent (=WP:42) source saying that somebody has a major impact it would be even better. What you can't do is say so on your own based on obscure metrics, that would be OR / STATS / SYNTH / ….
Unless it's something established in other articles, e.g., allegedly professional music or film ratings (stars) are supported in infoboxes for albums / films, alexa page rank is still accepted for web sites, and followers for YouTubers are in the process of being removed (from the infobox) as not good enough. –84.46.53.3 (talk) 23:23, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

I'm new to Wikipedia. Does this company qualify as being notable?

Company: Cognitiv Cognitivlabs.com

Not looking to get a full page, but rather a snippet.

Notability:

Cover story in Adweek's printed publication about how they run IBM Watson's advertising technology.

https://www.adweek.com/digital/ibm-is-bringing-next-level-ai-technology-to-marketers/

Note: The web page for all their writers, including their editor in chief, is designated as adweek.com/contributor/name, which can be confusing as it seems like it designates them as a contributor. This is a printed cover story. Adweek also has a Wikipedia page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adweek

IBM Watson has a Wikipedia page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watson_(computer)

Since you can't read it in full, being in the printed publication, here is another source documenting the IBM Watson stuff:

https://adexchanger.com/data-exchanges/marketers-guide-ai-marketing-advertising/

Digiday Best Mobile Marketing Platform 2018 -

https://digiday.com/awards/chartbeat-amobee-and-adobe-are-the-top-winners-in-the-digiday-technology-awards/

DigiDay has a Wikipedia page as well, for notability checking. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digiday

Here are some less notable sources that might allow for some secondary content. I designated them being staff and contributing writers in parenthesis:

https://www.exchangewire.com/blog/2017/12/12/experts-predict-will-artificial-intelligence-become-less-talk-action-2018/ (staff writer) https://www.thedrum.com/news/2017/09/27/beeswax-four-partners-form-new-adtech-platform-programmatic-cloud (staff writer) https://www.inc.com/jeremy-goldman/how-companies-like-amazon-google-turn-data-into-a-competitive-advantage-how-you-can-too.html (contributor) https://geomarketing.com/cognitiv-labs-neural-net-programmatic (staff writer) CIO Applications Top 25 AI Service Providers 2018 - https://artificial-intelligence.cioapplications.com/vendor/cognitiv-selftrained-deep-neural-networks-to-transform-marketing-cid-2043-mid-112.html (staff writer)

I'm new to Wikipedia and I want to see if I'm doing this right. Do the notable sources I listed at the top of this inquiry qualify for a snippet page? If not, what do I need? Also, do the less notable sources have any use? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Interpellation89 (talk • contribs) 02:23, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

@Interpellation89: The sources really need to be primarily and specifically about Cognitiv to establish notability. The sources also need to be completely independent of Cognitiv (not press releases or other marketing pieces ultimately paid for by Cognitiv). For these reasons, I'm not seeing the sources you've cited as sufficiently demonstrating notability. Here is my guide on how to write articles that won't be rejected or deleted, part of this larger guide on a variety of matters. Ian.thomson (talk) 02:43, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

General Editing Help

I have found an issue on the page "War on Terror". Mujahideen is misspelled as Mujahadeen. However the page is protected so I cannot fix the issue. Is there anywhere to add a comment so someone else can fix it?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_on_Terror

Under background, Precursor to the September 11 attacks — Preceding unsigned comment added by GvnRich (talk • contribs) 03:04, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

Hi @GvnRich: - I was able to make the change that you requested. Here is a little more about the process for requesting edits to protected pages: Wikipedia:Edit_requests#Making_requests. Have a good evening! Larry Hockett (Talk) 03:15, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

Changing the Page Title

New editor here My primary mission is to edit a page title that includes a geographical reference that is no longer valid. It appears that this is the one thing off limits to editing. Please advise. Lee — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leestanleyjones (talk • contribs) 03:20, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

Hi Leestanleyjones, welcome to the Teahouse. Moving a page requires autoconfirmed rights most of the time—these only take 10 edits and 4 days to acquire, but in the mean time you can request that a page be moved here. Eman235/talk 03:54, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

I'm a Wiki-Moron...help?

