Wikipedia:Teahouse

Maproom, a Teahouse host

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

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.

To read the newest questions, skip to bottom
About the Teahouse

Most recent archives
1211, 1212, 1213, 1214, 1215, 1216, 1217, 1218, 1219, 1220, 1221, 1222, 1223, 1224, 1225, 1226, 1227, 1228, 1229, 1230

(Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.)

How to edit "top"

When I want to edit some section of an article, I can click on an "edit source" button near the section title. But when I want to edit the opening paragraphs, there isn't a section title, so I click on the "Edit source" tab at the top of the page. This works OK, but my edit summary doesn't say "top". I see other people's edits in the edit history that say "top", I suppose they could have typed it in themselves, but is there some automatic way to get that? Also, with a long article, previewing takes longer when it has to reload the whole article; it would be a bit more convenient if I could just edit the opening paragraphs. Or am I wishing for what ain't? Bruce leverett (talk) 01:40, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bruce leverett. What you're talking about is editing the MOS:LEAD section of an article and everything that comes above it. You can do this by simply clicking on the "Edit" tab at the top of the article and open the editing window for the entire articles. This works pretty well for shorter articles and articles without subsections. Another thing you can try would be to set your user preferences to add an "Edit" link for the leads of articles. Click on your "Preferences" tag at the top of your browser and then click on "Gadgets". Look for the "Appearance" section and check the box "Add an [edit] link for the lead section of a page". Save the changes and you should see an "Edit" button now being displayed for the lead sections of articles. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:50, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, just what I was looking for! Bruce leverett (talk) 02:11, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What I don't understand is why this isn't part of the default. It seems much more useful to have the ability to edit just the lead without having to open up the entire page for editing. --Khajidha (talk) 13:01, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Khajidha: If you click on any "edit section" link you end up on an URL ending with, e.g., for the 1st section …&section=1 in the address bar of your browser. If you replace the 1 by 0 and go to this modified addresss you can edit the lede (lead). It's one of those "once you know it" things, only a section instead of the complete page can be very important over shaky mobile broadband connections. –07:00, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

I already use the method described above about adding a section edit button. I just can't see why that isn't enabled by default. --Khajidha (talk) 02:23, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Guessing, there's no "always correct" place for an edit link near the lede. Some template in the direction of {{edit}} could do it, but nobody bothers to add it manually everywhere. Logged in users could use a one-liner script in their custom JS to offer that link somewhere, I had a prefix index search for "subpages" in the sidebar (customized monobook).
Now trying four tildes: 84.46.52.84 (talk) 09:28, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, I also asked asked this recently, esp. related to editing from a Kindle mobile (tempting but frustrating). The Pref>Gadgets>Appearance setting described above works on my Chromebook (Desktop mode), but on the Kindle I see a new icon at the top rather like a simplified bust but it doesn't do anything--most internal links don't work in the Kindle/Chromium browser. I really shouldn't even try to edit WP from the Kindle, but it is so tempting while reading & looking something up to fix a minor punct or sp error etc. --D Anthony Patriarche (talk) 03:52, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Any way to speed this up in a legit way?

Hi. I nominated an article for deletion on 12 Dec - Citizenship Amendment Act protests. I have striken off my initial reason since it doesn't stand and have WP:WITHDRAWN to keep. But now the AFD is holding up the ITN for this and its parent article. Could an admin just check please and see if we can close this now or merge it into the main article Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019. Thanks in advance for whatever the outcome. DTM (talk) 12:46, 16 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

DiplomatTesterMan, the AFD has since been closed. ~~ OxonAlex - talk 13:53, 16 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

DiplomatTesterMan, For future reference, there is a gadget (found in the preferences -> gadgets -> Maintenance and administration) called XFDcloser that allows you to easily do all the steps in closing AFDs (& others). As long as you follow the guidelines in WP:NACD you are able to close some AFDs yourself. ~~ OxonAlex - talk 13:57, 16 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

OxonAlex, thank you for the explanation. DTM (talk) 06:13, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Question for deletion requests.

This is multiple parts.

Part one: Can people comment on this article for deletion request? There is only a handful of people who edited the article, so I have a feeling it won’t have many comments over the deletion request. Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/2019_Bagram_Airfield_attack

Part two: I have a feeling this is not the place to ask for other editors to comment on an article. Can someone please verify the correct place to ask for comments in this type of situation?

Thanks in advance. Elijahandskip (talk) 19:26, 16 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Elijahandskip, and welcome to the Teahouse.

On your first point, it is not only permitted but encouraged for any editor to express an opnion in any AfD discussion, and having more editors comment in any give discussion is, within reason, a good thing. But do be aware of Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions and of Wikipedia:Deletion policy in general.

On your second point: The thing to strongly avoid is to canvass votes, that is to alert editors because you think they would favor or oppose deletion in a particular case, or to post notifications where they are likely to be seen primarily by those taking one side of the debate. That is a definite violation of policy. Posting neutrally worded notificatiosn to general fora is less of a problem, but it is not really what the Teahouse is about.

By the way, please in future when referring to an article here (or on a talk page) please use a wiki-link, not a URL. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 20:37, 16 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I changed it here, hoping nobody minds —Tamfang (talk) 02:43, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Just in case, the WP:DELSORT info on AFDs for related wiki projects is a good thing (= no WP:CANVAS). Admittedly with projects in the default = dead state it won't help. Recruiting some active projects in a {{WPBS}} on the talk page is one of the first things I'd do after saving {{draft}} + 3 RS + some {{stub}} template on a new page. –84.46.52.84 (talk) 10:13, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This may sound stupid for me to ask...

I have never been blocked before, and I don't intend on breaking any policies to ever see that be the case. I basically never try to revert anyone except vandals more than twice. I have just found myself in a situation where I would like to revert someone a third time for an unexplained (and separately unjustified imo) edit. Would this be a violation of WP:3RR? –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 17:37, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@MJL: Well, does the intended revert meet any of the criteria listed here? ωικιωαrrιorᑫᑫ1ᑫ 17:41, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@WikiWarrior9919: No, definitely not. It's a simple MOS:DATEVAR dispute. It's gone:

I expanded an article and used Dates-1
User A changes a small section of the article's prose to Dates-2
I revert User A
User B reverts me with explanation
User B then changes the entire article (including citations and the tag at the top) to Dates-2
I revert both of the changes in one go with a clear explanation of policy.
User B reverts me without an explanation.

I hope that explains matters. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 17:46, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@MJL: Try discussing it on the other user's talk page. ωικιωαrrιorᑫᑫ1ᑫ 17:48, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@WikiWarrior9919: I appreciate the suggestion, but I might need an admin's help with this. I just want to know whether I'd be in the wrong to revert them again here.

–MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 19:00, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

MJL that would not, strictly speaking, violate the 3RR, but it would still be edit-warring. Note that WP:WAR says: Even without a 3RR violation, an administrator may still act if they believe a user's behavior constitutes edit warring, and any user may report edit warring with or without 3RR being breached. Please do not revert a 3rd time. Instead, explain further on the article talk page, and if the other editor ignores this, or does not respond positively, seek input from additional editors, or peruse dispute resolution. In this case, I will try to look at the situation later today. I am an admin. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 19:50, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@DESiegel: Okay, so I was right to not go past 2RR this entire time. I appreciate the response! :D –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 19:53, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@MJL: DESiegel's answer already touched on this but by way of clarity, a 3rd revert is not a bright line violation unless the article is on 2RR or 1RR (in which case it's the 2nd violation). A bright line 3RR requires more than 3 reverts, not only 3. However as the page and DESiegel said, 3 reverts should not be taken as an entitlement, doing so is likely to get you blocked since you can engage in edit warring with a bright line violation. Nil Einne (talk) 02:55, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Nil Einne: I think I have a new appreciation for our dispute resolution process to be honest. This is good information; thank you.

–MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 03:17, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tagging templates

Am I allowed to add tags to templates? I intend to tag Template:Periods in US history with a cleanup template using Twinkle, but I am unable to see the option for tagging. Are tags only for articles or something? I do not see the logic behind this. ωικιωαrrιorᑫᑫ1ᑫ 17:41, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WikiWarrior9919, I could be entirely wrong here, but wouldn't tagging a template result in the tag being transcluded onto every article that uses the template. ~~ OxonAlex - talk 19:12, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WikiWarrior9919, I would in general agree with OxonAlex. I would suggest that you leave a note on the template talk page instead. If there is an editor or a couple of editors who have made most of the edits (or the more recent edits) to the template, you might ping those editors in your talk page comment. Of course, if you can make the fixes yourself, that might be even better, but it might be a good idea in that case to leave a note explaining your fix on the talk page, and point to it in your edit summary. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 20:00, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not if they were inside <noinclude> .. </noinclude> tags, OxonAlex. But DES's point stands WikiWarrior9919: tags are for the attention of people who read an article, but few people read a Template page. The Talk page is a much better place to raise any issues. --ColinFine (talk) 22:41, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

After discussing the issue on the template talk page you can put in on TFD (templates for discussion). Good navboxes (for use at the bottom of pages wikilinked in the navbox) exist, good navboxes for article series also exist, but they are rare. Many including this template are 100% pure spam, where folks try to promote their POV on many articles without references and discussion. –84.46.52.84 (talk) 11:00, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

New Page about an author - Are they notable enough for me to bother?

I'm interested in creating a page about John Holl - Beer book author, journalist formally of The New York Times, podcast host. He appears to have enough articles, books, podcasts to be considered notable.

thanks for your consideration.

FYI, I authored this page a few years ago: David_Jordan_Bachner — Preceding unsigned comment added by TimHitchings (talk • contribs) 19:16, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You'll find guidance at WP:AUTHOR. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:21, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unclear, he's referenced on about seven articles, so a BLP would be no orphan. Not to be confused with John Holl. –84.46.52.84 (talk) 11:15, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Follow-up to Percy Jackson Grammar School

I have attempted to merge my draft with the article "Outwood Academy Adwick" but it requires tidying up with skills I don't possess. Specifically, the merge created two sets of references and did not contain the photographs from my original. I feel the layout has been compromised too. Help! Kenpj (talk) 20:51, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The result looks as if you tried to copy parts of the rendered (displayed) draft into the source of the target page. Just undo that and try again:
Edit the draft, in the edit box select (mark) text, copy that to your clipboard (Windows example: [Ctrl]+C), edit the target page in another tab, insert your copied text, preview the effect and fix it if necessary, save edit.
Pick next part from the source for copy etc. until done. Inserting a picture on an article works exactly like you did it on the rejected draft. –84.46.52.84 (talk) 11:40, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sati - two distinct meanings from two cultures

I am a practicing Buddhist, studying the Satipattahana Sutta. In Buddhism, Sati (from the Pali language, the ancient language of the Buddha) means mindfulness, a clear mental quality that is a basis for meditation in the Thervaden tradition... However, when I look this up on Wikipedia:

Sati_(practice)

There is only a reference to the Hindu practice of widow immolation, of widows throwing themselves onto their husband's funeral pyre and burning to death. This is very different practice!

How do I introduce a large body of information on Sati as a steady and focused mental quality, (available from Bikkhu Analayo, a prolific Buddhist scholar and monk residing near Boston, Massachusetts at the Insight Meditation Society)? 4 books of information regarding 'Sati' are timely, relevant and important, given the wave of meditation practices now rising in the US. How do I approach raising awareness about this mental quality - Sati? A word that apparently has two deep but very different meanings - both from cultures other than my own?