I'm a new user. My User id is DrumLessons. I tried to start a personal page called Greg Dana (Drummer, Instructor) for my business accomplishments. I did write it out but I can't find it in the search mode. It appears that the name Greg Dana (...) is titled DrumLessons/sandbox. How do I change this? Confused as frick! Can you kindly help? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by DrumLessons (talk • contribs) 07:36, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, DrumLessons. Your draft is located at User:DrumLessons/sandbox but you should not try to move it into the main space of the encyclopedia because it would be deleted almost immediately. It is written in a joking style inappropriate for an encyclopedia article and is completely unreferenced. It also appears to be an autobiography, and this type of article is strongly discouraged. Please read and study Your first article to develop an understanding of what is required for an acceptable Wikipedia biography. Take a look at Ringo Starr to see what a really good article about a drummer looks like. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 08:11, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

Who has rights to delete entire pages?

Am collaborating with an artist on a major film project and was referring to his page. One day it was live and the following day it had been deleted. The artist did not remove it. Who has rights to delete an entire body of reference? The artist can be found on this dedicated website: jeffreymilburn.com/. Seems rather disrespectful and/or spiteful. TY. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KDallett (talk • contribs) 10:45, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

@KDallett: Administrators have the right to delete pages. Your article probably get deleted because it met one of the criteria for speedy deletion, which you can see here. If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to ask. Mstrojny (talk) 10:58, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

I assume that the page in question was Jeffrey Milburn, which was deleted after a community discussion here. It seems Milburn is not sufficiently notable for a Wikipedia article - something he has in common with a huge, huge majority of all artists and other people in the world. --bonadea contributions talk 11:06, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

Report malicious edits

Hi, I found a wiki page on my village and the contents in it were not true as well as inappropriate. I tried editing it, but someone edited it back to the previous version. How/where can I report that editor/edits? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bigi Philip (talk • contribs) 12:29, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

@Bigi Philip: Reporting the editor/edits would not be the right thing to do. If you do not agree with another's edits, please discuss them on the article's talk page. Mstrojny (talk) 12:33, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

Infobox

How do you make a infobox?Squid Ink Ultra (talk) 13:05, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

See Help:Infobox, WP:List of infoboxes, and also (if you are talking about making a new infobox template) Help:Designing infoboxes and WP:Infobox. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:12, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

I notice that a similar question was asked, and answered, at User talk:Inkling girl Squid#Infoboxes. Do you have any connection with that user? If so, please read WP:Sockpuppetry. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:17, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

Review of draft

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:SS_Mundra Review my draft — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bhikhurathee (talk • contribs) 13:40, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

As the brown box on the draft says, the draft is awaiting review, and because of the number of drafts similarly awaiting review this might take up to 7 weeks. You don't need to ask here for it to be reviewed. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:45, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

I took a quick look and it appears the article will be rejected for insufficient sourcing. See WP:GNG. I think you will need at least 6 more sources of biographical info, including 1-2 in-depth profile pieces, to demonstrate notability. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 07:42, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Hi want to make a page on Tejaswini Singh on wikipedia but got some problem . Can I get some help ?

(article text removed) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vicbro.arise (talk • contribs) 14:47, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

This isn't the place for an article text. Tejaswini singh is currently nominated for speedy deletion as it had no references and appeared to be merely an attempt at promotion. If the two "references" given here would serve to support any of the text in the article, they need to be included as references in the manner described in WP:referencing for beginners. You need to remove text which isn't supported by reliable sources, and in particular any text which is not written from a neutral point of view. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:13, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

Note also that the first link is broken and gives a 404 error, and the second is not in English so you probably need to given an English translation to aid reviewers. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:17, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

George HW Bush Wiki

Hello, I think there is an error on the former president's wiki page. It says he signed NAFTA. Is that true? I think Bill Clinton signed it. Honest question. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:703:380:F38:7060:F3DE:E66F:C506 (talk) 15:30, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

The situation is discussed at NAFTA#Negotiation, ratification, and revision (1988–94). --David Biddulph (talk) 15:33, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

Painting of Emperor Willem II yacht in Molde harbour in 1901

We have a painting by Jean Playfair Evans of German Emperor Willem II yacht in Molde harbour painted in the summer of 1901. In the text presenting Molde, there is a mention that the Prince of Wales and the Emperor visited Molde. We think it would be interesting to include the painting in the Molde Wikipedia entry, alongside Nico Wilhelm Jungmann's 1904 painting.

The link for the painting is: http://jeanplayfair.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/NORWAY_ALBUM_28.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by JEAN PLAYFAIR (talk • contribs) 16:14, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

The fact that Wilhelm II visited Molde is a very, very, very, very small part of the article about Molde, and in my opinion does not warrant the addition of an image of a painting of his yacht. David notMD (talk) 20:28, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

What counts as notable?

Hi there I've been working on a series of articles on suffragettes / suffragists in Scotland and England who appear in the history books but not online, inspired by the Wiki Women in Red Project.

I recently had an article rejected. Some of the feedback was very useful and I have since improved the format and developed the context. However, one of the issues was "why she is important besides being arrested in a protest". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Florence_Hull#Florence_Hull

This makes me wonder whether this suffragette - who was a branch secretary and served time in prison for her part in suffragette protests - is notable enough for Wikipedia. This will have an impact on other articles I'm working on - many of whom were the footsoldiers of the movement rather than the leaders. All of them have census information, newspaper articles from the time written about them, and are named in books about the suffragette movement.

I'd love some guidance on whether this is enough to make them notable before I resubmit.

Many thanks Gillaween (talk) 16:18, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Gillaween, and welcome to the Teahouse. The issue that the reviewer had with the draft was not that it was written, but how it was written. It simply needs some more context, especially in the topmost section (called the "lead"). A lead should serve as a summary of the topic. If someone reads only the lead, they should still have a pretty good overview about the topic. The draft is a bit short, but it still mentions many other things besides her arrest. For instance, you could mention her work as honorary secretary in the lead section. And that she wasn't just arrested and then released, but wrote about her experience; that could be mentioned in the lead too.

But in short, the problem the reviewer mentioned was not with notability, but style of writing. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 16:39, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback Gillaween (talk) 17:20, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

Davy Jones (folklore) situation

I find it offending that you include the term "duppy" in the Davy Jones (folklore) page and I do not want that on the page anymore.

Relay this message accordingly and delete the quote.

This is more offensive than any other word on Wikipedia and it should be added to the banned list.

An African-American would set a book down if he found such a quote used on this page.

This is a very serious request and there is an explanation to the term after the quote, while both the quote and explanation are not important aspects of the story as the concept needs to be reworded and the term left out.

^{[Personal info removed -- Ian.thomson (talk)]} Respond with update, Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 157.182.149.174 (talk) 18:04, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

Do not post your phone number or email on here. It's about as smart as writing your phone number on a men's restroom wall with "for a good time, call..."

There is not currently a page titled Davy Jones (folklore). I assume you mean Davy Jones' Locker.

We have an article on the term Duppy, which is not historically a slur. Also, Wikipedia is not censored. I can find no sources saying that the word is offensive at any rate.

Frankly, that you think that that is the most offensive word to African-Americans (and not one starting with an N) raises questions about you. Ian.thomson (talk) 18:16, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

To Ian:

hold on, you are not taking this request seriously, and you are getting off on me in your final sentence.

that is exactly what I said.

if you read it again,the very explanation of the term is offensive, and I want it removed. keep the author, keep the book, remove the term and its explanation.

i would like someone else's opinion who does not get off on me.

i do not care if you are uncensored.

I'm telling you to remove it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.50.144.178 (talk) 01:29, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

He’s gone to Davy Jones’s locker, i.e. he is dead. Jones is a corruption of Jonah, the prophet, who was thrown into the sea. Locker, in seaman’s phrase, means any receptacle for private stores; and duppy is a ghost or spirit among the West Indian negroes. So the whole phrase is, "He is gone to the place of safe keeping, where duppy Jonah was sent to."

— E. Cobham Brewer[4]

change it to West Indians — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.50.144.178 (talk) 01:40, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

It's a quoted historical text. I don't care if you're telling us to remove it, Wikipedia is not censored.

Also, your original claim was that it was the word "duppy" that was offensive, not the explanation. You're moving the goalposts. Ian.thomson (talk) 02:06, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

I am sorry, but we are not going to remove the term on your say so. You are not in a position to make any such demands. You need to provide a link to a reliable source that verifies that the term is offensive. Our lengthy article Duppy does not call it offensive as a word and it is used extensively in song and literature. "Duppy Conqueror" by Bob Marley is just one example among many. One discrepancy is that the 1898 source uses "duffy", which in context seems to be a variant spelling of the same word. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:10, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

@Ian.thomson: There might be a real problem, the source says "duffy", the quote uses "duppy". –84.46.53.3 (talk) 02:14, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Fixed the quote. Duffy is derived from Duppy, so it's not talking about something else. Ian.thomson (talk) 02:19, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Template bots

Hi,

I've been wanting to add a few templates to the footer of all the pages of a few categories. Is there a firefox browser extension for that, or will I need to create my own bot? I'm not sure how to make my own bot.