I have never posted like this before, but feel moved to clarify this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TripleGem3 (talk • contribs) 21:05, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What you want exists at Sati (Buddhism). Note that at the top of Sati (practice) there is a connection to the many other meanings and articles "Sati", including the Buddhist meaning. David notMD (talk) 21:57, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@TripleGem3: Please sign posts to talk pages (like this one) by adding a space and four tildes ( ~~~~) to the end. This will automatically be turned into a timestamp and your linked username. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 01:47, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The article title is indeed an unfortunate one. I think the page should be moved to Sati (Hinduism) for consistency but I don't have time to do that right now.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:59, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I would oppose such a move, because there is the eponymous Sati_(Hindu_goddess) which would be a possible target for such a link. (The two are related, but would probably not be mergeable.) However, "(practice)" is relatively unclear. Maybe sati (ritual suicide) instead? Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 09:25, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Someone should start discussion on the Talk page about proposed name change.David notMD (talk) 12:38, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sufficient citations and writing style

Hello all, I've recently edited an article on Instant cameras, more specifically in the Creative Techniques section. I have a few questions:

I've completely rewritten the introduction to that section as I felt it wasn't introducing the section well. I'm not sure if my style of writing fits the general style of Wikipedia, so if anyone can give me some input of that it would be great. I'd also like to know if the citations I also added to the second paragraph are sufficient for also verifying the first paragraph. The section has an 'insufficient citations' banner which I don't know if it should still be there or if the citations I added are enough. Finally, I've noticed there is a Wikilink to an article about 'Polaroid transfer', which I'm not sure if it should be restructured as well. I think perhaps a main article about instant film creative techniques, with a section for Polaroid transfer, would be more appropriate. I don't know where I should discuss this. Polaroid transfer's talk page? GoodCrossing (talk) 23:28, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi GoodCrossing and welcome to the Teahouse. Thanks for seeking feedback on your edit. Unfortunately you've seem to have managed to write one incredibly long sentence in the Creative Techniques section with not very good punctuation, whilst also retaining the original, shorter paragraph. As a result we now have two near-identical statements, which isn't really OK. Anything factual that you expand upon does need either to be in the existing citations, or you need to add newer references. This is especially valid of anyone is likely to challenge the content, which they probably won't here. You have removed an uncited paragraph which did seem to serve as a bit of an introduction, so I'm not sure if that was an improvement. Forgive me if I don't check your references - it's getting late here now, and I'm not sure which second paragraph of which bit you're talking about as you didn't provide us with WP:DIFFs to easily look at your other edits. Normally, I would expect an editor to reuse a reference if it applies to more than one factual statement. (See WP:REFNAME for how to do this.) The only exception is perhaps in the lead section where, providing more details content beneath it is well-referenced, you don't actually need to include citations. It sounds like you're concerned to do the best editing you can, and have also engaged on the talk page, so I hope this little bit of feedback is of some assistance to you. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 00:23, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nick, thanks for the help. I'll try to redo the edit so that it's hopefully better. The references do apply to both paragraphs I'm writing, so I'll reuse them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GoodCrossing (talk • contribs) 15:23, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

change Rose McGowan page at her request

ques — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robert Jay Marczak (talk • contribs) 23:34, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Robert Jay Marczak: You may suggest changes to the article at Talk:Rose_McGowan and work with other editors to achieve consensus. If you are connected to Rose, you need to declare WP:COI also. RudolfRed (talk) 00:02, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Robert Jay Marczak: Welcome to the Teahouse. We generally don't change content that is already supported by published sources (I haven't looked to check) unless newer references are supplied to support the new content. We don't take the word of anyone, I'm afraid, as Wikipedia only reflects what has been said about a subject, not what they've said about themselves. As an aside, do you happen to have a camera? If so, the article could benefit from an updated photo of her, and it sounds like you're in a great position to fix that. Pop back if you need guidance on how to upload photos that you have personally taken. Nick Moyes (talk) 00:31, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

One obvious issue: We do not normally have a "controversies" (plural) section on a BLP, e.g., on Sasha Grey I simply moved one controversy (singular) to "personal life", trimmed to the relevant referenced facts, after an undisputed proposal to do this on the talk page for some time. –84.46.52.84 (talk) 11:57, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(regarding IP Address User Page)

@DESiegel I see. Also, I am not sure how to reply either, which is why I created this new thread.

172.79.69.94 (talk) 00:23, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Each section title has the word Edit to the right. Click on that to add a comment. Each comment should be preceded by one more : than the one before it - that creates an indent. David notMD (talk) 02:02, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks. 172.79.69.94 (talk) 17:37, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Also, on Wikipedia you don't alert another editor simply by butting "@

" next to the editor's user name. Instead you must ping the editor, by using eone of the various templates for this purpose, or making a wiki-link to the editor;'s user page. (The templates all work by creating and stylign such a link, they differ in exactly how they style it.) Then the comment must be signed as part of the same edit -- adding a signature later does not cause the notification to happen. I tend to read though new Teahouse p[osts fairly often, so i am likely toi see a psot here even with no ping. But that is not generally true or to be relied on. Also, one cannot ping an IP editor, only a registered account. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 16:10, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

How to request for an COI article to be deleted

I would like to request for a COI article to be deleted: Kent Tate. I've attempted numerous times to request edits on a COI article and it resulted in denials, multiple references being removed (unfortunately the strongest ones), content also being removed. It has been an uphill struggle. I've recently tried again to improve the article. The article is really not representative of the artist's past accomplishments. I had hoped to update the article to include a filmography to include current works but because there is too much resistance to the past request edits, I just anticipate much more of the same. The subject wants it deleted! If you need to hear directly from Kent Tate, please advise. Otherwise can you please advise how the article can be deleted post haste! Thank you!LorriBrown (talk) 02:47, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi LorriBrown. You can find out some more about why articles are deleted at Wikipedia:Deletion, but articles aren't generally deleted simply because there may be some COI editing involved. If the subject is considered to be Wikipedia notable for an article to be written about them, then deletion is unlikely to take place. Articles are not really written on behalf of their subjects, but rather about their subjects; so, articles are not deleted simply because they don't say what the subject wants them to see as explained in WP:BLPDELETE. If there are problems with the article, such as policy and guideline violations, that can be fixed, then that's what Wikipedia editors try to do. Sometimes there may be disagreements what these problems are and how to "fix" them, and in those cases editors are expected to follow Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. Only articles which are generally deemed beyond fixing tend to end up being deleted. If the subject of the article has problems with the article content, please ask them to take a look at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Dealing with articles about yourself because there are ways to try and resolve such issues; article subjects, however, don't have any final editorial control over article content and content which they might like can be added as long as it's done in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines. -- Marchjuly (talk) 03:08, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Marchjuly Trust me, I did not arrive at this easily. If you were to take a look at the talk page you would quickly discover 'the why'. I understand that the subject does not have control of their page but the page should be representative of the subject. Their seems to be two coexisting threads of editors on wikipedia. Those who try to help fellow Wikipedian improve and understand the rules and encourage participation.... And there are those who are deletionists and cloak their intentions with a bunch of legalize that is most difficult for new editors to navigate. Plus there really is a strong prejudice of COI editors! What I am disturbed about is that I don't want to create a puff article that glorifies the subject but rather I want to create an article that provides good information that informs someone who may be interested in reading about the subject. Because I have a COI with this particular subject I feel the edit requests I have attempted to make have been unreasonably denied - or unreasonable additional demands are piled on, just to get a couple of sentences of content modified. On the other hand the editor responding to the edit request can just rake out references and content at will. Making explanations that are not completely factual and there is little or no recourse. Under certain circumstances it would be likely to be considered vandalism. Because I have COI there is no recourse but to try to make another edit request to correct the errors made by the responding editor - these corrections are then further complicated by additional demands by the responding editor. It is very burdensome and time consuming to construct these edit request. The talk page is embarrassing for me as an editor and it looks bad for the subject. The denials go on an on and on... It is quite frustrating and frankly I get quite dizzy with the whole process. I have created multiple articles and granted I may not be the best writer on Wikipedia but I have managed to write several article with very little criticism - except for this one. So you see this is a conundrum. The article can't be improved but you say it also can't be deleted. I have requested help from others and mostly they don't want to get involved - so what would you suggest I do? Thank you!LorriBrown (talk) 03:41, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

After looking at the article's talk page, I'm not really seeing what you're describing. For sure, some of your edit requests have been denied, but the reasons given do appear to be based upon relevant policies and guidelines. Moreover, the editor(s) responding to you requests are pretty experienced ones who often deal with COI-related edit requests. I apologize if I'm repeating something, but one of the downsides of a having a Wikipedia article written about you or written about someone you know is that you know is that article content might not be something the subject of the article likes, but which is in accordance with relevant policies and guidelines; so, the best way to generally convince others that certain content belongs is to establish, without question, how it complies with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines, and accept that sometimes it simply might not be able to do so.

I get you're frustrated and I understand that COI-editors tend to be (maybe even sometimes extremely) scrutinized, but please also try and understand that there is a pretty good reason that Wikipedia Community has decided to highly discourage such editors from directly editing articles about subject they are connected to and instead do what you're doing by making requests on article talk pages. If you feel your requests are not being given a fair shake, you can ask for other feedback and Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard to see what others think. If feel that the article in question is something which merits deletion per relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines, you can nominate it for deletion per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion and see what other members of the community think; however, (once again I apologize for repeating something posted above) articles only tend to be deleted when it's clear that they shouldn't have been created to begin with (i.e. the subject isn't really Wikipedia notable in their own right) and very rarely deleted because they don't reflect the preferred point of view of the subject or the article's creator. There might be one other possibility in that subject of the article could request a "courtesy deletion" as explained in WP:BLPDELETE and WP:BLPREQUESTDELETE, but this seems to be really only done in quite exceptional cases where there are some problems which are so serious that there's no way to "fix" the article.

Finally, if you decide to ask about this at conflict of interest noticeboard, please try to assume good faith and avoid categorizing editors into group like you did above; Wikipedia is not really intended to be a battleground pitting one side against another, and everyone involved should ideally be working together to try and ensure that all article content is in accordance with relevant policies and guidelines, even though the reality might sometimes be different. If you're going to categorize editors on Wikipedia, then probably the only real way to do so is by WP:HERE and WP:NOTHERE, but even then you need to be careful when trying to interpret the motives of other editors. That's why it's almost always better to stick to discussing the content in question and avoid commenting on other editors as much as possible. There are specific noticeboards for discussing editor behavior, but you need to be aware that doing such things also means that your behavior is likely to also be scrutinized, and that you will be expected to provide proof of actual inappropriate behavior. My suggestion to you is to open a discussion about this at COIN (the COI noticeboard I mentioned above) and see if you can get others involved in the discussion, but be very careful as to how you frame your request so as to not immediately turn other editors off. You can try an AfD, but basically you will be arguing that you shouldn't have created the article in the first place because Kent is not someone who is clearly not Wikipedia notable (at least not yet); that's the only argument which would make sense at AfD since anything else would likely be seen as Wikipedia:I just don't like it Moreover, it would be a mistake to think that if you succeeded in getting the article deleted that it would be jsut be a mtter of time before you or another person could create another one which is more in tune with either the subject's or creator's preferences. Once an article is deleted at AfD, it's fairly hard for it to be recreated without a new consensus established about the subject's Wikipedia notability and recreations often end up deleted as fast as they are added . -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:06, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

My € 0,02 WP:wikilawyering, a COI edit-request is like a semi-protected edit request, you can use the ordinary WP:3O etc. dispute resolutions if there is no "rough consensus", i.e., one editor disagreeing with your suggestion is no consensus, two editors disagreeing with you could be "rough" enough. –84.46.52.84 (talk) 12:56, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Help - blocked on another Wikipedia

I'm sorry if this is the wrong place do ask this, but I need some help right now. My account on the Dutch Wikipedia was automatically blocked because it was caught using an open proxy – my IP is dynamic and shared with other people, so this happens sometimes.