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by RockingGeo (talk • contribs) 18:49, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

You're probably looking for Twinkle. ^{[Username Needed]} 20:24, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

Hello RockingGeo and welcome to the Teahouse.

For some one-off automated tasks such as the one you have described, AutoWikiBrowser is probably the most appropriate choice. Access to it requires an additional permission and you need to spend some time setting it up. Short of doing it yourself, you can request that another AWB user do the task at by adding a section at WP:AutoWikiBrowser/Tasks. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:46, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

@RockingGeo: Adding "some templates" at the bottom of "all the pages of a few categories" sounds like a decisive plan to get your account blocked and those pages protected. Unless you have some kind of consensus in a discussion behind it. –84.46.53.3 (talk) 01:26, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

So far, I see geology-related nav-bar templates added at the bottom of geology-related articles that had none. The question I might ask is whether it's appropriate to add both {{Geology}} and {{Structural geology}} nav-bars, but it's not a question over which I'd expect to see an editor get threatened with a block. Making a proposal for adding these templates and creating more templates at WikiProject Geology would be an appropriate thing to do. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:35, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Would like to start a page for a TV Show

Hello, I would like to start a page for a TV show - The Dr. Joy Show Your Prescription For Total Wellness. Would you be able to provide steps to assist me?

Thank you in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thedrjoyshow (talk • contribs) 20:01, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

First off, don't register an account that implies shared use. Ian.thomson (talk) 20:05, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

Then, Wikipedia:Your first article. Ian.thomson is refering to one of WP:s many policies found at WP:ISU. In short, something like Kim at Thedrjoyshow or Thedrjoyshowfan or Thedrjoyshowprperson is ok. For those interested, imdb: [1] Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:04, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

When "Why?" appears in an article!

When I come upon an article that has a "Why?" in in....how do I put in an answer I've found? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Danthebeachman (talk • contribs) 22:01, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Danthebeachman, and welcome to the Teahouse. An article that has a "Why?" in it should almost always be changed: one portion of the Manual of style for Wikipedia says "Do not address the reader with the Socratic method by asking and answering questions. Did Bacon write Shakespeare? Then who wrote Bacon?" So it is almost always appropriate for you (or anybody else) to remove the question. Whether or not it is appropriate for you to put an answer to the question depends on two things. 1) Do you have a reliable published source for the information you want to add? You usually can't add information from personal knowledge, unpublished papers, social media, forums or wikis. 2) Is the information actually encyclopaedic and relevant to the subject of the article?

Questions like this are often not clearcut, so if you think the answer to both is yes, feel free to add the information (with a citation to the published source); but others might disagree, and revert your edit: in which case, you can start a discussion on the article's talk page. --ColinFine (talk) 22:35, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

Verifying sources

I think this is much of a trivial question and I feeling right to link it here: WT:FAC#Fact checking. I would appreciate comments and I believe I am not the only one unsure about this. THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 01:06, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Are you asking how content and citations are checked for Featured Article candidates? Perhaps Wikipedia:Guidance on source reviewing at FAC will help. David notMD (talk) 02:25, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Thanks David notMD, I will surely have a read. THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 15:27, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

How do I enter date or information into Wikipad? Carl Walter -

How do I use or enter data or information into Wikipad? Carl Walter - — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.80.40.114 (talk) 04:19, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

The Teahouse is for questions about editing Wikipedia. Wikipad is nothing to do with Wikipedia. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:15, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Prerequisites

Hello. I am currently applying to be a pending changes reviewer. When I looked on the page to apply it said that an appropriate edit count was required, such that a track record may be established. What is generally regarded as an "appropriate edit count" and approximately how many edits would that be? Thanks!!Mgasparin (talk) 05:10, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Hi Mgasparin. I'm not sure if there's a specific threshold number which you need to meet, and maybe the overall quality of one's edits is also something which is considered. I will say that I don't think this edit wasn't very wise because that information was added by a bot which appears to have bet set up to specifically add such information to Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Pending changes reviewer; moreover, I'm pretty sure that reverting the bot's edit (for apparently no real reason at all) is not going to be seen as a positive by any of the administrators reviewing the PCR requests. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:53, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

@Mgasparin: Welcome to the Teahouse. We really appreciate your enthusiasm and interest in Wikipedia, so please don't let what I'm about to say put you off in any way. But I should point out that it takes time to gain experience on how Wikipedia operates, and I don't think you've had anything like enough time to fully grasp all the basics yet. A quick glance shows that you've only made 90 edits to mainspace articles since you joined us at the end of December. This simply isn't enough for you to have gained sufficient experience to be given that responsibility of approving pending changes, especially as you have't demonstrated any need for it whatsoever through any past history of reverting normal day-to-day vandalism at Special:RecentChanges. I would suggest you gain experience there of determining what is and is not vandalism, improving articles as you encounter them, and engaging with other editors. Pending changes will always be there for you later on. I had wondered whether you had had past experience here under another account name or as an IP editor, as some of your edits seem quite advanced? But then I see from your talk page that you have already been approached by others expressing concern about your limited understanding in proposing GA articles, or taking on the role of reviewer for other Good Article nominations without fully understanding what's involved. Now, there's absolutely nothing to be ashamed about in not having enough experience -every single one of us has been there. What we do seek in editors is sufficient understanding of our ways of working, policies and our guidelines, plus a self-awareness in their own abilities and limitations to know when is and is not the right time to seek to undertake complex tasks here. Right now, I don't think it is your time. Perhaps, when you've made over 500 mainspace edits and a proven track record of appropriate edits undoing anti-vandalism, you might then be in a different position to show that you need that right. Stick with it - we need keen people like you to learn the ropes and to take on new roles in the future. You'll get there. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 16:52, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Why isn't my article up?

Hey guys this is what I have put up. Please help me with this. Did I put it in the right place? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:ManDan2019/sandbox?action=edit

Can someone help me out? Why hasn't this been up yet and how can I make it go up?

Thanks. ManDan — Preceding unsigned comment added by ManDan2019 (talk • contribs) 05:46, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Hi ManDan2019. Drafts are not automatically upgraded to article status. If you feel the draft you're working is ready, then you can (1) WP:MOVE it yourself or (2) submit it for review. I highly recommend that you submit your draft to Wikipedia:Articles for creation for review; this will give an experienced reviewer the chance to assess the draft and make suggestions on things that might need improving. Articles submitted for review via AfC seem to have a better chance of avoiding being deleted since AfC reviewers pretty much never accept drafts which don't at least meet the basic requirements for a stand-alone article. You might also want to take a look at Wikipedia:Your first article for suggestions on how to write a proper Wikipedia article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:14, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

How to create a new page?

Hello everyone, can anyone guide me on how to make a new page on Wikipedia? The format, font and all other mandatory details section that we commonly see in all the pages.

Thanks and Regards, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ilhaamze (talk • contribs) 06:18, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Hi Ilhaamze. There are quite a few of different types of Wikipedia pages, but if you interested in writing an WP:ARTICLE, then you can find some tips on doing that at Wikipedia:Your first article. You probably should take a look at Wikipedia:Notability and Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not as well since a Wikipedia should only be written about certain subjects. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:06, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Ilhaamze Hello and welcome. I noticed that you used "we" in your post. If "we" is the group or organization that you want to write about, you will need to read about conflict of interest. 331dot (talk) 08:19, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

@331dot: I guess you mean Conflict of interest? Aditionally, if "we" referes to you company, WP:PAID. Victor Schmidt (talk) 09:57, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Victor Schmidt Indeed. Thanks for pointing that out, I have fixed my typo. 331dot (talk) 10:13, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

how to link text in infobox to wikiedia content?

Is it not possible in visual editing? thanks

Barnesbw91 (talk) 07:17, 25 February 2019 (UTC)Bryan Barnes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Barnesbw91

Hi Barnesbw91, welcome to the Teahouse. Infobox text can be generated in different ways. I guess you refer to text written as parameter values in the page using the infobox. You can link text to a Wikipedia article by placing it in [[...]], e.g. [[Guitar]] to produce Guitar. See more at Help:Link#Wikilinks (internal links). PrimeHunter (talk) 11:23, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

How to Page title?