Since this block makes me unable to log in or edit any pages there, including my own talk page, there is no way I can contact the nl-wiki admins. Could someone please copy this message to them so they can verify my IP and possibly unblock me?

In case they need to know this, my IP is 2804:14c:110:8469:a586:cf7a:cdb5:f64 - Munmula (talk), second account of Alumnum 08:35, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your chances to find an nlwiki admin in the enwiki teahouse aren't good, this should be a known issue on Meta, maybe ask on m:Project:Babylon—their idea of a Village Pump—how that's handled. –84.46.52.84 (talk) 13:17, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've asked over at nl:Wikipedia:De kroeg, which is their Village Pump. Maybe they can help here. Victor Schmidt (talk) 18:03, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The IPv6-range, the IPv6 is in, is blocked because it's a VPN. And I can't give the user a IP block excempt, because the accounts wasn't registered yet on nlwiki. This is me (mbch331) (Questions/Remarks/Complaints etc.) 18:20, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I used to edit under my old account User:Alumnum. But something is wrong. I cannot log in there, create a new account, or anything. - Munmula (talk), second account of Alumnum 21:42, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You may ask the admins a password reset and then create a SUL-account on Meta. #HTH Klaas `Z4␟` V 08:45, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What would that solve? --bdijkstra (talk) 11:05, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Then Munmula can login everywhere (again). Klaas `Z4␟` V 17:24, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An account gets registered on a local wiki, the first time you log in. But the rules to be able to do that are the same whether you're a completely new user or an existing SUL user that doesn't exist on the local wiki. SUL only prevents others on locally registering an account that already exists on another wiki. We can make it possible for the account Alumnum to edit on nlwiki. This is me (mbch331) (Questions/Remarks/Complaints etc.) 20:57, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you all for your help. Sadly I cannot log into that account anymore since I've lost its password recently (this is why I created another account), but even when I still used the Alumnum account, I was already having open-proxy problems in nl-wiki. This happened here in en-wiki too a couple of times (most recent example). Even if there was an exemption for my IP, it would eventually change again and the new IP could be targeted again. - Munmula (talk), second account of Alumnum 02:49, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As Munmula is not able to log in on the Dutch Wikipedia because his IP is locked there and the local moderator Mbch331 is not able to give an exemption as Munmula didn't make any edit yet, how about lifting the rangeblock for a short period (or forever), indicated by Munmula, so Munmula can make one or more edits and be given an exemption? RonnieV (talk) 17:42, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Changing references to fancyclopedia.wikidot.com to fancyclopedia.org

Until now Fancyclopedia has been accessible using http://fancyclopedia.org and the deprecated http://fancyclopedia.wikidot.com, but now we've ported it to mediawiki, the latter form will stop working. Could someone write a bot to change all references of 'fancyclopedia.wikidot.com' to 'fancyclopedia.org' across the site. I don't want to learn how to write Wikipedia bots myself. Vicarage (talk) 08:39, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse, Vicarage. This is more the kind of find/replace job that AWB might do. But as I can only find one example where that url is used, surely this is a manual task you could do yourself? Nick Moyes (talk) 09:53, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Vicarage: If you'll post your request at WP:URLREQ, there are people there that specialize in this issue, and an existing bot that can probably handle the task. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 11:01, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, request posted, as I found multiple refs. Vicarage (talk) 13:15, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

How many days it will take to get article approved?

Hi,

I have created and published new article on 01/12/2019 however it is still not visible in Google search. How to check if published article is approved by reviewer or not? Is there any provision to verify current status of the article?

Also, could someone please explain how many days it takes to get article approved and visible in internet search?

Thanks in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Author.s.dawane (talk • contribs) 09:54, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Author.s.dawane: I assume you are talking about this page User:Author.s.dawane? Unfortunately, this is not an article, it is your userpage. You can use your userpage to draft articles, as you have done here, although usually it is better to create drafts as subpages (e.g. User:Author.s.dawane/Rishikesh_Kamerkar or in the draft area (e.g. draft:Rishikesh Kamerkar), but either way you will need to submit it for review before it can be moved to the mainspace. You can do that by pasting {{subst:submit}} at the top. However, you will need to find some additional reliable sources before you do so. Neither LinkedIn nor IMDB nor Filmibeat are reliable sources, and if you submit it for review now, it will be declined. As for appearing in Google searches, we of course do not control that, but as a rule it would need to be reviewed and accepted in mainspace before being likely to be listed by Google. Hug^syrup 10:46, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Just adding that there are many thousands of article submissions awaiting assessment. Once a draft is submitted for review, it can take many weeks to be assessed, approved and findable on Wikipedia itself. But only after a further and separate 'new page review' process do we allow Google to index Wikipedia content - and that process can also take some weeks. Science and geography articles tend to get through a lot quicker than pages about films, actors, sports people etc, as they are quicker to verify, and less prone to non-neutral content being accidentally or intentionally included. Sorry if this isn't what you want to hear, but with nearly 6 million articles here, and nearly everything done by a maybe fewer than a tens of dedicated volunteers, we can only go as fast as we can go. Nick Moyes (talk) 11:01, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting, I didn't know that the "new page patrol" affects Google searches. After about an hour with Special:NewPagesFeed to find a former draft (fail) I asked Google, they had it, but they are sneaky, they use the WikiData birth date instead of the enwiki birth year. –84.46.52.84 (talk) 18:41, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bullet piont and wrapping.

Does anyone have a solution to enable bullet pointed text to wrap around other content such as image boxes, eg Heroes (American TV series)#Cast and characters?. Ozflashman (talk) 10:10, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ozflashman, welcome to the Teahouse. This isn't so much 'wrapping' as left-positioning. Our preferred position for the first few images is normally right-positioned. This is a parameter you can easily adjust in the image markup using source editor. (I simply inserted "|left" as the position command. No command simply puts the thumb image on the right side.) Thus [[File:Wikipedia Editathon - relax and enjoy.jpg|thumb|left|A Teahouse cuppa for you whilst you enjoy editing Wikipedia!]] moves the image to the left, as shown here. Be aware that images on the ~~left~~ right are the preferred position. See the 'Location' section in Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Images for more help. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 10:41, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think you meant to say that having images on the RIGHT is the preferred layout. --Khajidha (talk) 12:42, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think
that this example
answers the question. Ruslik_Zero 13:16, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply, however I still think there is a formatting problem in the template. It formats correctly in Chrome, but in MS Edge, the bullet points ignore the image to the left and appear imposed on top of the image although the text wraps correctly. Ozflashman (talk) 07:06, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Is it old or new Edge? Ruslik_Zero 12:13, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

How to I get the badge on my userpage that has the twinkle logo, and says "this user fights vandalism with twinkle" --Sir Bond 007 (James The Bond 007) (talk) 14:54, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @James The Bond 007:, you just have to add {{Twinkle topicon}} at the top of your userpage in source editing mode for that one. Visit Template:Top icon templates for more such icons. Cheers! Usedtobecool ^TALK ✨ 15:19, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

James The Bond 007, A list of userboxes and codes to be added to your userpage for each of them, is available at Wikipedia:Twinkle#Userboxes. Usedtobecool ^TALK ✨ 15:28, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tola Olukilede - I need more help on Referencing

I have just submitted an article for a living person (TOLA OLUKILEDE) however i was told i will need to cite my references and as well, mark section headings before i am able to resubmit again. Kindly help out on this.Niftyrules™ 15:05, 18 December 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Niftyrules (talk • contribs)

You can create section headings using either two or three equals signs around your heading. Two creates a main heading, and three creates a subheading. Like this: == Heading ==. As for referencing, the best place to start is probably reading this guide, as it gives a very detailed explanation of how to do referencing properly. It's also important to read our guide to what constitutes a reliable source as no matter how many references you put in, the article will still be rejected if the sources are not reliable. Hug^syrup 15:22, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Checking an article

Hi!

I've submitted my article Colección SOLO, I added a lot of references, from Spain and abroad. I'll be very grateful if somebody could check my article, that still now as a draft. Thank you very much. @namile17 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Namile17 (talk • contribs) 16:26, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy link: Draft:Colección SOLO

Hello, Namile17, and welcome to the Teahouse. I see that you have added several cited sources and removed some promotional language, and have resubmitted the draft. I note that the category links still seem to be the ones from the Spanish-language version of the article. That should be corrected. I see a few grammar issues. That is minor. Some citations do not include full information. A date of publication should be included where this is known, so should an author. The title of the source should always be included, and the name of the publication where the source is contained in a publication such as a magazine, newspaper, journal, or web site. An access-date (aka retrieved date) should be present for all online sources (not needed for online copies of print sources). That helps in finding an archive url if the online source becomes unavailable. None of this should hold up approval, but it might as well be fixed while waiting for review. The number of external links is on the high side, but I haven't checked individual links.

Please be aware that there are over 3,700 drafts submitted and awaiting formal review. It may be several months before this draft is next reviewed, although it may be sooner. Volunteers work on drafts in whatever order they choose. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 17:26, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oh and please in future sign any comments here and on talk pages with four tildes (~~~~). The wiki software will convert this into your signature 9standard or custom) and a time- and date-stamp. This helps readers keep track of who wrote what, and is also helpful for some scripts that run on the site. Thank you. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 17:29, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Im going to correct the things that you told me. Thank you, very very much!Namile17 (talk) 10:04, 19 December 2019 (UTC)@namile17[reply]

hi

When I checked a diff, I saw a panel that said Rollback, Rollback Vandal, etc. Is this feature available to everyone, or does this mean I'm a Rollbacker?--Sir Bond 007 (James The Bond 007) (talk) 17:39, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@James The Bond 007: I think you mean the links created by Twinkle. Every user with autoconfirmed status (that is, an account four days old and with ten edits) Can enable Twinkle in their preferences. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:53, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, so how do you become a rollbacker--Sir Bond 007 (James The Bond 007) (talk) 18:01, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@James The Bond 007: See Wikipedia:Rollback for what rollback is and how to get that permission if you need it. RudolfRed (talk) 18:09, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

From WP:Rollback: "To request rollback rights, ask at Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Rollback or ask one of the administrators listed here. Any administrator may grant or revoke rollback rights, using the user rights page. While there is no fixed requirement, a request is unlikely to be successful without a contribution history that demonstrates an ability to distinguish well-intentioned edits with minor issues from unconstructive vandalism. Rollback is not for very new users: it is unlikely that editors with under 200 mainspace edits will have their request granted. In addition, editors with a recent history of edit warring will often not be granted rollback given concerns of abuse through revert warring." David notMD (talk) 18:10, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

how to attach references

How do I add references to an article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Raybrown268 (talk • contribs) 17:54, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You have been given a number of useful inks in the feedback on your draft and on your user talk page. Try reading those, and particularly Help:Referencing for beginners. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:05, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Raybrown268: If you find our referencing instructions a bit confusing, I've drafted some alternative guidance that you might like to try. See: User:Nick Moyes/Easier Referencing for Beginners. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 21:57, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please help me with my Draft Article

Collapsing the inclusion of the entire article draft _signed,Rosguill ^talk 18:52, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Brenda Mohammed’s writing career sparked in 2013 after her near-death experience with Cancer and her recovery. I am Cancer Free won a Bronze Medal in the category Health and Fitness in Readers Favorite International Awards 2018.[1]

After she wrote the book I AM CANCER FREE which became a best-seller, it gave her the encouragement to continue writing.

As a former Bank manager of Republic Bank Limited in Trinidad and Tobago,[2] the switch to a writing career was not difficult and she tried her hand in multi-genre.

In six years she wrote twenty-four books, some of which won multiple awards.[3]

Besides awards for her books, she received several Global Literature awards.

She also fell in love with writing poetry. Her poems on Facebook, and reference to them in her blogs and on Twitter, brought her many favorable comments and encouraged readers to visit her Amazon author page and website.