I am not able to figure out, how to give Main title to my submission ? can anyone help me with that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MuktaOjha (talk • contribs) 08:07, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

You have submitted your sandbox draft for review, and (as it says in the brown box on the page) "Review waiting, please be patient. This may take 8 weeks or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 2156 pending submissions waiting for review." While you are waiting, there are a number of points which you can address to improve the draft. You need to remove the misplaced external links. You can consolidate where the same reference is used more than once. You ought to add a section heading for the references, and a {{reflist}} template. You can address the CS1 error reported for invalid access date; in the error message there is a help link to assist you. --David Biddulph (talk) 09:30, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

How to Write a Article/Bio about a Celebrity?

How to Write a Article/Bio about a Celebrity? I want to publish some content about a celebrity. How to write on this topic? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kamalaujla (talk • contribs) 09:46, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Kamalaujla. You write an article about a celebrity the same way that you write an article about any other subject: you start by finding the independent reliably-published sources without which it is impossible to write an acceptable article, and then you write the article in a neutral way, summarising what those sources say. If the content you want to publish has not already been published somewhere reliable, then you may not put it in a Wikipedia article: that would be what we call original research, which is forbidden.

My personal view is that anybody who tries to write a new article before spending a few weeks improving existing articles and learning how Wikipedia works is choosing a difficult and frustrating course for themselves.

For more information, please see your first article. --ColinFine (talk) 10:47, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Question about my first article

Hello there

I wrote my very first Wikipedia article last Friday (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:AnnSimoens) and am wondering how I can see if I correctly submitted it for approval? I think I did but I'm not sure. I realise it could take a while before my article really gets posted online, but am just curious to know if I could at least check the submission.

Thanks for your help. Regards Ann — Preceding unsigned comment added by AnnSimoens (talk • contribs) 10:17, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

No you haven't submitted it for approval, and that is the wrong place. Your user talk page is for other users to communicate with you. You started the draft in your sandbox, which is an acceptable place so that's where you need to put your latest draft. When you believe that it is fit for submission for review, add {{subst:submit}} to the top of the draft. Before you submit it for review, you need to remove the "references" to Wikipedia, and read WP:CIRCULAR. You can, of course, include wikilinks where relevant. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:31, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Dear David, thank you so much for your valuable input. I improved my article first and then posted it via the Sandbox. Hope it'll get approved shortly. Bye, AnnAnnSimoens (talk) 10:54, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Question on use of the authority control template

I have been operating on the understanding that Template:Authority control is for use on articles about people. That seems to be what Wikipedia:Authority control discusses as well. However, I recently came across the template on this article about a geographic location. My first inclination was to remove it. However, then I saw that there is valid VIAF data on geographic locations as well. That makes the template potentially useful on that page. Therefore, I left the template for now. Is that correct? Are geographic locations valid articles for the authority control template? Or is the proper use limited to just articles about people? Desertborn (talk) 14:08, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Spell check and where to start

To begin reviewing articles for typos, etc. do I just pick randomly or are there suggestions/recommendations of articles that need to be reviewed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaymeemcdonald (talk • contribs) 14:54, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Jaymeemcdonald, There are various categories for pages "needing attention to grammar or spelling". You can find a general list, or go to your favorite wikiproject to get more specific ones. WelpThatWorked (talk) 15:15, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Jaymeemcdonald Check out WP:TYPO Schazjmd (talk) 15:17, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

My first edit in mainspace

Dear fellow wikipedians,

I'd like to make my first edit on the article Food processing, which classifies it into primary, secondary, and tertiary. And, where primary is further elaborated into -among others- livestock.

For livestock I'd like to create a new article called Poultry processing (it doesn't exist yet, neither something similar).

How do I go ahead? For example, should I start with a disambiguation page mentioning all kinds of meat processing first or should I make a Stub with a Wiki markup/link, and then create another article for poultry processing?

Thanks for your help.

Dotsonti Let's Talk! 15:07, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Dotsonti, and welcome to the Teahouse. There is an essay called Write the article first, which I wholly endorse. Links, disambiguation pages (and also images and infoboxes) are superficial ornamentation compared to the challenging but much more valuable task of creating a well-sourced and well-written article.