She has been interviewed on 7th November 2018 by Yvonne Webb of the Trinidad Newsday newspaper, the December 2018 issue of the Presbyterian News in Trinidad and Tobago, and Alem Hailu of the Sunday Edition of the Ethiopian Herald on Sunday 17th November 2019. Some of her poetry appeared in prestigious journals and anthologies in India and Kazakhstan.

A couple of radio stations in America also held interviews with her. Her work in Literature for Suicide Prevention is recognized worldwide. She was the driving force in the production of A SPARK OF HOPE: A Treasury of Poems for Saving Lives. The book topped the charts on Amazon and made Best Seller No.1 within the space of two days.

After the success of her self-help book, How to Write for Success, she founded three Facebook Groups How to Write for Success,[4] Poems for Suicide Prevention[5], and How to Write for Success Library.[6]

Among her accolades are the following:

'WORLD NATION WRITERS' UNION[7]

In October 2018 she was appointed an Honorary Member of the World Higher Literary Academic Council of WORLD NATIONS WRITERS’ UNION of Kazakhstan.

On 29th December 2018, she was awarded the World Laureate in Literature by World Nations Writers' Union. On 31st December 2018, she received a Certificate of Honour for serving as a juror in an International Poetry Contest sponsored by the World Nations Writers' Union. In August 2019 she received a Diploma and World Poetic Star Award from World Nations Writers' Union.

MOTIVATIONAL STRIPS She was appointed Vice-Chancellor of Motivational Strips Academy of Literary Excellence and Wisdom by the Founder Shiju H Pallithazheth on 5th November 2018.[8] On 30th December 2018, she received a Global Literature Guardian Award from the Founder of Motivational Strips and Associates. In March 2019, Motivational Strips and its Nominating Authorities awarded her with a Golden Dove of Peace award for her efforts in maintaining and spreading Global Peace. On October 16th, 2019 she was awarded the Order of Shakespeare Medal by the Founder of the Facebook group Shiju H Pallithazheth for selfless service imparted to keep the ambiance of world writers on a rightful and progressive path, as well as in helping the forum in maintaining the modus operandi of Motivational Strips secure, since its inception a year ago.[9]

UNION HISPANIOMUNDIAL DE ESCRITORES, PERU In June 2019 she was appointed as National President of the Union of Writers, Union Hispaniomundial de Escritores for Trinidad and Tobago.

SEYCHELLES GOVERNMENT On 31st August 2019, she was honored by the Seychelles Government Accredited Literary Society [ LLSF] for her contribution to World Poetry, creativity, and writing expertise.

IWGA 2020 On December 8th 2019 she was nominated for the prestigious iWoman Global Award 2020 in the field of Literature.[10]

A list of Brenda’s published books by genre, and awards are as follows:

CHILDREN’S BOOKS

Adventures of Squeaky Doo - Five exciting travel Memoirs of a Teddy Bear which children love.[11]

She Cried for Me is the heart-wrenching autobiography of a stray dog.[12] The book is also available in Audio and is a best seller on Audible.com

CRIME FICTION

The Gift of Love: Barry Holmes Investigates Book 1 is a crime fiction/romance which once topped the Amazon charts in all three categories of Kidnapping Thrillers, Private Investigation Mysteries, and Conspiracy Thrillers.[13]

The Axe Murderer: Barry Holmes Investigates Book 2 is a crime fiction highlighting kidnapping for ransom.[14]

MEMOIRS

I am Cancer Free: A Memoir is the true story of the author’s miraculous recovery from cancer and the winner of two prestigious awards:[15]

1. Winner in the Category Non-Fiction in the McGrath House Indie Book Awards 2016.

2.Winner in the category Health and Fitness in Readers Favorite International Book Awards 2018.[16]

Memoirs of Dr. A. M. Khan: Journey of an Educator gives a glimpse into life in the days of Indentureship in Trinidad and Tobago. The book received four five-star reviews from Readers Favorite in 2018.[17]

My Life as a Banker: A Life Worth Living is a motivational memoir of Brenda's life in the banking sector.[18] The book placed second in the Category Bio/Memoirs in Metamorph's Publishing Summer Indie Book Awards 2016.

Retirement is Fun: A new Chapter is filled with travel adventures after the author moved on from a banking career. She demonstrates clearly when one door closes, many others open.[19]

Travel Memoirs with Pictures: Exploring the world. is a pictorial memoir of the author's travels around the world and is great for travel inspiration.[20]

Your Time Is Now: A Time to be Born and a Time to Die gives answers to compelling questions and will help you find your purpose in Life.[21] The book received an IHIBRP 5 Star Recommended Read Award Badge.

POETRY

Strength for the Disheartened: Motivational Poems: A collection of poems to motivate and inspire. Dreams of the Heart: A Poetry Collection - a selection of a number of unique poems for romantic poetry lovers.[22]

A Spark of Hope: A Treasury of Poems for Saving Lives - The poems within this anthology by forty-nine authors are therapeutic, and some have already saved lives.[23]

ROMANCE

Stories People Love - Six exciting short stories of crime, adventure, and love. The stories are very alluring.<refhttps://allauthor.com/author/brenchris/></ref> The book won two gold awards in Connections EMagazine Readers’ Choice Awards 2019 - one in the Romance category and the other for topping all genres.

Heart-Warming Tales - Six thrilling and suspenseful tales of Crime, Love, and Unhappy Marriages, all unified by the same theme - trials and tribulations of love.[24]

Stories that Intrigue - contains the love story of Sam and Julia, two bestselling authors in six intriguing episodes. The binge and wanderlust of Julia will delight every reader.

SCIENCE FICTION

Zeeka and the Zombies: Revenge of Zeeka Book 1 is the first book in a spine-chilling science fiction series.[25]

Zeeka's Child: Revenge of Zeeka Book 2 - Mystery surrounds the birth of Zeeka's Child.[26]

Zeeka Returns: Revenge of Zeeka Book 3 - Zeeka decides his fate.[27]

Zeeka's Ghost: Revenge of Zeeka Book 4 - Zeeka's Ghost haunts Steven.[28]

Resurrection: Revenge of Zeeka Book 5 - the sudden appearance of a stranger, bothers Steven.[29]

Revenge of Zeeka: Horror Trilogy comprises of the first three stories in the award-winning series Revenge of Zeeka.[30] The book received a five-star review and five-star seal from Readers Favorite on 14th September 2016.

Zeeka Chronicles: Revenge of Zeeka: This multi-award winning science-fiction novel, set in the year 2036 and inspired by the recent scare of the zika virus, where zombies and robots take center stage has won four awards.[31]

1.Winner in the Category Young Adult Thriller in Readers Favorite International Awards 2018.[32]

2. Winner of the gold award in the category science fiction in Emagazine Readers' Choice Awards 2018.

3. Won a place in the top ten finalists in Science fiction in the Author Academy Global Awards 2018.

4.Winner in the category science fiction in Metamorph’s Publishing Summer Indie Book Awards 2017.

SELF-HELP

How to Write for Success: Best Writing Advice I Received is a popular guide for new and aspiring authors.[33] The book received a five-star review and five-star seal from Readers Favorite one month after publication. It also won the gold award in the category Non-Fiction in Connections EMagazine Readers’ Choice awards 2019. The book is her inspiration for founding the Facebook group, How to write for Success, with 5200 plus members. It is very popular amongst university students and new and aspiring authors who have written fantastic reviews about it.

.

References

https://readersfavorite.com/author-area/65210/contestants-page/5780
republictt.com
https://allauthor.com/author/brenchris/
https://www.facebook.com/groups/howtowriteforsuccess/
https://www.facebook.com/groups/403967190260293/
https://www.facebook.com/groups/2349441551988580/
https://www.facebook.com/groups/2147732905452366/permalink/3028513124041002/
https://motivationalstrips.com/msalew
https://www.facebook.com/groups/252154565336217/
https://iwomanglobalawards.org/users/nominee/954
https://allauthor.com/author/brenchris
https://allauthor.com/author/brenchris
https://allauthor.com/author/brenchris
https://allauthor.com/author/brenchris
https://allauthor.com/author/brenchris/
https://readersfavorite.com/author-area/219776/contest
https://allauthor.com/author/brenchris/
https://allauthor.com/author/brenchris/
https://allauthor.com/author/brenchris/
https://allauthor.com/author/brenchris/
https://allauthor.com/author/brenchris/
https://allauthor.com/author/brenchris/
https://allauthor.com/author/brenchris/
https://allauthor.com/author/brenchris/
https://allauthor.com/author/brenchris/
https://allauthor.com/author/brenchris/
https://allauthor.com/author/brenchris/
https://allauthor.com/author/brenchris/
https://allauthor.com/author/brenchris/
https://allauthor.com/author/brenchris/
https://allauthor.com/author/brenchris/
https://readersfavorite.com/author-area/219776/contest
https://allauthor.com/author/brenchris/

[1]<refhttps://www.amazon.com/Brenda-Mohammed/e/B00CUR2KEU></ref>

Brenchristo (talk) 00:03, 17 December 2019 (UTC)Brenda Mohammed

AUTHOR BRENDA MOHAMMED

brenchris.allauthor.com

My Draft Article is at in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Brenda_Mohammed I have been told that I have zero references. I need help from a friendly Editor to get my following article published"

Brenchristo (talk) 18:49, 18 December 2019 (UTC)Brenda[reply]

The most recent feedback told you that there are no reliable sources; try reading the advice at WP:reliable sources, which was a link given to you. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:08, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

How to add a chart to page?

Please help — Preceding unsigned comment added by Logan Sherwin (talk • contribs) 20:25, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse, Logan Sherwin. You have not given us much to go on, so all I can offer at this stage is to point you towards Help:Table. If you need further help, we'll need to know more about what you want to do, and in what article. (One thing I will say is that to add a simple table, it actually easier to insert and edit one with our Visual Editor, which is not something I normally recommend. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:13, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Logan Sherwin, by a "chart" do you mean a table, or do you mean a graph or something similar. If that is what you mean, do consult Help:Graph which links to help pages for quite a few specific types of graphs. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 22:47, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The San Francisco Examiner

It should be San Francisco Examiner, not The San Francisco Examiner, because (to my knowledge) the article "The" was never used as the name of this newspaper. Unfortunately, for some reason I am not able to move it myself. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 23:30, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You can't move it because the redirect has history, but you can go to Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests and request that it be moved. Someone already did a copy-paste move in 2009 which was later reverted, so a full WP:RM might be preferable. I'll note that their website uses "The" in the title and in the legal footer, but not in other places. – Thjarkur (talk) 00:19, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently the form of the name has varied in the past. I did a quick check on Newspapers.com and found that this front page from January 6, 1910, has a small "The" above the flag on the front page. On the other hand, the front page of the June 6, 1935, issue has no "The", but (strangely), page 2 and other inside pages have "The San Francisco Examiner" at the top. Eddie Blick (talk) 02:17, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

See Talk:The San Francisco Examiner#Name of this article, where I also reviewed some archives. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 03:34, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Is being a runner-up noteworthy enough to be mentioned under Honours?

User:Ooaaaa just removed the mentions of a bunch of footballers being a runner-up from their pages, is this per policy? Being a runner-up seems noteworthy enough to me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Davepeta (talk • contribs) 02:28, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse, Davepeta. Providing the people are genuinely notable on other grounds, and that whatever they were runner-up in is a non-trivial competition (e.g. not cake decorating on a gameshow!), and is well-cited, I see no reason why it should not stay in the article. We have plenty of actors and musicians whose pages list their nomination for awards even when they fail to win them. Sounds like you should politely ask the deleting editor why they felt it was right to delete that info. If no agreement can be reached, seek consensus on the articles' talk pages. Nick Moyes (talk) 06:27, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Plum Hollow Country Club, Southfield, Michigan

I was researching Plum Hollow Country Club and my family history and realized that Wikipidiah had a misspelling of my great grandfathers name in the article online about the history of the golf course. My great grandfathers name was Joseph T.A. VarnHagen . It would be great if this could be corrected. This is a link to an obit from the Detroit Freepress. https://www.newspapers.com/clip/7213555/detroit_free_press/ Thanks, Phil VarnHagen — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.5.117.168 (talk) 03:27, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Talk:Plum Hollow Country Club#Varnhagen. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 03:55, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

How do I change the title of an article?

Thanks, Thatone~~weird~~wikier Say hi 06:43, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thatoneweirdwikier, By MOVING it. Usedtobecool ^TALK ✨ 06:59, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Question

I saw, when viewing a user's rights, the term EPADMIN was listed as one of their rights, but it was not linked and I couldn't find any pages that discussed this particular user right. Can anyone tell me what this term means? Just out of curiosity! Thanks Aspenkiddo (talk) 09:04, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse, Aspenkiddo. I think you deserve the award for "Most Obscure Question of the Year"!! I'd never heard of epadmin but, after a bit of digging, I also found EPONLINE and EPCAMPUS as some form of old user permissions. Very surprisingly EPADMIN has very little mention in our archives, but the others seem related to Wikipedia:Education Program. So it's a logical guess is that was some form of internal administrative right for helping to manage just that one program. Pinging @MartinPoulter: who's user rights show he once had the epadmin permission, lest he can shed a bit more light on it for us. Season's greetings, Nick Moyes (talk) 10:18, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ah found it: Right at the bottom of WP:UAL is this section on Former access levels, indicating that EP staff, administrator, campus-ambassador, online-ambassador, and instructor [were] Used by users to coordinate and work with students, instructors, and institutions as part of the education program. Deprecated since 2013. Nick Moyes (talk) 10:27, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Still existing rights should show up on Special:ListGroupRights, hunting red links on this special page was fun. –84.46.53.228 (talk) 01:05, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Are candidates for a political position, such as Congressman, automatically notable

I am wondering if the strict requirements for notability on Wikipedia are loosened in the case of someone with a small bit of notability (like as a writer, comedian, etc with a modest on-line presence) automatically become notable when he decides to run for national office, ie to challenge an incumbent. 64.112.181.11 (talk) 11:33, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No. Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Politicians and judges requires that someone is elected to such a position or holds office, to be presumed notable. Simply being a candidate is not enough. Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Creative professionals gives the requirements for most of the others you mentioned. Our notability guidelines are not additive. If someone doesn't meet one of them, almost meeting a bunch of them is not enough. However, it's more likely that someone who almost meets several of them will have sufficient reliable secondary source coverage to meet the WP:General notability guidelines. But this will need to evaluated on a case by case basis by looking at the sources. Note that strictly speaking, there's no such thing as "a small bit of notability" when it comes to our guidelines. Someone is either notable or they aren't. Although there are some complexities in how we handle borderline cases, and also in the content that we may have in articles. Nil Einne (talk) 12:07, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Good example of politician becoming WP-notable: Democratic Candidate Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Didn't Even Have a Wikipedia Page on Monday. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:31, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Editing question

What are the quansequences that one may face if he or she incorrectly edited a page — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shezi Ayabonga (talk • contribs) 11:45, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Shezi Ayabonga: it really depends on what is meant by 'incorrect'. Deliberate vandalism is usually met with warnings and can ultimately lead to a short block, or even a permanent ban in extreme cases. Making mistakes is usually handled by another editor simply reverting the mistake and perhaps pointing it out on the user's talk page. What is more difficult is where you think something is 'incorrect' and another user disagrees. In that case, we have a process called bold, revert, discuss. In other words, anyone can be bold and make a change if they act in good-faith and believe it is within policy, then another user can revert that change if they feel it is incorrect or inappropriate, then the first user must discuss the change on the article talk page if they still disagree, and consensus must be reached. I hope that helps, but if you have a specific example of what you are referring to, it will be easier for me to give you a more specific answer. Hug^syrup 12:13, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Taxobox for plant species

I'm writing an article about a plant species and want to include a species box. I want to copy, paste, and edit text from an existing article, so that it is formatted correctly, and because I'm using my phone. However, species boxes are partially generated from code, and no species of this genus have an article yet that I can copy. The page of instructions for how to do this is too long and not organized. Are there short readable directions I can follow to do this one thing, generate a species box? Can someone explain it to me?

Yes, the article belongs on Wikipedia, and yes, I'm competent to write it in spite of being confused by the speciesbox page.

Thank you, Farm lenses (talk) 12:04, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Farm lenses: I'd be happy to guide you. That said, while I could give you a theoretical explanation of how to do it, it's probably easier on both of us to show you how to do it with an example instead. The specific article you want to give a speciesbox would work well as such an example, but I would need to know the binomial name of the species you want to write about first. AddWittyNameHere 12:12, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'll probably never write another plant species article, so I'm not looking for a guide. If the process is so complex users can't do it without tutoring, it's in need of a redo.

Nonetheless, I appreciate the offer. The species is Dinizia excelsa. Thank you, Farm lenses (talk) 12:24, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Farm lenses It's not necessarily that complex, if you're dealing with an area where the underlying infrastructure is complete, and if you're dealing with a "standard" species. Unfortunately, taxonomy is complex and things like monotypic genera means there's not really a "one speciesbox fits all" possible. (Hence me wanting to know the taxon: much, much easier to just give you the information relevant to you if I can first verify that yes, the infrastructure exists and no, you're not dealing with one of those complex cases)

Species where all the infrastructure is complete is pretty easy: you just write

{{Speciesbox | image = image name, or leave blank | genus = genus name, in this case Dinizia | species = specific name, in this case excelsa | authority = taxon authority, or leave blank }}

(Please add every parameter on its own line, makes it much easier to edit for the next person to come along. I would do so above, but well, the nowiki tags to make it show up as code make that useless.)

Of course, there's several other parameters that can be useful, like one to add a caption for an image that's there, to clarify conservation status, and so on. However, as long as the genus and species parameters are there and filled out, the speciesbox works.

Now, I checked and the infrastructure for Dinizia exists, and it's not a special case (the genus used to be, but is no longer monospecific these days) so you should be good to go with the above. AddWittyNameHere 12:52, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the template. Yes, I know it's not monpspecific; as I said above, the article belongs on Wikipedia. Farm lenses (talk) 13:45, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Farm lenses: I updated the genus article at Dinizia, so there's a red link waiting to change to blue. Plants of the World Online has good descriptions for both species, see here for Dinizia excelsa. Peter coxhead (talk) 13:53, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, I don't really see how Template:Speciesbox#Simple cases could be made any more straightforward to follow. Peter coxhead (talk) 13:56, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You could just give an example, remove a couple hundred words. You might also see that this template the user AddWittyNameHere provided is in a different order, I don't know if it matters. It wasn't clear you were showing two examples on the simple examples, then nowhere was it explained if plant versus animal differed in parts, which is why both are included, and the boxes have images on top, simple has it on bottom, and it's indented in places, there are optional ways of writing species boxes, I didn't see info about how to tell if it would generate one from this species if there's a genus box, but are indents a thing. I'm an expert in my field, and I try to avoid writing walls of text for non-experts then telling them they're easy to use. But thanks, I suppose, for letting me know. I hoped Teahouse was a place where editors don't get told they asked the wrong question, everything was available, they shouldn't have bothered busy editors. Farm lenses (talk) 14:25, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

HOW TO INSTALL HUGGLE?

How do you install Huggle to fight vandalism? --Sir Bond 007 (James The Bond 007) (talk) 13:54, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

James The Bond 007: Huggle, (and STiki, the other major semi automated tool), both require rollback in order to work. I'd do it with twinkle for a few weeks, and then apply for the permission. (Given you can practically rollback with Twinkle, the main point of the permission is for these tools.)

But to answer the question, it can be downloaded at meta:Huggle/Download. ~~ OxonAlex - talk 15:25, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Edit reversion

Why was my edit for list of Dora video releases deleted? I don't understand why they keep doing this! The list was never finished until i edited it! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vincentmacefe (talk • contribs) 14:27, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The user didn't add an edit summary, but it's obvious, the 3rd = last column in all tables of this list is for dates. Your addition could work as footnote, but there are no footnotes yet, and all I know about it is "like references, only different" and Help:Footnotes as link without reading it. –84.46.53.228 (talk) 01:27, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

query about getting pages reviewed by someone before publication

I'm new to contributing to Wikipedia. I've been told I have a conflict of interest in what I published and it was stripped out - but I can ask for it to be looked at before I publish - but I couldn't see how to do this. Also I was told that I had plagiarised text - I'd copied something I'd written on our own website. How do I get around this, or do I have to rewrite everything. I want to put a list of our Presidents on our site, and some of what I put was direct quotes from something we published years ago. Please advise, thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lis1913 (talk • contribs) 14:46, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Lis1913 You obviously read your talk page and the clear warnings I gave you yet you've continued to re-add promotional and copyrighted content despite warnings and a warning that if you continued you would be blocked. I suggest you immediately revert yourself. Praxidicae (talk) 14:48, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've now taken everything out that I've added - not that I can see it was copyrighted - except I have corrected the Presidents name and some of the information about the structure, which was wrong. I've deleted all the information about membership as that was incorrect. How am I supposed to make sure the entry is actually correct, and add more useful information? Lis1913 (talk) 15:00, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Lis1913 Please refrain from editing the page directly and read WP:COI. You may request changes on the talk page of the article once you've disclosed your conflict of interest. Praxidicae (talk) 15:05, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Lis1913: I believe I want to put a list of our Presidents on our site identifies a mistaken impression that you may have. Wikipedia is an encycleopedia (like Encyclopædia Britannica). It contains articles about notable subjects, including people, companies, etc., that have been discussed in depth in reliable, independent sources. The articles are created by volunteer contributors of their own volition, and become part of the encyclopedia, subject to editing by other such contributors. It's not like social media or other webhosting platforms, where companies can have "sites" or "pages" that they can control. Naturally, it's in the best interest of the project that it be accurate, which is why information must be verifiable at those reliable sources. Subjects of articles naturally have a conflict of interest, and cannot be considered reliable without those independent sources. I hope this makes sense. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 16:57, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Page Creation

Hi there, I created a page Jason Criddle and on two attempts I have received information that the page does not meet Wikipedia page creation guidelines. I don't know what else to do. I have edited the page twice already with no success. I will appreciate any form of assistance you wish to render. Thanks. Best regards, Blessing — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blessing Adewale (talk • contribs) 14:49, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Blessing Adewale: I tagged the page for speedy deletion, and again when you immediately recreated it (which was not the best course of action). I think it is unlikely that the individual you are attempting to create a page for meets our notability guidelines but, if you think he does, I strongly recommend you create a draft and submit it through the WP:AFC process. It will then be reviewed by an experienced editor and only when it meets Wikipedia standards, it will be moved to mainspace. That process makes it far less likely to be deleted. Could you also please confirm what your relationship with Jason Criddle is? Hug^syrup 14:55, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Hugsyrup, I'm totally new here on Wikipedia - I'm just trying my best to find my way around the pages. I saw that you tagged the Jason Criddle page for speedy deletion but I had no idea whatsoever how to amend it. The only thing that came to my subconsciousness is rewriting the text, which I did. I believe that way I will be able to make it more encyclopaedic but you stated that, "it was not the best course of action." I will like to know how to go about WP:AFC process and how to create this page successfully.

As for your question, I have no personal relationship with him. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blessing Adewale (talk • contribs) 15:15, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Blessing Adewale: if you click on this link: WP:AFC, you will find all of the details of how to create a page via AFC. I suggest that before doing so you read through the numerous links and other information that I placed on your talk page. This includes how to write a biography that complies with our standards, how to properly source your article, how to demonstrate notability, and so on. Had you read these originally, I think they would have given you a lot more of an idea on what to do, rather than simply redrafting and resubmitting the article.