I advise looking at Your first article, and using the Article wizard to create a draft. Once you submit your draft for review and it is accepted, then is the time to look at DAB pages. Please don't aim to create a stub: they were valuable at an earlier stage of Wikipedia's development, but now they are really not helpful: instead, create a draft, and work on making it into an article. --ColinFine (talk) 15:55, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

@Dotsonti: I don't want to curb anyone's enthusiasm for editing, but on top of what ColinFine has said, I do think you ought to check out the existing article called Broiler industry and then decide whether you are better off editing and enhancing that one, or how you would justify creating a completely new page called "Poultry processing". If you don't think a new article is justified, you can always create a Redirect so that anyone searching for one term gets taken to the other article. However, we do already have a redirect from Poultry processing, which takes you to Poultry farming. We do allow a redirect to be taken back and used for a new article, but you would need a really clear rationale to do so, and I don't hold out huge hope. Good luck, and do try out The Wikipedia Adventure to get an interactive tour of the basics of editing and contributing. I feel there's a joke to be teased out here about editors running around like headless chickens, but I'm sure it would have been deemed to have been in very poor taste had I tried! So I won't. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 17:15, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Query

Swiggy, a food delivery application in India, only has a everybodywiki page, is it notable enough to be added to a wikipedia page? Anjana T S (talk) 15:44, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Anjana T S, and welcome to the Teahouse. If you think Wikipedia should have an article about Swiggy (which will not be Swiggy's article), then it is up to you to demonstrate that it is notable: please look at WP:NCORP, and see if you think it meets the criteria. --ColinFine (talk) 15:59, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Cannot edit existing wikipedia page

Hello, I am trying to edit some paragraphs in the Bipolar disorder page under genetics. Every time I have made an edit it is rejected. Can someone please help with this? I sent my last attempt via an editor as I am now unable to edit the page myself but I have not heard anything back. Thank you Flamingo2019 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Flamingo2019 (talk • contribs) 17:14, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

@Flamingo2019: The article you are trying to edit is semi-protected, as you know, since you have already placed a request on the article's talk page. Please discuss this at Talk:Bipolar_disorder. You need to provide citations to reliable sources to support your edit request. RudolfRed (talk) 17:29, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Please read the reply you received when you last asked about this: WP:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 910#Cannot edit existing wikipedia page. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:37, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

The section on genetics was patchy and not coherent,especially for a layperson. I have tried to leave as much content as I could from the original entry. I have tried to put myself in the shoes of a relative of someone with bipolar disorder. I have re-phrased statistics in a way that (I hope) they are easy to understand and not anxiety producing. Thank you Flamingo2019

Notice: Teahouse navigation aid added

To help editors move from the bottom of the Teahouse page back to the top, and vice versa, I have added two small floating up and down arrows which you will now see in the bottom right hand corner of this page. Just click or tap the 'up' arrow/chevron to go to the top of the page. Whilst the intention is to aid navigation, it's possible some users may find it obstructs their view of content. The only way is to try it and find out!

So please let us know if you like (or hate) this small up and down arrow, and we'll remove it if it causes problems. The main intent was to aid the growing army of mobile phone users who don't have the keyboard commands (Ctlr-Home and Ctrl-End) to quickly move between page bottom and page top, but instead have to swipe endlessly to reach where they want to go! Comment here, or at the original proposal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nick Moyes (talk • contribs) 17:43, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Please remember to sign your posts. It does hover over content. Is there a preference to disable it? RudolfRed (talk) 17:52, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Hoax case of feral child Ramu ref our wiki page "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feral_child"

Dear Sir/Madam, Our wiki page on subject line declare that as quoted"Ramu, Lucknow, India, (1954) – A girl taken by a wolf as a baby, and raised in the jungle until the age of seven.[60] Aroles made inquiries on the scene and classifies this as another hoax." I donot agree with this Hoax case as my mother witnessed the case while Ramu was admitted to luckhnow hospital in year 1954/1955.The child as my mother narrate that Ramu body was full of hair and it was male then female. The boy was given physiotherapy to reorient its deformed body particularly its hand and legs. She says at that time local news paper was full of his news and Pioneer news paper of Lucknow also published news.The Ramu was seen by my mother and her uncle daughter. Both these girl could see Ramu as on of brother of her uncle daughter was a just pass out doctor from the college cum hospital and also because my mother's father was govt. officer. My interest is that we if has a opportunity to correct it should do it. Atleast we till collect more info should put it the Ramu case into non confirmed Hoax case.

With Regards Anurag Shukla civil engineer — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anurag Shukla civil engineer (talk • contribs) 18:04, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

This would be better on the talk page of the article concerned. Britmax (talk) 18:13, 25 February 2019 (UTC)