I didn't just say personal relationship - do you have any kind of connection to Jason Criddle? Has anyone asked you to write an article about him?

Finally, please could you sign your comments by typing four tildes, like this: ~~~~ after your posts. Thanks! Hug^syrup 15:25, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Hugsyrup, thank you! I will read through them. As for your question, no, not at all. There has never been anything like that. No one has contacted me. Thanks for all of your help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blessing Adewale (talk • contribs) 15:39, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I stumbled upon his name while doing some reading online so I decided to check him out on Wikipedia for more information about him. On getting here, to my surprise, he doesn't even have a page. And I have always wanted to contribute to Wikipedia, so I say to myself, this is the best time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blessing Adewale (talk • contribs) 15:43, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, the reason he doesn't have a page is that he is not notable by our standards so I would probably focus on contributing in other areas, to avoid frustration. Also, could I ask you again to please sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). And, when you reply to me, you can do so by typing immediately below this comment, not by creating a new section. Hug^syrup 15:46, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Porygon2 and Porygon-Z articles

Hi! Me and a few other people have started to publish the Porygon article on Wikipedia and I was just wondering if there was a Porygon2 or a Porygon-Z article either discarded, deleted or in progress because I do want to create one if it hasn't been created yet. Thanks. UB Blacephalon (talk) 15:33, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Blacephalon! As you can see, Porygon-Z is now what we call a redirect, the current thinking seems to be that it doesn't merit a separate article on WP. But yes, it was a separate article once you can see a version of it here: [1]. Same goes for Porygon2: [2] Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:20, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Where might I find a list or directory of articles with bad grammar instead of having to search for them?

A few years ago, I created an account on Wikipedia and was guided by some program to an article which had been marked by someone as having bad grammar. I don't know which article this was. I think it had something to do with Portugal, but that's not important. I proceeded to fix this article's grammar. Where might I go if I want to find similar articles? Table92 (talk) 16:08, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Table92: Is Wikipedia:Basic_copyediting#Find_articles_that_need_copyediting, pointing to Category:Wikipedia articles needing copy edit, what you were thinking of? (It is not grammar-specific, but it is the closest I can think of.) Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 16:24, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Community portal may also be of interest. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:26, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

How to edit

So if l saw a mistake l must edit to correct the mistake.Also l can add some information to improve the page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kidzai122 (talk • contribs) 16:18, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Kidzai122! Try Help:Getting started. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:22, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse, Kidzai122. Wikipedia is the encyclopaedia that anyone can edit. That doesn't mean you can add your own personal opinions, but it does mean we rely on people like you to help improve articles. So, YES, you can correct mistakes and add further details. All we ask is that you give a short 'edit summary' whenever you make a change so that we know what you've done. And we also require new factual statements to be supported with references (=citations). Without a link to a published Reliable Source any new content you add might well be removed as not verifiable. If you do these two things well, you will soon be on your way to becoming one of the great Wikipedia editors of tomorrow. If you have any other questions - just ask. Good luck, and maybe you might like to try The Wikipedia Adventure! Nick Moyes (talk) 22:17, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

How to archive messages

How do you archive messages on your talk page? --Sir Bond 007 (James The Bond 007) (talk) 16:35, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

James The Bond 007, there are two main scripts to do this - either User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis or User:Lowercase sigmabot III/Archive HowTo. Place either of the templates on your talk page, and a bot will archive the page at the set interval. The instructions and parameters are detailed on both pages.

If you just want the most commons settings, use either {{subst:User:ClueBot III/JustArchiveThis}}

or

{{User:MiszaBot/config | algo = old(30d) | archive = User talk:James The Bond 007/Archive %(counter)d | counter = 1 | maxarchivesize = 150K | archiveheader = {{Automatic archive navigator}} | minthreadstoarchive = 1 | minthreadsleft = 4 }}

~~ OxonAlex - talk 16:47, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

For a user talk page manual archiving is an alternative, cf. Help:Archiving. It boils down to (1) create an /Archive 1 sub-page, content {{talk archive}}, (2) copy a section from talk to /Archive 1, (3) blank it on talk with edit summary "moved to /Archive 1" or similar, (4) add {{archive box}} before the first section on talk, it will be displayed to the right of the talk ToC. –84.46.53.228 (talk) 02:02, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

User box help

How do you organize user boxes? --Sir Bond 007 (James The Bond 007) (talk) 16:42, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

James The Bond 007, you can organise them into a column with Template:Userboxtop and template:userboxbottom. See User:OxonAlex/userboxen for an example from my previous user page.

There may also be ways to organise them horizontally, but I haven't come across them. ~~ OxonAlex - talk 16:52, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Referring to a group that has changed names

I'm editing an article about a group that has often changed names. For this example, let's say the group was called "ACT on Campus" until 2014, then changed to "Young ACT" from 2014 onwards.

Which of the following sentences is best?

"In 2011, an ACT on Campus member said..." or "In 2011, a Young ACT member said..."

HenryCrun15 (talk) 20:08, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@HenryCrun15: It's hard to make a specific suggestion for a general scenario, but the easy solution is to just say "In 2011, a member said...".. You'd also ideally track and source the organizational name changes in the history section, so that if the statement also went in the history section, you could say "A member at the time said...". If this doesn't work, and you have more specific info such as the actual proposed text and the article, I can help you more. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 21:50, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bottom bracket

Header inserted by ColinFine (talk) 22:42, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Stray thoughts, Questions Ild like answered and future reading on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bottom_bracket page This section background on why I asking compatibility Longevity Question: (personally like 68,70,73, etc BSA) Currently building a bike, (Talked to both FSA & Shimano 800-) all Shimano, mixing road crankset & BB all else XT mountain to avoid compatibility issues, but (MegaExpo Vs Ultegra?)

QUESTIONS/wonder IF FSA BB and Crank would be a better, longer lasting choice from a longevity standpoint. ??? Mega Expo being larger will this affect chain line? Is Chain Line 1/2 of BB width or does it need its own column in table?

Random Thoughts: FSA MegaExpo one side floats and diameter changes so NOT interchangeable with Shimano according to FSA! Expo larger Balls bearings last longer, weight more? But which lasts longer? FSA? FSA weights more but since I not a racer who cares? Reciprocating mass farther from center, (Crank arms, rims, tires (folding), spokes), more important than static or mass at center? Weight of unit Shimano seems to be moving to lighter and lighter, but as BALL bearing size DECREASES so does longevity? Ultegra and XT on mountain side and higher component levels are SEALED units, so theoretically last longer? . Press Fit harder to maintain at home require more elaborate tools.

Further reading: FSA (Redacted)
1. ^ https://www.pinkbike.com/news/to-the-point-bottom-brackets-2014.html
2. ^ https://www.mantel.com/blog/en/bottom-bracket-shells-and-bottom-brackets
3. ^ http://www.bikeman.com/bicycle-repair-tech-info/bikeman-tech-info/1599-bottom-bracket-types
4. ^ https://www.parktool.com/blog/repair-help/bottom-bracket-standards-and-terminology
5. ^ https://bikerumor.com/2010/02/17/bottom-bracket-tech-breakdown/

-- Beryl666 (talk) 22:16, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Beryl666. This is not the right place for questions like this: this page is for questions about editing Wikipedia. If you want to discuss how to inprove an article, the place to do that is the article's talk page, in this case Talk:Bottom bracket; but if I read you right, you are asking for advice about the subject of the article - bottom brackets. I'm afraid that Wikipedia is not really the right place for that sort of question. You might possibly get a helpful response if you ask at the Miscellaneous section of the Reference Desk; but really even that is for asking questions that can be answered from definitive sources, rather than for opinions. --ColinFine (talk) 22:48, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Answering an editor

Hello, I have recently created my first article on wikipedia for a scientist on my area of expertise and, after the submission, it was quickly declined as it was not clear which notoriety criteria it fulfilled (which I totally understand). My question is how can I answer that comment from the editor? I want to write a small piece to justify why it deserves a wikipedia article, but I am not aware of the correct place to do it. Should I write on the editor's page? Or in the article's page? Thank you in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jpantonio (talk • contribs) 23:17, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jpantonio and welcome to the Teahouse. You can reply to the reviewer either on their own talk page or on the talk page of the draft article, but if you use the talk page of the draft, then it would be helpful to ping them to draw their attention to your reply. Your attention was specifically drawn to Wikipedia:Notability (academics), and your reply should address this problem. In particular, you need to ensure that there are some independent references to WP:Reliable sources before resubmitting. Dbfirs 23:35, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Are vs Is

In a recent discussion about a metallic band, I found it odd that the grammar stated: "The Mentally Ill were a punk band". I thought that the band is singular, while the members are plural? i.e. The Kingston Trio: "... is an American folk and pop music group." If you take away the "name" and merely refer to the actual organization for what it is - "band"; one would not say: "The band were ..." but "The band is ...". The Juilliard String Quartet is a classical music string quartet; not "are" a classical music string quartet - regardless of the name. Also, "Vienna Choir Boys is a choir of boy sopranos" not "are". Pentatonix is an American a cappella group in its lede. Why are certain bands like The Who described on WP in the lede as: "The Who are an English rock band" and not "The Who is an English rock band"; like "Nirvana was an American rock band"? This: "Fleetwood Mac are a British-American rock band" just does not sound right. Doesn't the same principles apply? Curious. Thanks in advance. Maineartists (talk) 23:23, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently it's a British construction of long standing ("The Beatles are...") and seems to be preserved against American logical grammar. Dbfirs 23:39, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

They also pronounce aluminum: "aluminium". That doesn't make it right. Are these articles all written only by British WP editors? Maineartists (talk) 23:44, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please take a look at MOS:ENGVAR and MOS:TIES, but in general Wikipedia doesn't have one preferred national variety of English and generally the style chosen by the first major contributor or through consensus agreed to upon on the article's tall page is the one followed per WP:RETAIN. Same goes for dates, citation style and many other things. You can always be WP:BOLD and change things you think should be change, but you might want to check the article history or its talk page (including the archives) to see whether it's something which has been discussed before. In addition, lots of editors add Wikipedia:Editnotices like {{Use British English}}, {{Use American English}}, etc. (see Category:Use English templates for some more examples ), but whether these were just added by some random editor or based upon some consensus sometimes takes a little digging to figure out. Regardless of which format/variety is used, WP:ARTCON (at least within the particular article and then perhaps to some degree with respect to other similar articles) should be one of the main things considered since mixing multiple formats/varieties of English is not a good idea. Cleaning up for the sake of consistency is probably not going to be much of an issue, but completing changing from one variety of English to another or one citation style to another often turns out to be even if done with the best of intentions. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:26, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) @Maineartists: errm, actually, we spell it "aluminium" and we also pronounce it "aluminium", too. We think that makes it right. But, if you really want to pick on our pronunciation, you'd be better off having a go at us for things like this. I can't offer any definitive explanation for the vagaries of the English language, but certain is/are combinations sound right, whilst others sound wrong. This sounds right to me: 'The Beatles' is the name given to a group of four lads from Liverpool who formed a popular beat combo in the 1960s. The Beatles (meaning the four lads) were the top-selling artists in the 1970s... That's my two penn'orth, anyway. Cheers, Nick Moyes (talk) 00:48, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Fascinating: Aluminum or Aluminium I learned something new today! Thanks! As for the other revelation as to "sound" versus correct terminology: I agree. In most cases, however, I do not believe it is being properly used here at WP: considering The Backstreet Boys has the same exact "sounds" (lede: Backstreet Boys is an American boy band) while your The Beatles has: The Beatles were an English rock band. Maineartists (talk) 01:59, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Our Manual of style has the valid option: "England are playing Germany", and this plural usage seems to be more common in articles on British bands. I recall a discussion some time ago, but I can't find it. Dbfirs 02:12, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As someone put it somewhere recently, this is English Wikipedia, not American Wikipedia, so we over here in the U.S. have to live with the fact that most of the world speaks (or is it speak?) a variant of English that is different from ours. If it's consistent within an article with strong MOS:TIES to other countries, it's just something you get used to after a while. Now writing in those articles can be somewhat more challenging – it's easier to remember a valid difference in usage when you see it than it is to write with it. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 06:13, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As a Brit, I find it annoying that this nonsense is blamed on us. I would say "Pink Floyd is a group"; and that is how I usually hear it said. Some people try to justify "are" by using "The Beatles" as an example; admittedly, I sometimes hear fellow Brits say "The Beatles are a group". But I don't believe that people in Britain generally treat singular group names as plurals. Maproom (talk) 09:54, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Rather to my surprise, The GloWbE corpus shows "The Beatles are/were" outnumbering "The Beatles is/was" not only in British sources (153:40) but also in US sources (145:20). But this may be an oddity of the Beatles, or because "Beatles" is plural anyway. Radiohead shows the pattern I expected: are/were:is/was = 45:15 (UK) 7:15 (US). Aerosmith shows 11:4 (UK), 4:10 (US). (Struggling to find other bands which are 1) well-known enough to appear in the corpus 2) with a name not appearing plural, and 3) not a word or phrase which might turn up in other contexts in the corpus.) --ColinFine (talk) 10:51, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ColinFine: try Google ngrams. Maproom (talk) 18:01, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Linking to a specific section in a template

I want to create an internal link that links to a section of a table within a Template: article, and displays only the rows and columns of the table within that section. How do I do this (without breaking the formatting of the table when it displays in the other page)? I tried inserting an {{anchor}} before the section of the table I want to link to in the Template:, and linking to the anchor, but it didn't work.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Reelcheeper (talk • contribs) 00:07, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Reelcheeper. I'm not really sure what you're trying to do at Template:Table of Tunisian municipalities. Are you trying to add a WP:WIKILINK to Tataouine to that template? If that's the case, you can perhaps simply replace the WP:PIPE to Tataouine Governorate and simply link to "Tataouine". WP:ANCHORs can be used to add "invisible targets for internal links" to pages, but it's not clear why you would want to do that for this particular template. Are you trying to create link whose target is Template:Table of Tunisian municipalities#Tataouine?

It kind of sounds like you only want to WP:TRANSCLUDE part of the template onto some page, perhaps as explained in WP:SELTRANS. You might want to try asking about this as Wikipedia:Village pump (technical) or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Templates since someone there might be able to help you better? -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:16, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any way to add a photo of a person without having to obtain their consent?

I see so many wikipedia pages about people (without photographs)... However there are plenty of photos available on sites like imdb.com and others... I have been reading Wiki photo guidelines - they are very confusing. Can somebody suggest a simple, practical and perfectly legal way to add such photos?

Natalia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikirapguru (talk • contribs) 00:21, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Wikirapguru. I'm not sure if there's a simple and easy way to explain something that in general tends to be quite complicated, but in general Wikipedia:Copyrights#Guidelines for images and other media files, Wikipedia:Image dos and don'ts and probably even this file File:Licensing tutorial en.svg come kind of close. Basically, Wikipedia content is released under a license that allows pretty much anyone anywhere in the world to reuse it for pretty much any purpose (including for commercial purposes), and this applies not only to text, but also images. If you look at "small print" right above the "Publish changes" button when you make an edit, you'll see that you're agreeing to this every time you make an edit on Wikipedia. So, the content we add to or create on Wikipedia can be (with some minor restrictions) pretty much be reused by anyone anywhere for any purpose without our permission. When someone uploads one of their own photos to Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons, they are essentially agreeing to the same thing; they may have some options with respect to file copyright licenses, but the basic agreement they're entering is the same: they agree to allow anyone anywhere in the world to download the file they uploaded at anytime for any purpose. This doesn't mean they are transferring or giving up their copyright ownership over the photo to these other people; it just means that they are only making a particular version of their photo freely available for others to use as they please.

So, as long as the content we create or the photos we upload are clearly 100% our own work, there's no problem with use agreeing to release it under the types of licensing the Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons accepts; however, if we try to release content created by others or partially created by others under such a license without their explicit consent to do so, all kinds of problems can happen since we are basically trying to do something that we have to right to do.

Most of the websites where you see photos online almost certainly have their own respective policies and guidelines when it comes to the content they host. Many of them are pretty proactive in removing content that is uploaded without the permission of their original copyright holders, but may aren't and don't worry about it until someone complains. Many may also host such content based upon the concept of fair use or fair dealing for educational or other informative purposes, etc., and English Wikipedia does allow this as well in some form and in some cases as explained in Wikipedia:Non-free content, but they are many Wikimedia Foundation projects like Wikimedia Commons which don't; so, often whether such a file can be uploaded and used depends on the particular policies and guidelines of the Wikimedia Foundation project in question.

Anyway, I hope I didn't confuse you even more, but basically unless you are the 100% creator of the image you want to upload and use on Wikipedia, it's best to assume that it's copyrighted and that someone other then yourself owns this copyright; so, without that person's permission to do so, you shouldn't upload the file to Wikipedia under a free license. Now, if you've got a particular image in mind and your not sure about its copyright status, you might want to ask at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:57, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Hello, Wikirapguru and welcome to the Teahouse. It's a good question, but unfortunately most of the pictures you see online are somebody else's copyright, and there's no simple way for you to take their image without their permission and and release it here for commercial and non-commercial use. That would be stealing. So there is no 'simple' way to make them available. But there are lots of other ways which requires a bit of effort.

First you could look to see if the photographer has released their picture on the website with a special 'Creative Commons' licence that explicitly permits commercial use of that image. The absence of a copyright notiec doesn't mean you can take the image and use it here - it needs that explicit permission. If they've done so, there are ways to then upload the picture legitimately. You could make a point of taking pictures of those people yourself and then uploading them (that'd be fine); or you could contact the photographer (not the person being photographed) and ask them to upload their picture for use here. Or you could wait for the artist to die and then you'd be able to upload one image under a very special 'non-free use' basis. But all these routes are a bit complex, except for uploading images you personally have taken. I've not bothered to include links to all these special ways - but if you need further details just ask. But, again, the simple answer is 'no' there is no easy way. Nick Moyes (talk) 01:00, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

To: Nick Moyes

And how does Wikipedia ‘know’ if the person uploading the photo is the person pictured in it? I work in rap industry, and personally know a lot of rappers who have an article about them without a photo. I can tell them to upload the picture, but how will Wikipedia be able to tell if uploading is done by the author/model?

Also, I have attempted to upload some photos of now dead rappers that I personally took a while ago, and ran into the blocking feature. I overcame it but then somebody took the photo I uploaded down, claiming that I was not a photographer. (And I WAS)

Please advise... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikirapguru (talk • contribs) 01:59, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Some quick shots, folks uploading photos of themselves do not necessarily have the rights to do this, e.g., the copyright of photos taken by professional photographers. Selfies would be okay. Fair use is a dead end for living people, the enwiki theory is that it should be easy to take and publish a new photo under a free licence (CC0 a.k.a. PD, CC-BY, CC-BY-SA, but not NC or ND). The consent part can be handled by {{personality rights}} on commons, i.e., stay away from kids or anybody who is no "public figure", celebrity, politician, etc. –84.46.53.228 (talk) 02:24, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again Wikirapguru. The person who takes a photo, not the subject of the photo, is generally considered to own the copyright on the photo absent any official copyright transfer agreement between photographer and subject which gives the subject ownership of the photo. So, if you're attending a concert and you take a photo of the band playing, then you own the copyright on that photo absent any agreement that you might have entered into with the band, its representatives, or maybe even the venue which would transfer that right to the band, etc. Now, you might run into to problems depending upon how you try to use the photo, but that's a personality rights or maybe even trademark matter that's sort of different from copyright.

Now, if you uploaded a photo you took to Wikipedia and was subsequently deleted, then it might have been because there was no way to verify your copyright ownership. While it would be great just to take everyone who claims copyright ownership over an image at their word, often a more formal ~~time~~type of verification is required. You can find out more about it at c:Commons:OTRS#Licensing images: when do I contact OTRS?, but mainly what you would need to do is send a consent email (like WP:CONSENT) to Wikimedia OTRS. This will allow an OTRS volunteer to verify that you're are really the copyright holder. This is a bit of good-faith being assumed that people emailing OTRS are really who they're claiming to be and not every email sent it is accepted as proof of copyright ownership, but the process is for the most part straightforward and deleted files subsequently verified by OTRS are restored and tagged as being "OTRS verified". If you do this, you should try to use some official (office) email address if you have one and may be asked to provide further verification by email by the OTRS volunteer processing your email. OTRS volunteers are required to sign a confidentiality agreement that they won't reveal the contents of the emails they see to anyone not approved to see them; so, you don't need to worry about personal or sensitive information being posted anywhere on Wikipedia. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:51, 20 December 2019 (UTC); [Note: Post editing by Marchjuly to change "time" to "type" (second sentence of second paragraph). -- 04:22, 20 December 2019 (UTC)][reply]

To: Marchjuly

Ok, that clarifies it for now. Thanks for taking thee time to write a thoughtful reply. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ::::Wikirapguru (talk • contribs) 03:05, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Wikirapguru: I can't add much to the helpful replies above. None of us here or at Wikimedia Commons are trying to be intentionally obstructive about photos. But the priority is always to ensure nobody's right are infringed by somoene else uploading images they don't own. So we always err on the side of caution. But may I say that it's fantastic to hear you wanting to make the effort to add pictures to articles. If only more people "in the business" appreciated the great position they are in to provide images of famous artists to Wikipedia that us ordinary mortals can't. I do have one final suggestion to make. You could create your own Flickr stream for all your photos, ensuring you set the image rights to 'free for commercial re-use'. (This can be done per stream, per album or per image.) Any editor here could take and upload the relevant photos and upload them, linking back to the url on Flickr. One of our OTRS team would then check and confirm the validity of that licence. You'd have far less work to do, and maybe all you'd need do is drop a note and a url on the talk page of the relevant rapper's article, and someone else can have the hassle of mobilising the image. Just a thought. Cheers, Nick Moyes (talk) 09:58, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why was my article declined?

Hi, this is Anaya Sherifdeen and I'd like to ask- why was my article declined? Thanks so much! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Water light45 (talk • contribs) 01:32, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Water light45. Please take a look at Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything, Wikipedia:Autobiography and Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not for more specific details, but basically only subjects which meet Wikipedia:Notability are generally only considered OK to create Wikipedia:Articles about. From what you've written in your user sandbox, it looks like you might be mistaking Wikipedia for a social media account or some sort of free website where you can post a profile. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:40, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Anaya and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia is a very useful resource to learn from, but it doesn't have an article about everyone in the world. Usually, ordinary people like you and me don't get articles because we haven't been written about elsewhere by independent WP:Reliable sources. Perhaps sometime in the future you might become notable in the Wikipedia sense, then someone else might write an article about you. Best wishes from the UK. Dbfirs 01:50, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse, Water light45. Your draft article says that you are 9 years old and that you are the "world's favorite children's author- at least, in her imagination". There are countless social media sites where you are welcome to post that type of thing, but Wikipedia is not among them. This is a serious encyclopedia - a reference work - that includes biographies of notable children's authors who have actual best-selling books that are issued by major publishers and that win major literary awards and are reviewed by major publications. I suggest that you read Your first article, and when you thoroughly understand that, you will also understand why your submission was not accepted. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:13, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalized wiki

Hi ! How can I deal with a page that gets often vandalized? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.28.154.201 (talk) 02:22, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RPP if you want a specific protection, e.g., pending reviews (modern), semi-protection (older solution), etc. Tell folks here which page you have in mind, they can arrange it, WP:RPP itself is sometimes protected from IP-edits. –84.46.53.228 (talk) 02:42, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Follow-up to Draft Page improving references

Hello - I do not understand why my page cannot be published - it is very short bio and has all the necessary details. I made changes as requested previously in the teahouse. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FFeldspar (talk • contribs) 02:36, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi FFeldspar. It looks like Draft:Colin Grubb (if that's draft your referring to) is still awaiting an AfC review; so, although it hasn't been approved, it also hasn't been declined. There tends to be lots of drafts awaiting review and only so many AfC reviewers doing the reviewing; so, you might just have to wait a bit longer. The AfC template on the draft's page currently says that more than 3,700 drafts awaiting review and that it could take up to four months to review them all. I'm not sure where your draft is currently in the queue of those awaiting review, but perhaps you won't have to wait too much longer. You can still work on the draft why your waiting for it to be reviewed and you might want to take a look at WP:SURNAME and WP:PUFF as well as WP:BLPSOURCES and WP:BLPNAMES for some possible issues that I noticed about the draft after a quick look at it. -- Marchjuly (talk) 03:01, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, FFeldspar. If I was reviewing Draft:Colin Grubb right now, I would not accept it. The draft completely lacks references to significant coverage of Grubb in independent reliable sources. Independent sources are mandatory to establish notability, and links to the websites of the show business projects that Grubb has been involved with are of no value in establishing notability. Have you studied Your first article? If not, I recommend it highly. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:22, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It's not actually a queue - reviewers pick what they want to review from the list in no particular order (although collectively, they try to not let any get too old). While waiting, you might consider creating sections. David notMD (talk) 11:04, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

List of members of the United States Congress by longevity of service

Regarding the referenced lists, I did not see NANCY PELOSI's name. She has been a member of the House of Rep for a very long time and should be listed also. (I am not qualified to do the editing.)— Preceding unsigned comment added by ‎2600:6c63:657f:95ba:b5c4:d71a:c8e3:a7dd (talk) 04:02, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi IP ‎2600:6c63:657f:95ba:b5c4:d71a:c8e3:a7dd. You're just as qualified as any other editor to try and improve an article by being WP:BOLD as long as you do so in good-faith and in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines; so, you don't need to worry about making mistakes since any that you might make can pretty much be fixed by someone else. In this case, though if you look at the very top of the article about longevity of service you see that only those who have served 36 years or more listed; so, even though Nancy Pelosi has served for a long time, she hasn't quite reached the 36-year-threshold yet having been first elected to the US Congress in 1987. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:19, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Update Edit Summary

Is there any way to edit the Edit Summary (description of change made) in the history after my edit has been published? I accidentally hit some hotkey while typing my edit summary that got the change published with an edit summary of "c". It was a very minor change, and flagged as such, so it's not a big issue in itself, certainly not worth reverting & reinstating the edit, but based on experience it may happen again on my Chromebook. --D Anthony Patriarche (talk) 04:08, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi D A Patriarche. There's no way to really go back a change the edit summary of a previously published edit, but you can make a dummy edit which be used to create a new edit summary which can indirectly correct/clarify a previous edit summary. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:13, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Finance

Does Wikipedia (as of now) have enough funding to continue it's existence? In terms of being a source of information Wikipedia is by far the greatest thing in human history, and possibly hundreds of millions of people do not want to see it's extinction. 47.152.149.158 (talk) 09:39, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and welcome. As I understand it, the Wikimedia Foundation's funding is stable (thanks to those who donate) and there is currently no monetary threat to the existence of Wikipedia. There is an end-of-year fundraising push right now, but this is a normal occurrence and not indicative of a funding problem. 331dot (talk) 09:43, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Help with draft

Hello i m Ioannis, I m from Crete and I wrote an article about my homevillage in Crete, as I did in german wiki and in greek wikipedia. MY article is this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Agios_Georgios_Lassithi_Crete, and I want to publish it. Plz help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ioannis1981dr (talk • contribs) 09:48, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ioannis1981dr: Welcome to English Wikipedia, and to The Teahouse. You have submitted your draft, so all you need to do now is wait and at some point it will be reviewed. I think it is likely to be accepted - we have quite a low bar for acceptance of geographic places, and as long as it is a legally recognised village or town, it doesn't necessarily need a lot of sources proving it is otherwise notable. I don't have time to properly review it myself right now, but I will keep an eye on it and will take a look next week if no one else has got to it by then. Hug^syrup 09:57, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ok! Thanks a lot!!! Ioannis1981dr (talk) 10:00, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ioannis1981dr: Yassas! I've just tidied up your draft a bit and marked a few things that need references, such as the population statistics. Anything you cant substantiate should be left out. I suggest you add Template:Infobox settlement to your draft, ensuring you insert some coordinates so it can be mapped. (As an aside, I think I must have been to Agios Georgios many years ago when I climbed Dikti/Spathi, though my favourite mountain route on Crete is doing the 40km 2-day traverse of Psiloritis from the bus stop in Fourfouras back to the bus stop in Rethymnon!) Regards from a cold and wet UK. Nick Moyes (talk) 10:42, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Can I post this article to mainspace when finished?

I'm working on an article in my sandbox about the artist/painter Emil Armin. He is definitely notable, as you can see that he is one of the 25+ artists on this page for which Wikipedia has not yet created a page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_painters_in_the_Art_Institute_of_Chicago. He is a Chicago modernist and his Luce biography notes that "By the early 1920s, he was a star on the Chicago art scene..." So, definitely passes the notable test. I am spending a lot of time on this article, and will probably spend another eight to ten hours finishing it (I'm going to go through old newspaper archives that mention Armin and have one more book to go through). My question is: once I'm done, can I just post it to mainspace? In full transparency, my mother is related to the painter. She is elderly, and has mentioned that it annoys her that all of Armin's peers have Wikipedia pages but he doesn't. So, I'm doing this for her, and it's the holidays, you know. My worry is that if I put it into Drafts and ask for a review, it might get into a two-or-three-months-long queue. On the flip side, I don't want to post it to mainspace and quickly be spanked with an auto or manual delete that makes it unlikely the article will ever see the light of day. Please advise, and I thank you so much for whatever it is you recommend. I had never really appreciated Wikipedia and all of the people who build it until I got into it myself, and I hope to one day contribute more...hard to do with current workload :-(. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by IntegrityPen (talk • contribs) 12:48, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

IntegrityPen Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. It is true that submitting a draft for a review using Articles for Creation will likely have a wait involved, but it is better to get feedback on a draft than have an article potentially deleted or treated more critically than it would be if it were just a draft. It is always a good idea for users new at creating articles to run it through the draft process first. 331dot (talk) 12:52, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

331dot Thanks for the fast response. Will do. Just so I know, is another option to find a very experienced Wikipedia person, ask them to review it and then have them post it? Is that common? There's one person who has written the pages for three of Armin's closest peers that I was thinking of reaching out to. Also, one last question: is it best to ask for review via the button in my sandbox when I'm ready or should I move it into a Draft status and then push it to review? Thanks. IntegrityPen (talk) 13:02, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

IntegrityPen If you know of a user who you think could review it for you and give their advice or even move it to mainspace for you, you can certainly approach them. You can certainly just use the button in your sandbox; it doesn't matter terribly if the page is there or in Draft space. 331dot (talk) 13:18, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

331dot Got it. Thanks!

Emil Armin is now in mainspace. Maproom (talk) 17:51, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, IntegrityPen. Emil Armin is definitely notable, and you did an excellent job for a first effort. The Articles for Creation process is entirely optional and editors who can write articles like you have done can ignore it entirely. Thanks for your contribution. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 18:07, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Cullen328 Wow, Jim/Cullen. Very high praise from somebody who has an amazing track record at Wikipedia. Thanks! IntegrityPen (talk) 18:23, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome, IntegrityPen. Holiday greetings to you and your mother. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 18:26, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request to admin

Hello all respected administrators.

The article was created by few people in last 1 and half years both time it got deleted because it has no notable links , so someone last month created this article again which was in draft , today i got to know that it was deleted twice , i checked all the previous references deleted it and today i recreated the article with enough references of dawn newspaper , tribune , thenews and others. i would like to know can someone approve this and check ? it will be good as the artist (Serial suno chanda) is becoming famous and virual in india and pakistan.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Nabeel_Zuberi — Preceding unsigned comment added by Memon KutianaWala (talk • contribs) 13:24, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If this is about Draft:Nabeel Zuberi then you have not yet submitted it for review. If it has previously been deleted for lack of notability, then you need to find new WP:Reliable sources independent of the actor. See WP:NACTOR for the requirements. Dbfirs 15:10, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi I have added all new references in english , and removed all old non notable references , here is draft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Nabeel_Zuberi Memon KutianaWala (talk) 15:20, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Memon KutianaWala: Can I just give you a tip? You have 24 sources, for an article that is only about 100 words long. That is completely excessive and, rather than making me look at it and think 'this must be notable' it makes me thing 'this probably isn't notable, and the author is trying to hide that behind a wall of citations, but either way I can't be bothered to look through 24 sources right now'. Of course, not all reviewers are as lazy as I am - but you're not helping yourself by including so many sources. You can demonstrate notability with as few as two or three really high quality sources, and massively increase your chances of having your article quickly accepted. When you're asked for additional sources, what we almost always want is quality not quantity. If your best three sources aren't good enough to show notability, then I highly doubt the other 21 are going to change that. They might be necessary later, as the article expands, to back up specific claims, but for getting this very brief draft published? Nope. Hug^syrup 15:41, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Memon KutianaWala: For what it’s worth, I personally do not think that Nabeel meets WP:NACTOR. The criterion that he comes closest to meeting is #1, but he has only had a significant role in one notable drama serial (Suno Chanda); on the other hand, his role in Yaqeen Ka Safar, for example, was not significant, and therefore would not contribute to notability. NACTOR #1 requires multiple such roles. Moaz786 (talk to me or see what I've been doing) 15:54, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have fixed and added Lux style award links too and i will fix it more , i have removed 12 references out of 24. Memon KutianaWala (talk) 16:08, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

mohammadmahdiazizi

Dialog-warning.svg Oops! This doesn't look like a gallery. Your attempt to create a page in the main namespace of Wikimedia Commons was automatically prevented.

This usually happens for one of the following reasons:

You tried to create a Wikipedia article – but this is not Wikipedia. The website you are on right now, Wikimedia Commons, is a media repository used by Wikipedia, other Wikimedia projects, and others. Unlike on Wikipedia, pages in the main namespace here are not articles. Instead, they are galleries that showcase media files. To get to Wikipedia, visit wikipedia.org. The English Wikipedia project has information about how to create your first article. You tried to create a gallery but used the wrong format. If you are trying to create a page showcasing media files, you should include gallery tags, media files and categories, as explained in the gallery guidelines. You just wanted to experiment a little. That's okay. You can do that in the sandbox. If you have any questions, please visit the help desk. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ali.25842 (talk • contribs) 15:47, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Did you have a question about editing Wikipedia? --David Biddulph (talk) 16:08, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Understood and thank you for your time, but I have just created a brand new page on Radmila and attempted to publish. Did I do something incorrectly or do I need to revisit the first attempt?

I was informed by Robert McClenon that I need to revisit an article's draft page, but I have since created a brand new article on Radmila Lolly. I am not sure if I did this properly as I attempted to publish the edited article as a new page under the same name. What is the most efficient course of action to create the new and adjusted Radmila Lolly page? Thank you